Rigorous Standards for Chronic Disease Publishing
JCD applies clear editorial policies to protect research integrity and improve the reliability of chronic disease evidence. Our policies align with international best practices in peer review, ethics, and transparency.
Double Blind Evaluation
All submissions undergo double blind peer review focused on methodological rigor, clinical relevance, and ethical compliance.
Editorial Screening
Editors assess scope fit, reporting completeness, and ethics documentation before external review. Manuscripts that do not meet standards are returned with guidance.
Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected for subject matter expertise, clinical relevance, and research integrity. Conflicts of interest are screened before assignment.
Decisions Based on Merit
Editorial decisions are independent of sponsorship, institutional influence, or commercial interests. JCD evaluates manuscripts strictly on scientific quality and relevance to chronic disease care.
Confidentiality and Objectivity
Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, unbiased feedback and protect confidential information.
- Maintain confidentiality of manuscripts and data.
- Declare conflicts of interest before accepting review.
- Focus critiques on methods and evidence, not authors.
- Provide clear recommendations supported by reasoning.
- Respect patient privacy and ethical considerations.
Responsible Publishing
JCD follows ethical standards for research involving humans and animals and requires transparency about funding and conflicts of interest.
- Ethics approval and informed consent are required for human studies.
- Animal studies must meet institutional welfare standards.
- Clinical trials should be registered in a public registry.
- All funding sources and conflicts of interest must be disclosed.
- Plagiarism screening is performed during editorial review.
Clear Contributions
Authorship should reflect meaningful contributions to study design, analysis, or manuscript preparation.
Author Responsibilities
All authors must approve the final manuscript, confirm originality, and accept accountability for the work. Contributions should be transparent and documented.
Changes in Authorship
Requests to add or remove authors after submission require written approval from all authors and a clear explanation for the change.
Transparency Standards
Reliable chronic disease evidence requires accurate reporting and responsible data sharing.
- Provide data availability statements and repository links when possible.
- Report outcomes, methods, and limitations clearly.
- Describe statistical analyses and handling of missing data.
- Use reporting guidelines relevant to study design.
Protect Sensitive Information
JCD safeguards patient privacy and maintains confidentiality during peer review.
Patient Privacy
Manuscripts must remove identifiers and avoid details that could reveal patient identity. Consent is required for case reports and sensitive clinical images.
Reviewer Confidentiality
Reviewers must not share or reuse unpublished data. All manuscripts and reviewer comments remain confidential during and after review.
Inclusive and Respectful Language
We encourage respectful language and fair representation of populations. Authors should describe demographics accurately and avoid stigmatizing terms when reporting chronic disease outcomes.
Updates and Retractions
JCD maintains the integrity of the scholarly record through corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary.
Corrections
Errors that affect interpretation are corrected promptly and linked to the original article for transparency.
Retractions
Serious breaches of integrity or ethical misconduct may result in retraction following an investigation and editorial review.
Handling Ethical Breaches
JCD investigates allegations of misconduct in line with publishing standards.
Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication
Submissions are screened for originality. Plagiarism or duplicate publication may result in rejection or retraction, with notifications to relevant parties when required.
Data Fabrication or Falsification
Any evidence of data manipulation or misrepresentation triggers investigation. JCD may issue corrections, retractions, or other actions to protect the scientific record.
Fair Review Process
Authors may appeal editorial decisions with a clear, evidence based rationale.
- Appeals should address specific reviewer or editor comments.
- All appeals are reviewed by senior editorial leadership.
- Final decisions are communicated with transparency.
Clear Outcome Categories
Editorial decisions are based on peer review outcomes and the strength of the evidence presented.
- Accept with minor revisions.
- Major revisions required.
- Reject with resubmission invitation when appropriate.
- Reject due to scope or methodological limitations.
Questions about editorial policies? Contact [email protected] for guidance.
Publish with Confidence
JCD editorial policies protect integrity and support trusted chronic disease research worldwide. Transparent policies protect patients and improve trust in published evidence. They also support consistent decision making across submissions for global audiences and reviewers everywhere today.
