Skip to Main Content
Skip Nav Destination

Publication Ethics and
Malpractice Statement

It is necessary for all parties involved in the act of publishing to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior: author, peer reviewers, journal editors, and publisher. The ethic’s statement for JPPT is based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


Authorship – Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported work. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors in order of their contribution to the article. If others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper, have agreed to its submission for publication, and agree to take responsibility for their own contributions.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest – All authors should disclose any substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the paper must be disclosed.

Originality and Plagiarism – By submitting a manuscript the author(s) warrant that the manuscript is their own, original work and that the sources of any ideas and/or words that are not their own have been properly attributed through appropriate citations and/or quotes. Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication – Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere and is not concurrently being consider for publication by another journal. Such redundant publication is generally considered unethical publishing behavior, and if discovered may result in a manuscript under consideration being rejected, or a published article being retracted.

Standards in Publishing – An original research paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Authors should present an accurate accounting of the work and should provide a discussion that addresses the significance of the report. Underlying data should be represented accurately. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior.

Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data connected to their paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) if requested. In any event, the author should retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Website Information-Authors should print and retain information attributed to a specific website.

Editors’ Decision – Following peer review, the possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a manuscript, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted. Revised papers must be submitted within 4-months or they will automatically be rejected. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.

Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper as needed.

Editor’s publication in JPPT – The editors of JPPT may publish in their own journal, but they must not exploit their position. Peer review is handled independent of the editor by appointment of a subrogate editor.


All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are content experts in the area of the particular paper.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer reviewers assists the editor in making editorial decisions and assist the author in improving the paper. Reviewers should recuse themselves from the assignment if it becomes apparent to them at any stage that they do not possess the required expertise to perform the review.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest – Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Promptness – Reviewers who accepted manuscript assignments are expected to submit their reviews within three weeks. Any referee who feels unqualified to review the subject of a manuscript or who is unable to promptly review a paper should notify the editor and recuse themselves from the process.

Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Likewise, the manuscript must not be shown to or discussed with others except when authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity – Reviews should be conducted as objectively as possible. Personal criticism of the author(s) is both unprofessional and inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly explaining and justifying all suggested recommendations. They should provide detailed and constructive feedback to assist the author(s) in improving their work, even if the manuscript is, in their opinion, not publishable.

Acknowledgment of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.


Fair Play – An editor will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality – The editors must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Additionally, the editors will make every effort to ensure the integrity of the blind review process by not revealing the identity of the reviewers.

Misconduct – Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest – The editors must have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between authors, reviewers and board members. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work and reports it to journal, the editor will publish errata pages, make corrections or retract the paper as when needed. The editor will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when con-sidering retracting, issuing an expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published.

Editorial Independence / Relation with Publisher / Journal Owner (e.g., academic/professional society) – The relationship of editors to publishers and journal owners will be based on the principles of editorial independence. The economic and political realities of the journal should not influence an editors’ selection of submissions, but acceptance should be based on the quality of the publication and suitability for the readers rather than immediate financial, political or personal gain.

Commercial Issues (e.g., advertising, commercial supplements, tendering process) – Advertising or publishes sponsored supplements will not influence the quality of the journal nor will it affect editorial decisions.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal