Ethical Compliance

1. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship is based on substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, acquisition/analysis/interpretation of data; drafting or critically revising the manuscript; approval of the final version; and accountability for the integrity of the work. All listed authors must meet the applicable authorship criteria. Individuals who contribute but do not qualify for authorship should be appropriately acknowledged.

2. Editorial Independence and Peer Review

Editorial decisions are based on the scientific quality, originality, relevance, and ethical standards of manuscripts and are not influenced by commercial, political, personal, or institutional interests. Manuscripts are subjected to appropriate peer review, and reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality, declare conflicts of interest, and provide objective and constructive assessments. Editors and reviewers must not use unpublished information for personal advantage.

3. Research and Publication Ethics

Authors must ensure that research involving human participants has received appropriate ethical approval and, where applicable, informed consent. Clinical trials should be registered in an appropriate public registry before or in accordance with applicable registration requirements. Research involving animals must comply with recognized ethical standards.

4. Plagiarism, Similarity Screening, Misconduct and Duplicate Publication

JPSIM does not tolerate plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, manipulation of data, image manipulation, duplicate publication, redundant publication, or other forms of research or publication misconduct. All submissions are screened for text overlap using similarity-detection software, and concerns are investigated where they arise. Appropriate editorial action, including correction, rejection, expression of concern, or retraction, may be taken in accordance with established publication-ethics procedures.

5. Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose relevant financial and non-financial conflicts of interest. Sources of funding and the role of the funder in the research and publication process should be declared. Such disclosures are considered during editorial assessment and are made transparently where appropriate.

6. Corrections and Retractions

JPSIM is committed to maintaining the accuracy of the published scientific record. Significant errors identified after publication will be corrected promptly. Articles may be retracted when the findings are demonstrably unreliable or when serious ethical or publication violations have occurred. Retractions and corrections will be clearly identified and linked to the original article.

Reporting an error. Readers, authors and reviewers can report an error in a published article to the editorial office at editor@psimj.com, quoting the article title or DOI. Authors who discover an error in their own published article must notify the journal promptly.

Corrections. An error that affects the reader’s understanding of the results, the conclusions, the authorship or the declarations is corrected by a correction notice that is linked to the original article and states what was changed. The article itself is updated only as described in that notice. A minor typographical error that does not affect meaning may be corrected in place.

Expressions of concern. If there is credible evidence of a serious problem and an investigation is under way, the journal may publish an expression of concern linked to the article until the matter is resolved.

Retractions. A retraction notice is published, linked to the article, and states the reason for the retraction and who requested it. The retracted article remains available on the website, clearly marked as retracted, so that the scholarly record is preserved. Retraction decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief after consulting the Editorial Board and, where appropriate, the authors and their institution, following the COPE retraction guidelines.

7. AI Policy and Prompt Recordkeeping

JPSIM abides by the artificial intelligence policies set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The rules below apply to authors, reviewers and editors.

Authors. AI tools, including large language models and chatbots, cannot be listed as authors, because they cannot take responsibility for the work. Authors must disclose any use of AI-assisted technology in the preparation of the manuscript, including writing, editing, translation, data analysis, and the creation of images or figures. The disclosure must name the tool and its version, say what it was used for, and appear in the Methods or Acknowledgments section and in the cover letter. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy and originality of their manuscript, and for any citations, data or images produced with AI assistance. Authors must not present AI-generated images or data as original research findings.

Prompt records. All authors are instructed to maintain a complete record of all AI prompts, as the editorial board may inquire about them at any point during peer review or evaluation. JPSIM reserves the right to request the exact prompts used when utilizing AI assistance during manuscript preparation.

Reviewers. Manuscripts sent for review are confidential. Reviewers must not upload a manuscript, or any part of it, into a generative AI tool, and must not use AI to write or draft their review or assessment. A reviewer who uses an AI tool for a limited purpose, such as checking the language of their own comments, must say so to the handling editor and remains responsible for the content of the review.

Editors. Editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports or decision letters into generative AI tools, and must not use AI to make or write editorial decisions. Editors are responsible for the decisions they sign.

Concerns about undisclosed or improper use of AI are handled under the procedures in section 8.

8. Complaints, Appeals and Ethical Concerns

JPSIM provides mechanisms for authors, reviewers, readers and other stakeholders to raise concerns, appeal editorial decisions, or report suspected ethical misconduct. Such matters are handled confidentially, fairly, and in accordance with applicable COPE, ICMJE, and WAME guidance.

How to raise a matter. Write to the editorial office at editor@psimj.com with “Appeal”, “Complaint” or “Ethical concern” in the subject line. Give the manuscript number or the article DOI, describe the matter, and attach any supporting evidence. Concerns raised anonymously are considered if they are supported by evidence.

Appeals against editorial decisions. An author who disagrees with a decision may send a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of the decision, giving specific reasons and responding to the reviewers’ comments point by point. The appeal is considered by an editor who was not involved in the original decision, who may seek an additional independent review. The outcome is sent to the author in writing and is final.

Complaints about the editorial process or journal staff. The editorial office acknowledges a complaint within seven working days. The Editor-in-Chief, or another senior member of the Editorial Board who was not involved if the complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, reviews it and replies in writing within 30 days. If a full reply needs longer, the complainant is told why and when to expect it.

Concerns about submitted or published work. Suspected plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, image manipulation, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts of interest and undisclosed AI use are assessed against the relevant COPE flowcharts. The authors are told of the concern and given an opportunity to respond, and the editors may ask for the original data or contact the authors’ institution or ethics committee. Possible outcomes are no action, a correction, an expression of concern, a retraction, or notification of the institution, as described in section 6.

Confidentiality and records. The identity of a person who raises a concern in good faith is not disclosed beyond what is needed to deal with it. People who are the subject of a concern are always given an opportunity to respond. The journal keeps a confidential record of each matter and its outcome.

If you are not satisfied. A complainant who is not satisfied with the journal’s final reply may write to the publisher, the Pakistan Society of Internal Medicine, at the address on the Publisher and Ownership page.