Editorial Policy
Judi Clinical Journal adheres to the standards set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.
Upon submission to journal, it is imperative that all authors reach consensus on the manuscript's content. Additionally, authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscript complies with all relevant editorial policies detailed on this webpage.
Judi Clinical Journal is closely monitoring ongoing developments in this field and will update its policies as needed.
1. Artificial Intelligence (AI)
AI Authorship: Currently, large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT do not meet Judi Clinical Journal's authorship criteria, as authorship entails accountability, which cannot be attributed to LLMs. If an LLM is used, it must be documented in the Methods section (or another suitable section if a Methods section is unavailable). However, the use of AI tools for "AI-assisted copy editing"—defined as improving human-generated text for readability, style, and error correction—does not need to be disclosed. This does not include generative editorial work or autonomous content creation, and authors remain responsible for the final text.
Generative AI Images: Due to emerging legal and research integrity concerns surrounding generative AI-created images, Judi Clinical Journal does not permit their use in publications. Exceptions include images provided by contracted agencies or AI-related works where such content is relevant, which will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This policy covers various image types, including video stills, photography, scientific diagrams, and illustrations, but excludes text-based items like tables and graphs. Non-generative machine learning tools used to modify or enhance existing images should be disclosed for review.
AI Use by Peer Reviewers: Peer reviewers are selected for their subject matter expertise, which remains indispensable in ensuring rigorous and credible evaluations. While AI tools are evolving, they may still produce outdated, inaccurate, or biased information, and manuscripts may contain sensitive data that should not be shared. As a result, Judi Clinical Journal asks peer reviewers not to upload manuscripts into generative AI tools. If an AI tool assists in any part of the manuscript evaluation, its use must be transparently declared in the peer review report.
2. Ethics and Responsibilities
Authorship: Authorship is awarded to individuals who meet at least two of the following criteria:
2.1 Drafting the manuscript or performing a critical review.
2.2 Engaging in data acquisition, study design, or data analysis and interpretation.
2.3 Providing final approval of the manuscript prior to submission.
Contributors who do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.
3. Disclosures and Declarations: Authors must disclose the following information before the references section under the heading "Declarations":
Contributions of each author.
Funding sources.
Any financial interests.
Ethical approval by a recognized ethics committee.
Patient consent for research involving human participants.
Data availability statement.
Conflict of interest, if applicable.
Data transparency statement.
Use of AI tools.
4. Corresponding Author: The corresponding author represents the co-authors and is responsible for:
4.1 Ensuring all authors approve the final manuscript and are accurately listed on the title page.
4.2 Managing all communications between the journal and co-authors throughout the publication process.
4.3 Ensuring compliance with the journal’s guidelines and editorial policies.
4.4 Informing the journal about any relevant issues, unpublished data, supplementary files, and data transparency.
4.5 Confirming that the manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere or is under consideration by other journals.
5. Affiliation: Affiliation refers to the institution or organization where the work was conducted or where the authors are currently employed. Authors must ensure the accuracy of the provided affiliation, as changes cannot be made post-publication.
6. Changes to Authorship: During the submission process, the authors must provide an accurate list and order of authors and corresponding author. Post-acceptance changes in authorship, including adding or reordering authors, changing the corresponding author, or modifying the author order, are not permitted. Changes may be allowed during revision with a valid explanation and must be approved by all authors, accompanied by an Author Consent Form, available here:
7. Changing Author Name: Author names are published exactly as submitted. Authors must ensure accuracy during submission, as post-publication name changes are not permitted.
8. Confidentiality: All communications between authors and the journal, including correspondence with Editors-in-Chief and reviewer reports, must be kept confidential until authorized by the journal for sharing or reuse.
9. Authorship Issues or Disagreements: Disputes regarding authorship or any issues arising during the peer review, acceptance, and publication processes should be resolved by the authors. The journal will not intervene in these matters. If the dispute remains unresolved, the journal may withdraw the manuscript without compensation.
10. Competing Interests: Authors are required to disclose any interests related to the manuscript to ensure transparency and allow readers to assess potential biases. Relevant disclosures include:
11. Funding and Financial Interests: Identify all funding sources and any parties that could gain or lose financially from the publication. Ensure no sponsor interference in data analysis or generation.
12. Employment: Disclose any current or anticipated employment with organizations that might be financially affected by the manuscript’s publication.
13. Non-Financial Interests: Disclose any non-financial interests that could influence the manuscript, including personal relationships, beliefs, professional affiliations, editorial board memberships, consulting roles, or other relevant associations.
14. Authors’ Responsibilities
Authors must adhere to the following guidelines to maintain the quality and integrity of the Judi Clinical Journal and adhere to scientific standards:
14.1 Manuscripts should not be concurrently submitted to other journals.
14.2 The work must be original and not previously published, except for expanded versions.
14.3 Plagiarism and unauthorized use of others' work must be avoided.
14.4 Authors should not divide a single study into multiple submissions to increase submission volume.
14.5 Results must be presented honestly, without data falsification or manipulation.
14.6 Proper acknowledgment must be given to those who contributed to the work and to sources of materials and procedures.
14.7 Authors must provide documentation or raw data to verify the validity and originality of their data. If misconduct is detected, the journal reserves the right to reject the work. Post-publication errors should be reported for correction or retraction as needed.
15. Citation Ethics
Proper citation and referencing are required in all types of studies. Excessive self-citation, citation manipulation, or citing unrelated works is prohibited.
Authors should:
Cite original studies or articles rather than secondary sources.
Ensure cited works directly support their claims.
Avoid irrelevant citations and excessive referencing.
Refrain from citing predatory journals or non-peer-reviewed sources.
16. Predatory Journals/Publishers
The Judi Clinical Journal discourages citing or using content from predatory journals, which do not adhere to standard peer-review practices and often engage in unethical practices. Authors should avoid references from such sources. If discovered, authors will be asked to replace these references with valid ones.
To effectively identify and locate predatory journals and publishers, the followings are recommended:
Kscien Predatory Journals List: https://kscien.org/predatory-publishing/
Beall's List: https://beallslist.net/
Open Access Journal Predatory Journals List: https://www.openacessjournal.com/blog/predatory-journals-list/
Cabell's Predatory Journal Information: https://cabells.com/
17. Article Withdrawal
Withdrawal applies to articles that are in press and may contain errors or breaches of ethical codes. Withdrawn articles will have their content removed and replaced with a notice indicating the withdrawal and its reason.
18. Article Retraction and Correction
18.1 Article Correction
Process of Correction in Judi Clinical Journal:
18.1.1 Error Identification
Detection: Errors in published articles may be identified by authors, readers, or the editorial team. These can range from minor typographical issues to more significant errors, such as inaccuracies in data interpretation or methodology.
Notification: Upon identifying an error, the individual—whether the author or reader—is encouraged to promptly notify the Judi Clinical Journal's editorial team to facilitate corrective action, ensuring the integrity of the scientific record.
18.1.2 Assessment
Evaluation by the Editorial Team: Once notified, the editorial team assesses the reported error to determine its nature and severity, particularly if it affects the study's findings or conclusions.
Consultation with Authors: Authors are consulted to provide their perspective on the identified error, which helps clarify its context and potential implications.
18.1.3 Decision on the Type of Correction
Minor Corrections: For minor errors that do not affect the scientific integrity of the article, the journal may issue a corrigendum, which involves minor revisions without substantial changes.
Major Corrections: In cases where the error significantly impacts the study's conclusions but does not warrant retraction, the journal may require a more detailed correction. This may include revising sections of the article, reanalyzing data, or issuing a formal erratum.
18.1.4 Issuance of Correction
Correction Notice: The editorial team, often in collaboration with the authors, prepares a correction notice. This is published in a subsequent issue and is linked to the original article.
Details of the Correction: The notice will provide a clear explanation of the error, the corrected information, and how the error was identified. If necessary, it will include updates to specific parts of the article, such as tables or figures.
Indexing and Linking: The online version of the article is updated with a link to the correction notice, ensuring future citations are informed of the correction.
18.1.5 Transparency and Documentation
Record Keeping: All corrections are documented by the journal to maintain transparency and accountability. The original error and corrected version remain part of the academic record.
Reader Notification: Depending on the correction's significance, the journal may directly inform subscribers or readers who have cited the affected article.
18.2 Retraction Policy of Judi Clinical Journal
At Judi Clinical Journal, we uphold the highest standards of academic integrity. Our retraction policy addresses instances where a published article is found to be flawed due to honest error, research misconduct, or other issues that undermine the reliability of the findings.
18.2.1 Grounds for Retraction: Articles may be retracted for the following reasons:
18.2.1.1 Research Misconduct: This includes data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, authorship disputes, or unethical research practices.
18.2.1.2 Honest Errors: Significant errors in data analysis, methodology, or interpretation that make the findings unreliable.
18.2.1.3 Duplicate Publication: Instances where the same research findings are published in multiple journals without proper citation or authorization.
18.2.1.4 Ethical Issues: Violations of ethical standards, particularly those involving research subjects or undisclosed conflicts of interest.
18.2.2 Retraction Procedure
18.2.2.1 Initiation of Retraction: Retraction can be initiated by the authors, journal editors, or third parties such as readers or institutions, provided substantial evidence supports the claim.
18.2.2.2 Investigation: The journal conducts a thorough investigation, often involving input from original peer reviewers, authors, and potentially the authors' institutions. Based on the investigation, the journal determines whether retraction is necessary.
18.2.2.3 Decision Making: The final decision to retract is made by the editor, typically in consultation with the editorial board or external experts, and is based on the evidence and the severity of the identified issues.
18.3 Retraction Notice
Publication of the Notice: A retraction notice is published, clearly labeled, and linked to the original article in all formats (e.g., abstract, full text, PDF).
Content of the Notice: The notice will state the reasons for the retraction, who initiated it, and provide a complete citation of the original article. It will also clarify whether the retraction was due to misconduct, error, or other reasons.
Accessibility: The retracted article remains available on the journal's website, but it is marked as retracted to inform readers of its status.
18.4 Post-Retraction Actions
Impact on Related Research: If the original article's findings affect subsequent work, additional notices or corrections may be issued to alert the academic community.
Author Notifications: Authors will be informed before the retraction notice is published and given the opportunity to respond or provide additional context.
Transparency and Record Keeping: All retraction decisions and processes are documented and archived for transparency. The journal will cooperate with any institutional investigations related to the retraction.
18.5 Appeals Process
Authors who believe their article has been unfairly retracted may submit an appeal in writing to the editor within 30 days of the retraction notice. The editorial board will review the appeal and issue a final decision. While appeals may result in a reversal of the retraction, this is uncommon. The journal's retraction procedures align with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines to ensure fair, transparent, and consistent handling of retractions.
18.5.1 Appealing a Retraction
18.5.1.1 Understanding the Reason for Retraction
Review the Retraction Notice: Authors should thoroughly review the retraction notice to understand the specific reasons for the retraction. This will guide them in preparing a focused appeal.
18.5.1.2 Prepare Supporting Evidence
Collect Documentation: Authors should gather all relevant documents, data, and correspondence, such as raw data and ethical approvals, to support their case.
Address the Concerns: A detailed explanation should be prepared, addressing each point raised in the retraction notice and providing evidence to counter any misunderstandings or errors.
18.5.1.3 Draft a Formal Appeal Letter
Structure the Appeal: The letter should be formal, addressed to the journal’s editor-in-chief, and include:
Introduction: A brief introduction stating the retracted article's title, authors, and publication date.
Summary of Issues: A summary of the retraction reasons outlined by the journal.
Counterarguments: Evidence-based arguments addressing each issue in the retraction notice.
Conclusion: A polite request for reconsideration of the retraction, with the option for further discussion or the involvement of an independent review board.
18.5.1.4 Submit the Appeal
Submission: The appeal letter and supporting documents should be sent to the journal’s editorial office, typically by email or the manuscript submission system.
Confirmation of Receipt: Authors should request confirmation to ensure the appeal is being processed.
18.5.1.5 Await Response
Editorial Review: The journal's editorial team will review the appeal, possibly consulting peer reviewers, the editorial board, or external experts.
Outcome: The journal will communicate its final decision in writing. If the appeal is successful, a notice may be issued restoring the article or amending the retraction notice.
19. Article Removal and Replacement
In rare cases, articles may be removed from the database if they are libelous, infringe on legal rights, or pose significant health risks. Metadata will be retained, but the content will be replaced with a notice explaining the removal. If a corrected version is published, retraction procedures will be followed, including linking to the corrected article.
20. Duplicate Publications
Authors must ensure that their submissions to the Judi Clinical Journal are original and have not been previously published or are under consideration elsewhere. Duplicate publication, where the same manuscript or substantial parts of it are published more than once, is strictly prohibited. Authors must disclose any prior or concurrent publications, including conference papers, preprints, or reports, and ensure that the current manuscript offers new and significant contributions. Submissions that do not comply with these standards will be subject to rejection, and in cases of intentional duplicate publication, appropriate actions, including retraction and notification to relevant institutions, may be taken.
21. Language Editing Service
Manuscripts must be submitted in English, with correct spelling and grammar, to avoid desk rejection. Authors are advised to seek language editing services from recognized experts before submission. If using third-party editing services, a certification of the language edit should be provided.
22. Adherence to Inclusive Language
Inclusive language that respects diversity and avoids prejudice is essential. Authors should avoid bias, stereotypes, and culturally insensitive language. Terms related to personal attributes should only be used if scientifically relevant, with clear justification. Racial and ethnic terms should be capitalized, and religious, cultural, and political statements should be factual and evidence-based.
23. Fabrication, falsification, and image manipulation
All digital images submitted for publication will undergo rigorous examination to ensure compliance with the following standards. Any image manipulation that contravenes these guidelines may lead to delays in processing, rejection of the manuscript, or retraction of the published article:
No part of an image may be enhanced, obscured, relocated, removed, or introduced artificially.
Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are permissible only if uniformly applied across the entire image and if they do not obscure, alter, or misrepresent any original information, including the background. Any non-linear modifications must be disclosed in the figure legend.
During or after the peer review process, any concerns regarding image manipulation will be addressed by the Editor, who may request the original data from the authors for verification against the submitted figures. Failure to provide the original data may result in manuscript rejection or, if already published, retraction of the article. Manipulation that affects data interpretation will lead to rejection or retraction, and suspected misconduct will be reported to the authors' affiliated institutions.
Editorial Guidelines
1. Roles and Responsibilities
Editors of Judi Clinical Journal play a crucial role in evaluating the scope and quality of submitted manuscripts, making recommendations based on peer review outcomes. The editorial board is collectively responsible for upholding the journal’s standards of high-quality research. A primary duty of the editor is to determine whether a manuscript is suitable for publication in the journal.
2. Submission, Screening, and Editorial Assignment
Manuscripts are submitted to Judi Clinical Journal through an online system, which manages the entire review process. Upon submission, the editorial office reviews the manuscript to ensure completeness and accuracy of metadata. Once this initial screening is complete, manuscripts are assigned to a senior editorial board member—either the editor-in-chief or a selected associate/section editor. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable at this stage may be rejected outright. The editorial board's membership details are accessible on the journal’s website. Acceptable manuscripts are forwarded to editors for formal peer review.
3. Article Management
Manuscripts are managed through the journal’s online system. Editors are notified via email when assigned a new manuscript. Manuscripts are allocated based on the editor’s expertise and current workload. While a thorough understanding of the manuscript's topic is not mandatory, editors should be familiar with the subject matter. If an editor finds that a manuscript significantly exceeds their expertise, they should decline the assignment. Additionally, if any potential conflict of interest is identified, such as institutional affiliation with an author or involvement in a competing project, the editor should withdraw from the review process.
Upon receiving a manuscript, editors should evaluate its relevance and quality, determining whether it aligns with the journal’s scientific scope. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria should be rejected immediately. Acceptable manuscripts should proceed to formal peer review.
4. Recruiting Peer Reviewers
Editors are responsible for inviting at least two reviewers to assess each manuscript. Reviewers should be selected based on their expertise in the relevant field and should not be affiliated with the same institution as any of the authors, nor should they have recent collaborations with them. Avoid inviting reviewers requested by the authors. If a potential conflict of interest is detected, alternative reviewers should be sought.
Reviewers should have substantial experience in the field, which can be gauged from their publication history. Suitable reviewers range from post-doctoral researchers to emeritus professors. Identifying appropriate reviewers can be challenging, and editors might use abstracting and indexing services, manuscript reference lists, or their own academic network to find potential candidates.
5. Decision Making
Reviewers will provide recommendations for each manuscript, including:
Accept
Minor revision
Major revision
Reject
The editor’s final decision is based on reviewer feedback and their own assessment of the manuscript. A minimum of two reviewer reports is required before a decision is made. The possible decisions are:
Accept: The manuscript is deemed suitable for publication without further modifications.
Minor Revision: The manuscript requires minor changes before it can be accepted for publication.
Major Revision: Substantial revisions are needed, and the manuscript will be reassessed by reviewers.
Reject: The manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication in the journal.
If the majority of reviewers recommend rejection, the manuscript must be rejected. However, a single critical flaw identified by even one reviewer can lead to rejection, regardless of other positive reviews. Replicative or overly derivative studies are rejected, with emphasis on originality and contribution to scientific knowledge.
6. Appeals: Judi Clinical Journal upholds the COPE guidelines concerning appeals of editorial decisions and complaints. Authors who believe their manuscript was unfairly declined have the option to submit an appeal. To initiate this process, authors should contact Judi Clinical Journal with a formal appeal letter, clearly outlining the grounds for their appeal. The letter should detail why the authors believe the Editor's decision was erroneous and address each comment that contributed to the rejection with a comprehensive and specific response. Upon receipt of the appeal, the journal will consult with the journal’s external Editorial Advisory Panel to assess whether the manuscript warrants reconsideration for re-evaluation. Authors should avoid submitting their paper elsewhere while an appeal is under consideration and must respond to referees' comments professionally and clearly.
Judi Clinical Journal develop and implement a formal process for authors to appeal editorial decisions, aiming to support legitimate appeals while discouraging repetitive or baseless challenges. Editors should permit appeals to potentially reverse earlier decisions through thorough re-evaluation of the editorial process and decision-making. This re-evaluation might include considering new factual evidence provided by authors, manuscript revisions, supplementary materials, or addressing concerns regarding conflicts of interest and potential biases in peer review. Decisions should not be swayed by author objections alone. Editors should oversee all interactions between authors and peer reviewers during the review process, and may seek additional peer review comments to inform their final decision.
7. Confidentiality
Manuscripts must be kept confidential. Editors should not use any information from the manuscript until it is published.
8. Publication Ethics
The editorial office of the Journal conducts checks for plagiarism and other forms of research misconduct. Editors who become aware of ethical issues, such as plagiarism, authorship disputes, duplicate submissions, or data manipulation, should report these concerns to the journal’s editorial office at
9. Copy right and License formatting
The journal operates under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY) license. This license allows authors to retain the copyright of their work while granting users the freedom to download, print, reuse, archive, and share the article, provided proper credit is given to both the authors and the original source. The CC BY license promotes broad accessibility, ensuring the article can be widely distributed and included in any scientific repository.
9.1 Author Rights in the Judi Clinical Journal
1. Patent and trademark ownership: Authors retain full ownership of their patents and trademarks.
2. Unrestricted use of research data: Authors have the freedom to use their research data without any limitations.
3. Recognition and acknowledgment: Authors are entitled to receive proper credit for their published work.
4. Reuse of research materials: Authors can reuse their published materials in new projects without needing permission or financial compensation, provided the original article is properly cited. This includes:
5. Expanding the article into a book.
6. Including the article in a future project compilation.
7. Reusing figures, tables, and portions of the original work in other publications.
8. Sharing for academic purposes: Authors can freely share their work for educational purposes, with proper citation of the original article. The following permissions apply:
9. Using and distributing printed or digital copies of the article for classroom instruction.
10. Presenting and distributing copies of the article at conferences.
11. Sharing the article via email with students or colleagues for academic or personal use.
12. Providing free access to the article for 50 days through Share Links, with no need for registration.
13. Including the article in theses or dissertations, as long as they are not published commercially.
14. Sharing the article privately within a workgroup hosted on commercial sites under a hosting agreement with the publisher.
15. Preprint and manuscript sharing: Authors may freely share the preprint of their work on any platform or repository. They may also share the accepted manuscript on non-commercial websites.
16. Public access to final articles: The final published version of the article can be made publicly available for sharing purposes.
17. Copyright retention: Authors retain full copyright over their published work.
9.2 Institution Rights in the Judi Clinical Journal
1. Classroom distribution: Institutions may distribute printed or digital copies of the article for educational and scientific training purposes.
2. Incorporation into coursework: Materials can be integrated into institutional curricula and awareness programs.
3. Grant funding: Published articles can be used to support grant proposals.
4. Theses and dissertations: Institutions may publicly share theses and dissertations containing the final version of published articles, including DOI links to the official publication.
Joining the editorial board
Judi Clinical Journal is currently seeking qualified individuals to join the Editorial Board of our journal. Researchers with expertise in relevant subject areas are encouraged to apply.
Our mission is to promote scientific communication that is clear, concise, and objective, with a focus on promptly publishing high-quality original research. We uphold the highest standards of quality, and our Editorial Board is composed of esteemed scientists from around the world.
To qualify as an Editorial Board Member, candidates should have a minimum of 20 research articles published in reputable, peer-reviewed English-language journals and have frequently been listed as the corresponding author (first or last author) within the past five years.
Editorial Board Members are expected to support the journal’s ethos, scope, editorial standards, and policies, and actively promote the journal within the scientific community.
Key responsibilities include:
Evaluating manuscripts for suitability for peer review,
Selecting appropriate reviewers that meet the journal's requirements, and Recommending decisions based on peer reviewers' reports and their own assessments, while adhering to Judi Clinical Journals’ editorial guidelines.
In addition to these responsibilities, Editorial Board Members have opportunities to contribute to journal development and participate in promotional activities aimed at enhancing the visibility of our published research.
Benefits of becoming an Editorial Board Member include:
Gaining editorial knowledge through access to dedicated editorial training and resources.
Advancing your career by increasing visibility among potential employers, funding bodies, and peers in the field.
Contributing to the research community by ensuring the publication of scientifically sound, reproducible research.
Proposing and coordinating special issues to highlight your research field.
Early exposure to cutting-edge research through manuscript review.
Playing a pivotal role in shaping and improving journal processes.
If you meet the qualifications and are interested in joining the Editorial Board, please email [email protected] with the subject line "Editorial Board Application." Include a brief statement highlighting your qualifications, expertise, and motivation for joining the board, along with your updated CV. We welcome dedicated researchers, academics, and professionals committed to advancing clinical research and maintaining academic excellence and integrity.