Focus and Scope
'Palliative Medicine in Practice'hereinafter referred to as ‘PMP’ or ′The Journal′, is a peer-reviewed, open access scholary journal covering broad spectrum of topics within palliative care and aiming to advance knowledge of this rapidly evolving field. The Journal, a quarterly, publishes review articles, original clinical and experimental investigations in the field, case reports, letters and editorial comments. The idea of Editors is to reflect the multidisciplinary approach that plays a pivotal role in palliative care. Thus, The Journal is dedicated to various professionals like doctors, nurses, psychologists, social workes, and oher specialists, members of palliative care team. Beginning with first issue of 2018 PMP is published under English title and favours papers submitted in full text English to broaden the range of both authors and readers.
Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
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 “double blind” peer review policy, meaning that reviewers of papers won’t get to know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) won’t get to know the identity of the reviewer. The idea is that everyone should get a similar and unbiased review. The list of reviewers cooperating with the Journal is announced once a year. In potential cases when author(s) of manuscripts and reviewers are no more anonymous, reviewers are asked to confirm in writing no conflict of interests, i.e. no 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 ‘PMP’ 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 Palliative Medicine in Practice 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
- Title reflects the subject undertaken
- Assumptions are proper
- Work of practical nature
- Work of educational nature
- Aims are clearly defined
- Appropriate methodology*
- Ethical criteria fulfilled*
- Research-based work*
- Results are adequately presented*
- Statistical analysis is reliable*
- Discussion refers to results*
- Conclusions based on study findings*
- Conclusions refer to aims*
- Suitably chosen, proper number and up to date references
- Proper length
- All figures and tables are required
- Standard of written English acceptable
* criteria exclusively for research papers
Open Access Policy
All articles published in 'Palliative Medicine in Practice' are available in open access formula and are published under Creative Common Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) allowing to download articles and share them with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially.
Via Medica (Publisher) self-archiving policy establishes that authors can archive only accepted manuscripts including final PDF version and/or 'ahead of print' in any repository. In details, the author may only post their version provided acknowledgment is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Via Medica (Publisher) website. Apart from the link mentioned above, the acknowledgment should be provided with the full bibliographic record.
Corrections, Retractions and Related Policies
Our policy is to keep all articles published as final VOR (Version of Record) unaltered and exact. However, if changes in already published VOR articles are necessary, they will be executed after case-by-case analysis by Journal Editors and respective staff of Via Medica and in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). They will be implemented as a Correction Notice, Expression of Concern, Retraction, or Removal. These will be explained in a post-publication notice, permanently linked to the original work to guarantee full transparency and permanency. If authors find errors in their published articles and there is consensus about that among all co-authors, the corresponding author should formulate a detailed request for changes and submit it using the Support contact e-mail at the Journal’s website.
Correction Notice (CN)
A separate CN will be published if an error to be corrected can impact the interpretation of the article, but the integrity of the article has been preserved. Such CN will provide details of the error and changes made to the VOR article. It will be linked to the article of interest, which will also be corrected. Additionally, a footnote will be added to the article displaying the electronic link to the correction notice.
A Retraction Statement will be published in accordance with COPE guidelines in all instances where a major disclosed error undermines or invalidates the presented conclusions or where research misconduct or publication misconduct has occurred (fabricated data, plagiarism, manipulated images, etc.). Issuing a retraction will always be preceded by an investigation by our editorial team and an appropriate Editor. In case of retraction, a statement on this matter will be made available in the online issue of the Journal and will be linked to the retracted article online. Additionally, a ‘retracted’ watermark will be added to the article. If articles are retracted, they are not usually removed from the website. In most cases, the arguments for the retraction are so severe that such manuscripts should not be cited in any other scientific literature.
Expressions of Concern
In cases where serious concerns have been raised about a published article, however, the results of the investigation are not conclusive or have not been completed for an extensive period, an Expression of Concern may be issued and linked to the article. This can be later followed by a Correction Notice or Retraction Statement, which will constitute a permanent part of the published record together with the original article.
A Removal Notice (replacing an online article) is restricted for very rare cases of serious problems that cannot be addressed by a Correction Notice or Retraction Statement (e.g., a defamatory article or an article infringing other legal rights, violating privacy, etc.).
An addendum represents a different type of notification aiming to add information to an article and not contradict it. This may be published if authors request updates to their original publication. Addenda in this Journal will usually be subject to review by the Editors and – if accepted – will be electronically linked to the online article to which they relate.
Complaints Handling Policy
This policy applies to complaints on policies, procedures and actions of PMP’s editorial staff and as a rule is regarded as an opportunity for improvement. Complaints will be dealt with by members of the editorial staff, escalating (if required) to editor-in-chief, whose decision is regarded as final. Complaints should be directly emailed to a person indicated as a support contact at the Journal’s contact panel. All complaints will be acknowledged within three working days and, if possible, a full response will be made within three weeks. If this is not possible an interim response will be given within this timeframe. Further responses will be provided until the issue is resolved.
If authors are convinced that the article they submitted was rejected wrongly, they should send rebuttal letter via PMP’s support contact rather than submitting a revised article at this stage. If the editors agree to such appeal, authors may be asked to submit a revised version of the article in question which will enter again into PMP’s review process. The rebuttal letter should be detailed and include responses to comments from external reviewers and from Journal’s editors. Only one appeal per article will be considered. An invitation for resubmission after appealing is by itself not a guarantee of acceptance.
Informed Consent for Publication
To secure release from the responsibilities to the third parties, corresponding author is required to return to the Publisher a singed copy of the ‘Authors' statement together with the manuscript. The Authors' statement is available at https://journals.viamedica.pl/palliative_medicine_in_practice/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions. All authors must agree to the conditions of publication, however the final responsibility for this information lays on the author submitting the manuscript.
Palliative Medicine in Practice (PMP) will accept advertising for services and products that are of value to readers in their professions. Distinction between advertising and editorial content should be easy. PMP does not allow advertising to influence editorial decisions. Online advertising or sponsorship should not impede users’ access to editorial content. Journal accepts advertising from competitors. Advertisements or sponsorship related to tobacco products will not be accepted.
Advertisements and sponsorship must be legal, trusthworthy and comply with the relevant industry codes, laws and regulations.