Editorial Policy

Table of Contents

Main Document

General Descriptions

SMP, as an academic publisher on open sciences, adheres to the international rules and conventions suggested in Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), World Association of Medical Editors, Recommendations for Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. SMP takes its efforts to publish all contents with academic integrity. Authors are strongly recommended to read these editorial policies stated below. Submissions to SMP journals implies that all authors have read and agreed to the policies related to their work. SMP stands on neutral positions with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

About Open Access

All SMP journals are published in golden open-access mode. All contents published will be completely open online to all users immediately. Generally, SMP published its journals under CC license. But SMP allow journals to adopt their specific licenses according to the contents as well as discussions and decisions of the editorial board. SMP also allow journals to use different APC policies, e.g., waiver, discounting, or completely charging. For the specific conditions, authors are suggested to refer to the policies of the specific journal.

Ethical Aspects

Ethical approval

In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, all research involving human participants, human material, or human data must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing this, including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate, must appear in all manuscripts reporting such research. If a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption). Further information and documentation to support this should be made available to the Editor on request. Manuscripts may be rejected if the Editor considers that the research has not been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework. In rare cases, the Editor may contact the ethics committee for further information.

Retrospective ethics approval

As stated by COPE, if a study has not been granted ethics committee approval prior to commencing, retrospective ethics approval usually cannot be obtained and it may not be possible to consider the manuscript for peer review. The decision on whether to proceed to peer review in such cases is at the Editor's discretion.

Any research article describing a study (clinical research and case report) involving humans should contain a statement in the title page clearly stating that all involved persons (subjects or legally authorized representative) gave their informed consent (written or verbal, as appropriate) prior to study inclusion. In general, the Journal requires that any and all details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted or anonymized. In the rare situation that a study participant’s identifiable information is crucial to the case presentation, the statement of informed consent is absolutely necessary, unless the participant is deceased. In addition, a copy of any approval document(s)/letter(s) or waiver should be provided to the Journal in PDF format.

Identifying information should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, sonograms, CT scans, etc., and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian, wherever applicable) gives written informed consent for publication. Authors should remove patients' names from figures unless they have obtained written informed consent from the patients. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the article and copy of the consent should be attached with the covering letter. The final decision on whether consent to publish is required lies with the Editor.

Protection on human and animal rights

For research studies using human or animal subjects, the trial’s design, conduct and reporting of results must conform to Good Clinical Practice guidelines (such as the Good Clinical Practice in Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-Regulated Clinical Trials (USA) or the Medical Research Council Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice in Clinical Trials (UK)) and/or to the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki. Generally, we suggest that the national standard of the lead investigator be followed. If authors have any doubt as to whether the research was conducted in accordance with the above standards, the rationale for the chosen experimental approach must be clearly presented, along with a statement and proof of explicit approval given by the appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB, for human subjects) and/or the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC, for animal subjects) for conducting the doubtful aspects of the study.

All research reports that are submitted for consideration of publication in the journal must include statement(s) of proof that the appropriate approvals were obtained from the relevant IRB or research ethics committee. Any manuscript describing a study that used human subjects must include a statement that affirms the experiments were performed with prior informed consent (written or verbal, as appropriate) from each participant. All personal information must be anonymized prior to publication, unless a record of explicit consent from the involved patient(s) has been provided. Any manuscript describing a study that used animal subjects must include a statement in the Materials and Methods section (or text describing the experimental procedures) that affirms all appropriate measures were taken to minimize pain or discomfort, and details of the animals’ care should be provided.

Trial registration

In line with ICMJE guidelines, SMP requires registration of all clinical trials that are reported in manuscripts submitted to its journals. The ICMJE uses the World Health Organization (WHO) definition of a clinical trial, which is "any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes". This definition includes phase I to IV trials. The ICMJE defines health-related interventions as "any intervention used to modify a biomedical or health-related outcome" and health-related outcomes as "any biomedical or health-related measures obtained in patients or participants". Authors who are unsure whether their trial needs registering should consult the ICMJE FAQs for further information.

Data and materials availability

Research data should be made widely available to the research community to demonstrate the robustness and validity of the research presented in the journal, to enable and encourage replication of the results, and to allow the community with opportunities to learn. SMP requires authors to follow our data sharing policy. We recommend the use of community-endorsed data types. If you assign a persistent identifier to your research data by archiving it in a data repository, other researchers will be able to cite your data as well as your published research article. Please see https://www.re3data.org/, https://fairsharing.org/, or https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/ for help finding research data repositories. We further recommend citing the data that has been shared in the reference list. Data citations should include a persistent identifier, should be included in the reference list using the minimum information recommended by DataCite (Dataset Creator, Dataset Title, Publisher [repository], Publication Year, Identifier [e.g. DOI]) and follow journal style.

Article formation

Authorship

In SMP publications, authorship should be reasonable and should be stated clearly in disclosure as Author Contributions. According to COPE guidelines and descriptions in publications (McNutt et al. PNAS 2018; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715374115), SMP expect authors to follow statements as: 1) Each author is expected to have made substantial contributions to the conception OR design of the work; OR the acquisition, analysis, OR interpretation of data; OR the creation of new software used in the work; OR have drafted the work or substantively revised it; 2) AND to have approved the submitted version (and any substantially modified version that involves the author's contribution to the study); 3) AND to have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. Contributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section.

Special attentions should be paid to change of authors during publication process. Any changes to the author list after submission, such as a change in the order of the authors or the deletion or addition of authors, must be approved by every author and a change of authorship form must be completed. Changes of authorship by adding or deleting authors, and/or changes in Corresponding Author, and/or changes in the sequence of authors are not permitted after acceptance of a manuscript.

Adherence to reporting guidelines

In order to guarantee the quality of publications and sustain a standard publication, SMP strongly recommend authors to follow reporting guidelines during preparations of their articles. For common articles such as trials, basic research, systematic reviews, etc., authors should provide the checklists as the corresponding types.

  • Protocols for randomized controlled protocols (SPIRIT)
  • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses* (PRISMA) and protocols (PRISMA-P)
  • Observational studies (STROBE)
  • Case reports (CARE)
  • Qualitative research (COREQ)
  • Diagnostic/prognostic studies (STARD and TRIPOD)
  • Economic evaluations (CHEERS)
  • Pre-clinical animal studies (ARRIVE)
  • Statistical checklist (SAMPL guidelines)

Based on this, SMP journals may mandate that other reporting guidelines are followed and the exact requirements may vary depending on the journal; please refer to the journal’s submission guidelines.

Statistical methods

SMP journals have a standard review process for statistics in submitted manuscripts. Authors should include full information on the statistical methods and measures used in their research, including justification of the appropriateness of the statistical test used (SAMPL guidelines). Reviewers will be asked to check the statistical methods, and the manuscript may be sent for specialist statistical review if considered necessary.

Identification of resource

Important research is able to be repeated. In order to enable effective tracking of the key resources used to produce the scientific findings reported in the biomedical literature, authors are expected to include a full description of all resources with enough information to allow them to be uniquely identified, include by not limited to: cell lines, genes, data, products and equipment, etc.

Adherence to international rules and conventions

SMP try to use standard international rules and conventions in the publications, including international units (weight, volume, speed, time, etc.), names of animals, plants, bacteria, virus, etc.

Editorial process

Overview

Submissions to SMP journals will be subjected to a standard publication process, including technical review (reject/continue), peer review, internal review, decisions (reject/revise/accept), copyediting, proofreading, proof corrections, final approval, online publication.

Review and Peer review

Review and Peer review process is a crucially important procedure to guarantee the academic quality of the journal. Articles submitted to SMP journals will be initially reviewed by editors to check if it suits the scope and format of the journal. After that, articles will be subjected for peer review. SMP journals invite worldwide experts in the relevant field to make a double-blind peer review of manuscripts submitted by authors. Review comments are fully considered to ensure the academic value of the journal. The primary task of reviewers is to evaluate the validity of the approach, the significance and originality of the finding, its interest and timeliness to the scientific community, and the clarity of the writing. A qualified peer reviewer should send his/her feedback (even decline to review due to some reasons) as per the time frame of the journal. All peer reviewers must maintain a strict and perpetual confidentiality for the content of all manuscripts under their review and for any related correspondences with SMP and/or the journal editorial team. Reviewers must not share any part of the manuscript with a third party or discuss its content with the authors of the manuscript or any other person. Reviewers must not plagiarize or cite any of the contents of a manuscript before the manuscript has been formally published. Reviewers will decline participation in the peer review process for any manuscript if a conflict of interest exists, including interests related to the manuscript’s authors, personal interests, or academic or economic interests. If a conflict of interest becomes apparent during the peer review process, the reviewer must inform the Editorial Office immediately. The following reasons are adequate, alone or in combination, for rejection of a manuscript for publication: (1) The scientific content does not correspond to the journal’s aims and scope; (2) The research is not reasonably designed and the data are inadequate to support proper explanations or conclusions; (3) Related work has been previously published and only a few new points have been added; (4) The article contains accumulated information that has been previously published, with only few technical improvements; (5) The article is expected to attract only a very small portion of the journal’s readership audience; (6) The article has been rejected previously and resubmitted without adding any new valuable content.

SMP journals may have their own review and peer review policy. For different descriptions, authors should take firstly consider those of the specific journal.

Decisions

Generally, decisions may be made by editors, and final decisions will be made based on solid review comments by Editors-in-Chief of SMP journals, or by Managing Editors on behalf of the Editors-in-Chief. Decisions may be rejection, revision, or acceptance. Revised articles will be re-reviewed followed the same procedures of first review. Decision terms may be different for specific journals based on the policy of the specific journals.

Post-acceptance procedures

Submissions to SMP journals will be delivered for production immediately as soon as they are accepted. During this process, extensive copyediting including tables will be performed to meet the styles of SMP publications. Text on figures will be also checked and necessary edits will be implemented. Author queries may be proposed by editors if necessary. Then these edited articles will be subjected for typesetting and gallery PDFs will be generated and sent to authors for proofreading. No significant changes including author changes will be allowed. The proofreading process will only be ended upon final approval of all authors or the authorized corresponding authors. Final version will be published online.

Corrections and retractions

As stated in COPE guidelines, corrections or retractions may be published by SMP journals to guarantee the integrity of academic contents. Corrections to, or retractions of, published articles will be made by publishing a Correction (Erratum) or a Retraction note bidirectionally linked to the original article. Any alterations to the original article will be described in the note. The original article remains in the public domain and the subsequent Correction or Retraction will be widely indexed. In the exceptional event that material is considered to infringe certain rights or is defamatory, we may have to remove that material from our site and archive sites.

Special issues and collections

SMP journals publishes special and thematic issues focused on important and emerging topics in the field of study. Ideas for special issues are proposed by the journal’s editorial board, but the journal will also consider proposals for special issues submitted by members of the wider research community. All proposals are assessed for quality and relevance by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and the editorial office. The journal has established a rigorous process to ensure that any special issue manuscripts follow the same high-quality standards and peer review processes as regular manuscripts. Special issues may have a dedicated Guest Editor who is responsible for the coordination of the peer review process of any manuscripts submitted to the special issue in the online submission system. The Editors-in-Chief or the editorial office check the initial manuscript and assign it to the appropriate Guest Editor. The Guest Editor invites reviewers and makes recommendations on revisions and final decisions. The Editors-in-Chief have oversight of the entire process within the online submission system and are responsible for the final decision on all manuscripts.

Disclosure Statement policy

Acknowledgment

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an ‘Acknowledgements’ section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help or writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support. “None” can be used for this section.

Source of funding

For researches with funding support, authors should state clearly the funding details in this section, including the names of institutions, organizations, companies, etc. and funding numbers, time, etc. Editors may request authors to provide supportive materials if they consider necessary. Typical wording is “This study is supported by …”.

Ethical Approval

For descriptions, please refer to Section 3.1. Typical wording is ”The study was approved by …”.

For descriptions, please refer to Section 3.2. Type wording is “Written informed consents were obtained from all participants”. SMP allow journals to integrate Ethical and informed consent statements together in one section.

Conflicts of Interest

SMP requires authors to declare all conflicts of interest in relation to their work. All submitted manuscripts must include a ‘conflicts of interest’ section at the end of the manuscript listing all competing interests (financial and non-financial). Where authors have no competing interests, the statement should read “None declared” or There are no conflicts of interest”. Editors may ask for further information relating to this section if they consider necessary.

Editors and reviewers are also required to declare any competing interests and may be excluded from the peer review process if a competing interest exists.

Conflicts of Interest may include “Financial” and “Non-financial”. Financial aspects may include (but are not limited to): 1) Receiving reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of the manuscript, either now or in the future; 2) Holding stocks or shares in an organization that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of the manuscript, either now or in the future; 3) Holding, or currently applying for, patents relating to the content of the manuscript; 4) Receiving reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript. Non-financial aspects may include but not limited to: political, personal, religious, ideological, academic, and intellectual competing interests. If, after reading these guidelines, you are unsure whether you have a competing interest, please contact us at: info@hksmp.com.

Here are some typical aspects that may exist conflicts of interest: 1) Commercial organizations； Editorial Board Members, Guest Editors and Editors; Editorial staff.

Author contributions

Authorship is also an important aspect in publications. All authors should be listed in an appropriate manner. For detailed descriptions, please refer to section 4.1. Here is an example for author contribution section: “Author 1 name: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software. Author 2 name: Data curation, Writing- Original draft preparation. Author 3 name: Visualization, Investigation. Author 4 name: Supervision. Author 5 name: Software, Validation. Author 6 name: Writing- Reviewing and Editing.”

Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools

Large Language Models do not currently satisfy the authorship criteria as statement by COPE. SMP will not publish any contents with notable attribution by AI tools. Use of AI tools for preparations of manuscripts should be properly declared and editors may check if it is allowed for publications. “None” can be used if not any AI usage is involved.

Data availability

In SMP publications, authors are expected to provide a statement for future possible use of additional data not published in current articles. During the peer review and editorial decision process, authors can be asked to share existing datasets or raw data that have been analyzed in the manuscript, and whether they will be made available to other researchers following publication. Authors will also be asked for the details of any existing datasets that have been analyzed in the manuscript.

Other

Other statements may include: Copyright issues, Secondary publications, trial registrations, etc.

About misconduct

Research misconduct

Every step of research should be performed based on scientific procedures. All research involving humans (including human data and human material) and animals must have been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework. If there is suspicion that research has not taken place within an appropriate procedure and ethical framework, SMP Editors may reject a manuscript and may inform third parties, for example, author(s)’ institution(s) and ethics committee(s). In cases of proven research misconduct involving published articles, or where the scientific integrity of the article is significantly undermined, articles may be retracted.

Data falsification and fabrication

Data falsification is manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images, removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc. Data fabrication means the making up of research findings. Any questions regarding data integrity raised during or after the peer review process will be referred to SMP Editors. Editors may request (anonymized) underlying study data from the author(s) for inspection or verification. If the original data cannot be produced, the manuscript may be rejected or, in the case of a published article, retracted. Cases of suspected misconduct will be reported to the author(s)’ institution(s).

Duplicate publishing and plagiarism

Any manuscript submitted to SMP journals must be original and the manuscript, or substantial parts of it, must not be published or under consideration by any other journal. In any case where there is overlap or duplication, or the potential for overlap or duplication, we require that authors are transparent. Authors should declare any potentially overlapping publications on submission. Any overlapping publications should be cited. In general, the manuscript should not already have been formally published in any journal or in any other citable form. SMP uses iThenticate to monitor all existed duplicated contents. For suspected cases of duplication or plagiarism, we will process as outlined in the COPE guidelines and Editors may contact the authors’ institution.

Appropriate use of AI

AI may be used in preparations of manuscripts. For example, writing, revising, image creation, etc. As stated in Section 6.7, SMP journals do not accept articles with notable contributions of AI. Authors should state clearly what they have done during the manuscript preparation. Editors may check, consult and determine on the decisions based on COPE suggestions.

Conclusion remarks

Scientific exploration is full of difficulties, unknown aspects, but still is progressing. As an academic publisher, SMP considers our mission to “specialize in academic open access publishing and disseminate research achievements around the world”. We will try to help authors to publish their research achievements in a timely and scientific manner. We also know there must be some issues not listed on this Editorial policy, we will review this policy regularly and update it if necessary. For further information, do not hesitate to contact us at: info@hksmp.com.