'Clinical Diabetology' is a journal for practiciing clinicians aiming to increase knowledge and promote research for better management of people with diabetes. Editors are interested in publishing a wide range of articles such as original clinical research, clinical care, case reports, diabetes care related health policies and practices from across the world. The journal also publishes clinically relevant review articles, letters to the editor, and commentaries. Research papers that are not suitable for Clinical Diabetology are basic science research (animal preclinical research) or opinions that merely reflect personal views.

The Journal is committed to prompt evaluation and publication of submitted articles. All manuscripts together with supplementary files (if applicable) should be submitted online via the journal web page. The submission and review process is fully electronic and submissions by e-mail or postal mail will not be accepted. Please follow the manuscript preparation directions presented. Manuscripts submitted for publication in the Journal are evaluated as to whether they present new insights into the announced topic and are likely to contribute to progress in research or to changes in medical practice. Received manuscripts are initially examined by the Journal editors. Manuscripts with insufficient priority for publication are rejected immediately to allow the authors to recognize deficiencies and submit the paper to another journal or resubmit a revised version. Incomplete submissions or manuscripts not prepared in the required style are sent back to the authors without scientific review.

If manuscript is accepted for review, the authors will be notified in the electronic way only with the reference to the article ID number in the electronic system. Articles are evaluated by at least two outside referees who are contacted before being sent a paper and asked to return comments within time period indicated by Editors. All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents, and reviewers are instructed to treat manuscripts as such. The peer review process is also confidential and identities of reviewers are not released. Referees are asked to provide a written review together with recommendation of acceptance, requirement for revision or rejection of the article.

Authors are notified of decisions by e-mail only. Selected papers are edited to improve accuracy and clarity and for length. Criteria for acceptance of manuscripts or review forms are available at the Journal web page. PMP operates with a  “single blind” peer review policy, meaning that names of reviewers are not disclosed. The list of active reviewers cooperating with the Journal is announced once a year. Reviewers are expected to report to Editor in writing any potential conflict of interests, i.e. direct personal relationships (first- and second-degree kinship, legal ties, relationship by marriage), superior/subordinate professional relations or direct scientific cooperation within the two years preceding the review. Papers submitted to ‘CD’ but not accepted for publication may, in some cases, be eligible for publication in other journals of the Publisher. 

Manuscripts authored by Editors or members of Editorial Board are treated no differently to any other manuscript submitted to Palliative Medicine in Practice. All possible measures are undertaken to avoid any potential conflict of interest in handling of such manuscripts at all the stages including allocation of handling Editor, selection of reviewers, decision making and, if required, processing for publication.

Editors or Editorial Board members may submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in 'Clinical Diabetology' occasionally, but they are completely excluded from peer–review process and publication decisions when they are authors or co–authors of a manuscript. Manuscripts authored by a member of a journal’s editorial team (editors, Editorial Board members) are independently peer–reviewed and the peer review process is managed by the alternative members of the Editorial Board.

Reviewers’ criteria for manuscripts qualification:  (x)Title reflects the subject undertaken (x) Assumptions are proper (x)Work of practical nature  (x) Work of educational nature (x) Aims are clearly defined (x) Appropriate methodology (x) Ethical criteria fulfilled* (x) Research-based work* (x) Results are adequately presented* (x) Statistical analysis is reliable* (x) Discussion refers to results* (x) Conclusions based on study findings* (x) Conclusions refer to aims* (x) Suitably chosen, proper number and up to date references (x) Proper length (x) All figures and tables are required (x) Standard of written English acceptable

* criteria exclusively for research papers