Pathogenesis and Treatment in Stroke (PTS) complies with the following guidelines and standards:
l ICMJE: PTS comply with the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. The guidelines cover all aspects of editorial work comprehensively, from how to manage the journal to details about peer review and handling complaints. Most of the recommendations are not specific to medical journals, but will be complied by PTS.
l PRISMA involves a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies.
l MOOSE involves a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
l CONSORT statement relates to the reporting of randomized controlled trials.
l ARRIVE covers guidelines for reporting in vivo experiments.
l CARE guidelines (for case reports) were formulated by an international expert group to
support the improvement of accuracy, transparency and usefulness of case reports.
Learn more about the related guidelines, please get access to the equator-network.
All manuscripts may be submitted to PTS only if the authors have read and agreed to the content, and if the manuscript complies with the policies of the journal.
When reporting a study that involved human participants, their data or biological material, authors should certify that the study was performed in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki.
The premise of starting the study is that an independent ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB) explicitly approved the experimental work with human subjects. A statement to confirm this must be included within the manuscript, which must provide details of the name of the ethics committee and reference/permit numbers where available.
For non-interventional studies (e.g.,. surveys), if ethical approval is not required (e.g.,. because of local laws) or the research has been granted an exemption, this should be stated in the manuscript with a full explanation. A study for which an exemption has been granted should also provide the name of the ethics committee that approved the exemption. However, if researchers are in doubt, they should seek advice from the relevant authorities before proceeding with the study.
For new procedures or tools to be used in the clinical setting, a clear rationale must be given in the manuscript as to why the new procedure or tool is considered to better meet the clinical needs of the patient than routine clinical practice, and ethical approval and informed patient consent should be obtained to participate in the study.
A clinical trial is defined as “any study in which human participants or groups of humans are prospectively assigned to one or more health-related interventions to assess the impact on health outcomes” and the last line of the manuscript abstract should indicate the trial registration number (TRN) and the date of registration. ICMJE website and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform list the publicly available registries. For clinical trials that are not prospectively registered, PTS encourages retrospective registration to ensure complete publication of all results. In these cases, the manuscript should indicate the TRN, date of registration and the words “retrospective registration”
PTS conforms to the principles of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). ICMJE underlines that patients and study participants have a right to privacy that cannot be violated without informed consent.
2.2.1 Consent to Participate
Research conducted on human subjects should comply with international and national regulations in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki or any other relevant ethical principles. For patients or research participants who are minors or are considered vulnerable or unable to provide informed consent, consent must be obtained from their legal guardians or, if the participant is deceased, from their next of kin. In articles describing human transplant studies, authors must provide a statement that no organs/tissues were obtained from prisoners and must also identify the institution(s)/clinic(s)/department(s) from which the organs/tissues were obtained.
2.2.2 Consent for Publication
The patient’s right to privacy should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information, including name, initials, date of birth or hospital number, images or statements, should not be disclosed in the manuscript unless such information is essential for scientific purposes and you have obtained written informed consent for publication in print and electronic form from the patient (or parent, guardian or next of kin where applicable). The manuscript must contain a statement that the patient or his or her parent, guardian, or next of kin (in the case of a deceased patient) has signed written informed consent for the publication of any relevant data and accompanying images. The consent form treated confidentially must be provided to the Editor if requested.
Case reports or other research in which case details, personal information, or images may allow an individual to be identified should provide the consent from the individual or his or her parents, guardians, or next of kin for publication, and this consent should be stated within the manuscript. Patients should be informed that personally identifiable information will be accessible on the Internet under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 and in print after publication.
For datasets containing clinical data, authors should respect the privacy of participants and protect their identity on an ethical and legal level. The ideal situation is where participants have informed and consented to the dataset obtained at the time of trial recruitment. Otherwise, authors must demonstrate that the release of such data will not compromise anonymity or confidentiality or violate local data protection laws before releasing the dataset. Authors must consider whether the dataset contains any direct or indirect identifiers and consult with the local ethics committee or other appropriate body prior to submission, and if full anonymity is not possible, authors must indicate in the submitted manuscript whether the patient has informed and consented to the publication of the data.
Research involving vertebrates and regulated invertebrates should comply with relevant institutional, national and international animal welfare guidelines, and where possible, be approved by an ethics committee. A statement detailing compliance with relevant guidelines (e.g.,. the revised Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 in the UK and Directive 2010/63/EU in Europe) and/or ethical approval (including the name of the ethics committee and the ethics committee approval number) should be included within the manuscript. This also applies to field studies and other non-experimental research regarding animals.
For experimental studies involving client-owned animals, authors must obtain informed consent from the client or owner, and adhere to high standards (best practice) of veterinary care. If an ethically approved exemption is granted, it should also be detailed within the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption and the reason for the exemption).
The Editor will consider animal welfare issues and reserve the right to reject manuscripts, particularly when the study involves protocols that are inconsistent with generally accepted norms for animal research. For rodents used as in vivo cancer models, tumor burden should be within the recommendations of the University of Pennsylvania Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee guidelines.
A detailed description of any euthanasia or anesthesia methods, including information on the agents used, must be provided. These procedures must be performed in accordance with applicable veterinary guidelines, such as the American Veterinary Medical Association.
Experiments covering plants (whether cultivated or wild), including the collection of plant material, must conform to institutional, national, or international guidelines. Field studies should be performed in accordance with local laws, and manuscripts should provide a statement indicating appropriate permissions and/or licenses.
Voucher specimens must be stored in a public herbarium or other public collection that provides materials for storage. The manuscript must provide information about the voucher specimen and who identified it.
Research involving cell lines is encouraged to specify the following information in the Materials and Methods section within the manuscript:
(1) Confirm that the cell line has been tested for mycoplasma.
(2) Confirm that the cell lines used have been identified and describe the method used for the identification.
(3) State the source, supplier, and (if available) catalog numbers for all specific cell lines used in the study
It is strongly recommended that the authors provide a detailed methodology describing the maintenance and culture of cell lines in line with international guidelines for good cell culture practice (basic techniques, mycoplasma contamination, passaging numbers, etc.).
In addition, data on misidentified or cross-contaminated cell lines from the International Cell Line Authentication Committee and ExPASy Cellosaurus databases must be provided and cross-checked to ensure other cell lines are free of their contamination or obtain correct identification.
For cell lines previously reported to be contaminated or misidentified, the STR profile should be available for assessment by journal’s editors in the study.
Authors can refer to the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines, and provide sex and gender considerations where relevant. Authors should address the sex (biological attribute) and/or gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) dimensions of their research in their article to avoid ambiguity or conflation of terms. Importantly, authors should explicitly state the sex(es) of the research application in article titles and/or abstracts. Authors should also describe in the background whether sex and/or gender differences may exist, illustrate how sex and/or gender was considered in the study design, provide sex- and/or gender-disaggregated data where appropriate, and discuss the respective results. If a sex and/or gender analysis was not performed, the Discussion should state the appropriate justification. Authors are recommended to carefully review the full guidelines prior to submission.
PTS strongly recommend that all datasets upon which the manuscript conclusions are based should be disclosed to the reader, unless such datasets have already been a part of the submission. Articles involving datasets in the research should include an “Availability of Data and Materials” section that describes the available data source supporting their findings. If sharing of data is not desired, the author must state this fact and provide a corresponding explanation as to why the data are not available.
The statements for availability of data and materials may take one of the following forms (if multiple datasets are required, a combination of forms may be used).
(1) The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
(2) The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS].
(3) All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.
(4) The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to [REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
(5) Data sharing is not applicable to this article, as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
(6) Data supporting the results of the study are available from [THIRD PARTY NAME], but its availability is limited. The data are being used under the license of the current study and therefore cannot be made public. However, data may be obtained from the author upon reasonable request and permission of [THIRD PARTY NAME].
(7) Not applicable. If your manuscript does not contain any data, please state ‘Not applicable’ in this section.
PTS encourages authors to archive their datasets in an appropriate public repository. Authors have discretion in choosing a repository, provided readers are assured of free access to the data. A list of recommended repositories is provided below. For more information, please consult the Registry of Research Data Repositories.
PTS supports prospective registration of systematic reviews and recommends authors to register their systematic reviews at appropriate registries and provide the registration number in the last line of the manuscript abstract. Authors of systematic reviews should also provide documentation illustrating all the details of the search strategy. See the Cochrane Reviewers’ Handbook for examples of how search strategies should be presented.
Information pertaining to the statistical methods and measures used in the study should be provided, including the name, version, and supplier of the statistical software, as well as the p-value considered significant.
Authors, peer reviewers, and editors are expected to declare any potential or actual competing interests with respect to the manuscript. The COI and the name of the academic editor who make the final decision should be included in each published paper. In addition, editors and reviewers should declare COI to the editorial board.
Any interest or relationship, financial or otherwise that might be perceived as inappropriately influencing an author’s objectivity and the integrity or reliability of the study is considered a potential source of conflict of interest. Examples of potential competing interests include competing patents, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Any competing interests should be declared. To avoid ambiguity, it should be stated even if no competing interest exists. It is advisable to provide a statement of competing interests from public funding sources, including government agencies, charities, or academic institutions.
At the time of submission, conflicts of interest should be fully disclosed in the cover letter and in the manuscript, even if the author believes it has no impact on the work. If no conflict exists, please state that ‘The Author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest’. All authors should confirm the accuracy. If there is a conflict, please explain it in the “Competing Interest” section. Upon acceptance of the manuscript, the disclosure statement may be required to confirmation or update, or further details about such disclosure statements may be provided. For further details on conflict of interest declaration requirements, see the ICMJE.
External peer reviewers are expected to declare any potential competing interests that could exert an undue influence on the review at any point during the peer review process, and recuse themselves from the review when there exists competing interests. If there is any such statement of competing interest, the journal editor will judge whether the reviewer’s comments should be acknowledged or will expound the comments in the context of any such statement. PTS requires editorial staff or editors not to participate in dealing with their own academic work. Editors or editorial board members occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in the journal. In this case, other members of the editorial board will be replaced to manage the peer review. Submitted manuscripts will be assigned to at least two independent external reviewers. Editors/Board members who are authors will avoid participation in the decision-making process. Other editorial board members who do not have a conflict of interest with the author will be responsible for decision-making.
Guest editors should not have potential competing interests with the authors whose manuscript is under assessment. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate Editorial Board member will make the final decision on acceptance of the submitted manuscript.
With the exception of research articles, any non-research articles, including commentaries or Editorials whose authors are from editorial board, will be evaluated by an impartial editor who will determine whether peer review is warranted. In the case of peer review, a review process similar to that of the original article will be considered.
All authors should have made substantial intellectual contributions to published research. Authorship credit should be given in accordance with the standard proposed by the ICMJE guidelines. Specifically, authorship is merited by (1) substantial contributions to conception and design of the study, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; (2) drafting the article or making critical revisions related to important intellectual content of the manuscript; (3) final approval of the version of the article to be published; (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Each author should be fully involved in the work and take public responsibility for the content of the appropriate parts. Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship.
The authors' individual contributions to the manuscript should be identified and expressed using initials. PTS recommends using the role definition of CRediT.
All manuscripts must be submitted by an author instead of a third party
The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal and editorial office at any stage of the submission. The corresponding author’s specific responsibilities also include:
(1) Ensure that submissions meet all journal requirements, including but not limited to authorship details, research ethics and ethical approval, clinical trial registration documents, and conflict of interest statements.
(2) Handling the revisions and re-submission of revised manuscripts up to the acceptance of the manuscripts.
(3)Acting on behalf of all co-authors in responding to queries or critiques from all sources post-publication
Although correspondence with the journal is primarily the responsibility of the corresponding author, PTS editor should send copies of all correspondence to all listed authors.
All contributors that do not meet the criteria of authorship should be listed in the “Acknowledgment” section. Only those who have made substantive contributions to the study itself might be acknowledged. This includes support personnel, such as a department chair who provided only general support, statistical or manuscript review consultants, and scientific (medical) writers or any other person assisting in the preparation of manuscript content, as well as their sources of funding, as stated in the European Medical Writers Association (EMWA)guidelines. The role of medical writers should appropriately be acknowledged explicitly in the “Acknowledgment” section.
It is the author’s responsibility to obtain written approval from the person mentioned in the acknowledgement section.
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the author list is correct for the first submission. A request to alter authorship (for instance, adding or removing authors, author names, or contributing changes)) must be written in an e-mail by the corresponding author to the journal Editor containing a detailed explanation for the request and a letter signed by all authors indicating that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. New authors must fully meet the journal’s authorship requirements. PTS will separately notify anyone added or removed from the author list.
(1) Appropriate and relevant literature should be cited to support the claims made in research articles and non-research articles (e.g.,. Opinion, Review and Commentary articles). Authors should consider the following criteria when preparing manuscripts:
(2) Any statement in the manuscript that relies on external sources of information (i.e., not the authors’ own new ideas or findings) should use a citation.
(3) Authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
(4) Authors should ensure the accuracy of the citation (i.e., they should ensure that the citation supports the statement in the manuscript, and should not misrepresent another piece of work by citing it if it fails to support the point of the author)
(5) Authors should not cite sources that they have not read.
(6) PTS discourages citation manipulations to inappropriately increase the number of citations of themselves, their Friends etc.
(7) Authors should cite sources that have undergone peer review where possible.
(8) Authors should not cite advertisements or advertorial material.
PTS only accepts the original manuscripts. At the time of submission, it should be confirmed that no similar manuscripts have been or will be submitted to any other journal for publication. It is unethical to submit the same manuscript to several journals at the same time. The same paper published in more than one journal can damage the reputation of the journal. Duplicate publications or redundant publications (re-packaging in different words of data already published by the same authors) will be rejected. A flowchart used for dealing with Redundant Publications of COPE.
The author is responsible for ensuring the originality of the work. At the time of submission, all manuscripts are rigorously evaluated to determine whether there is published material. Using Turnitin in combination and searching titles in PubMed and Google, PTS singles out submitted manuscripts based on published research and other related sources. Submitted images are often checked for duplicates or other apparently abnormal data. Therefore, unprocessed data and metadata files need to be well preserved, as the Editor may use them to help evaluate manuscripts. In case unprocessed data are not available, there will be a delay on evaluating the authors’ manuscripts until this issue being addressed.
When plagiarism or fraud is reasonably suspected, the Editor reserves the right to challenge the author’s sponsoring agency and any other relevant agency. In cases of suspected plagiarism, a preliminary investigation will be performed in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowchart and ICMJE guidelines. Any suspected unethical publishing practices will be investigated. If plagiarism is confirmed, the plagiarized manuscript will be clearly marked on each page of the PDF. Manuscripts that are found to have been plagiarized will be rejected. The formal retraction of a published paper depends on the extent of plagiarism.
Image Manipulation: All digital images in manuscripts considered for publication will be carefully reviewed for any signs of manipulation inconsistent with the following guidelines. Manipulations that violate these guidelines will incur delayed manuscript processing or rejection, or even the retraction of published articles:
(1) No specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced.
(2) The grouping of images from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels, fields or exposures, must be made explicit by the arrangement of the figure and in figure legend.
(3) Brightness, contrast, or color balance can be adjusted as long as they apply to each pixel in the image, and they do not blur, erase, or distort any information that exists in the original image, including the background. Non-linear adjustment (for example, change in gamma setting) must be declared in the figure legend.
(4) Any issues raised during or post the peer review process will be submitted to the editors, who may compare the prepared data with original data requested from the author(s). If the original data cannot be provided, the manuscript may be rejected or, in the case of published articles, retracted. In any case, manipulation affecting the interpretation of the data will cause rejection or retraction. Suspected misconduct will be reported to the author’s institution.
Peer review is an indispensible part of scientific publication used to confirm the validity of the reported science. Peer reviewers are experts who are willing to review the journal manuscripts and further improve them. PTS complies with COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, and all journals use “double blind” review. In the entire review process, both reviewers and authors are unknown to each other.
Through the peer-review process, improvement should be made on manuscripts as follows:
(1) More solid: More explanation or additional experiments will be required to overcome the shortage of your paper based on comments from peer reviewers.
(2) Easier to read: The reviewer can point out contents in the paper that are difficult to understand so that the author can revise them. After all, the author cannot expect readers in different fields to understand his work in case that an expert fails to do so.
(3) More useful: Peer reviewers will also consider how important your paper is to others in your field, and can make recommendations to improve or better emphasize this point to readers.
Of course, peer review can not only provide authors advice, but also ensure that the quality of manuscripts published in the journal meets the journal’s objectives.
Please Note：
Manuscripts with content outside the scope will not be sent out for review.
(1) The editorial board will suggest 2 experts to review the manuscript.
(2) The author will be notified when the editor considers additional review of the manuscript.
(3) Editors-in-Chief are responsible for all publication decisions based on the referees’ reports. Authors of unaccepted papers will be notified promptly.
(4) All manuscripts submitted are considered confidential. Editors, reviewers and editorial staff participating in the review process shall disclose conflicts of interest with any author arising from direct competition, collaboration or other relationships, and avoid situations where such conflicts impact objective evaluation.
(5) Privileged information or ideas that are obtained through peer review must not be used for competitive gain.
(6)Our peer review process is confidential.
Accordingly, reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the content of the manuscript. It is not permitted to display or discuss with others, except in special circumstances to whom specific advice can be sought; otherwise, the identity of the person consulted should be disclosed to the Editor. Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations in the reviewed manuscript without the author’s consent. Reviewers shall disclose their conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from the peer review if a conflict exists as well as notify DBM.
PTS complies with the ICMJE and COPE guidelines.
Material inaccuracies, misleading statements, or distorted report must be corrected in a timely manner and with due prominence. If changes are made to a published article that do not affect the interpretation and conclusions of the article and do not render the article completely invalid, the editor will, in his discretion, make corrections at the earliest possible date by issuing a corrigendum, corrections, or editorial expressions of concern.
Published articles whose scientific information has been seriously undermined may be retracted. Retracted articles will be indexed and linked to the original article.
PTS follows the COPE guidelines for appeals and complaints against editorial decisions. Authors may appeal a decision to reject a manuscript that they believe to be incorrect. The appeal letter should clearly state why the decision is believed to be incorrect and respond in detail and specifically to any comments related to the rejection of review. Further advice from the journal’s Editorial Advisory Panel and external experts will be taken into account for eventual re-reviewability.
The academic editor of a journal has the full responsibility and authority to accept or reject papers submitted for publication. The academic editor may make the decision in consultation with a member of the Editorial Board or a Guest Editor in the case of evaluation.
Academic editors should consider all manuscripts submitted for publication in a timely and unbiased manner, taking no account of the race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author, judging them on their merits and respecting the intellectual independence of the author. Situations that might result in real or perceived competing interests should be avoided.
Academic editors and editorial staff should not disclose any information about the manuscript under consideration to anyone except reviewers and potential reviewers. Editors should not use unpublished information, arguments, or explanations disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research unless the author agrees.
If editors have compelling evidence that the content or conclusions of a published paper are incorrect, they should prompt publication of a correction or retraction of the article.
The editorial decision-making processes of our publications are believed to be completely separate from our commercial interests, for instance pressure from the publisher to the journal editor. In other words, Editors can make decisions independently and without pressure from any influential body or organization.
Our editorial policy conforms to the principles of editorial independence presented by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
Supplements, special issues, or similar publications funded by third parties (e.g.,. companies, societies, or charities) may be selected for publication. The journal should provide readers with the name of the funding agency, as well as any conflict of interest statements.
Journals should not allow funding agencies to decide which publications they choose to fund.
Editorial oversight of all publications is protected from the influence of sponsors or advertisers, including the selection and appointment of Guest Editors for these supplements. Sponsors or advertisers, including their roles, need to be prominently disclosed in the publication. All supplements published by PTS will transparently disclose the source of content, the role of editors, authors, sponsors and advertisers, and any conflicts of interest related to the supplement.
PTS is online scientific communication publishing platform for researchers worldwide, publishing original research regardless of gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, geographic/regional background, religion, or socioeconomic status. The Editors-in-Chief are encouraged to invite and appoint diverse experts to the journal’s Editorial Boards.
Potential boundary and territorial disputes that may be particularly relevant to the author’s description of the research or in an author or editor correspondence address should be respected. Editors are responsible for content decisions, and when there is a potential or perceived dispute or complaint, the editorial team will strive to find a solution that satisfies all involved parties.
PTS remains neutral in relation to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Editor-in-Chief:
Massimiliano Visocchi,
Institute of Neurosurgery, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 20123 Milan, Italy
ISSN: 2996-0908 (Online)
Frequency: quarterly
Submission to final decision:
60-90 days
Acceptance to publication: 15 days
Category:
Clinical Neurology
Peripheral Vascular Disease
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Exploration and Verfication Publishing
