Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Aims and Scope

The International Journal of Person-Centered Medicine (IJPCM) is dedicated to the development of the theory and practice of Person-Centered Medicine (PCM).  All aspects of PCM and multi-disciplinary person-centered clinical care are therefore of interest to the Journal, particularly: (a) medical epistemology and the nature of knowledge for the individualisation of clinical practice; (b) reductionism and complexity in clinical care; (c) methodologies for the individualisation of clinical practice and for the evaluation and development of person-centred medicine; (d) methodologies for the development, use and evaluation of person-centered history taking, diagnosis, prognosis and follow-up; (e) clinical practice recommendations and guidelines for PCM; (f) narrative-based medicine; (g) values-based medicine; (h) transcultural medicine; (i) psychosocial and psychosexual medicine; (j) social and environmental care in PCM; (k) spiritual and religious care; (l) economic aspects of PCM and policies for the funding of PCM; (m) individualised/personalised (genomic) medicine; (n) sociological aspects of PCM; (o) the medical humanities and PCM; (p) ethical and medico-legal implications of PCM; (q) the role of the family and of friends in caring and decision making; (r) the development and use of information technology and medical informatics for the development, application and evaluation/audit of PCM; (s) person-centred design and operation of healthcare facilities; (t) health service policies and policy-making for PCM; (u) the national and international health politics of PCM, (v) the role of medical education and PCM & (w) people-centred care (population approaches to clinical care).  The Journal welcomes learned submissions from doctors, nurses, the allied professions and all those clinical and non-clinical colleagues with an interest in, or responsibility for, the development and application of person-centred approaches to clinical care and public health.

Publication formats

The IJPCM accepts submissions in the following formats: (a) Full scientific papers deriving from original research; (b) Learned review articles presented as structured or systematic reviews; (c) Commentaries and Editorials; (d) Brief and Rapid Communications; (e) Essays, Opinions and Viewpoints; (f) Critiques and Analyses; (g) Book Reviews; (h) Conference Reports; (i) Letters to the Editor; (j) Research Letters.  All papers will be initially reviewed by a Submissions Working Group before selection for peer review by two distinguished reviewers in the field and a statistician if appropriate.

 

Section Policies

Editorial Introduction

Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Regular Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book Reviews

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letters

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine: Conceptual Perspectives

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine Part One

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine: The Team Approach

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine: Person-centered Basic Communication Skills

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine: Person-centered Clinical Care Activities

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine: Cultural Diversity and Person-centered Health Care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine: Special Initiatives for Person-centered Care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-Centered Medicine: In Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Special Section: Conceptual Bases of Psychiatry for the Person

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-centred Medicine: Institutional, Primary Care and Public Health Perspectives

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-centered Medicine: Person-centered Clinical Care Procedures

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Person-centered care and evidence based medicine

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Third Geneva Conference on Person-centered Medicine: Regional Perspectives on Person-centered Care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Person-centered care and chronic disease

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Person-centered mental health

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Person-centered medicine and patient satisfaction

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Person-centered care: general aspects

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

The Person with Disease at the Center of Teaching

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Making progress in people-centered care: country experiences

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Contributions to the advancement of person-centered care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Conducting Research on Clinical Communication

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Stakeholders’ roles and contributions beyond annual meetings: next steps to advance person- and people-centered care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Fourth Geneva Conference on Person-centered Medicine: Education in person-centered medicine

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Fourth Geneva Conference on Person-centered Medicine: Person-centered integrative diagnosis (PID)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Fourth Geneva Conference on Person-centered Medicine: Person-centered special developments

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Clinical and Electronic Communication

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Patient Views and Advocacy

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Health Promotion

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Health Profession Issues

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Person-centered Decision Supports

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Measuring progress towards people-centered care

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Manuscripts are initially screened by the Editor for conformity with aims and scope, then sent to 2 experts in the subject of the article plus a statistician if appropriate.  If reviewers conflict, an additional expert is recruited and an editorial decision for acceptance/rejection made on the basis of the complete advice received. Manuscripts are either accepted, accepted conditionally upon minor revision, rejected with an invitation for extensive revision or rejected.

 

Financial Support and Competing Interest Policy

As part of the manuscript preparation process each author will be required to sign a License and Disclosure form to indicate Financial Support and Conflict of Interest,  a Privacy Statement and an Informed Consent Form and a Protection of Human Subjects and Animals in Research Statement.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

As part of the manuscript preparation process each author will be required to sign a Disclosure of Financial Support and Conflict of Interest Statement, a Privacy Statement and, for research reports, an Informed Consent and Protection of Human Subjects and Animals in Research Statement.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The ethics statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Publication decisions

The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.

The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure of Financial Support and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Statement on Informed Consent and Observation of Human and Animal Rights

All authors of research reports involving human or animal subjects should provide for publication a statement  on Informed Consent and institutionally approved observation of human and animal rights.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.



ISSN: 2043 7749