179
The no tes in this statement are excerpts fro m: Internatio nal Co mmittee o f Medical Jo urnal Edito rs. Unifo rm Requirements fo r Manuscripts Submitted to Bio medical Jo rnals. Ann Intern Med 1 9 9 7 Jan 1 ;1 2 6 (1 ):3 6 -4 7 . Available o n website: http:/ / www.acpo nline.o rg / jo urnals/ 0 1 jan9 7 / unifreg r.htm. This article includes: issues to co nsider befo re submitting a manuscript, requirements fo r submissio n o f manuscripts, sending the manuscript to the jo urnal, and separate declaratio ns.
Inquires and comments should be sent to The Editor at the São Paulo M edical Journal ( Revista Paulista de M edicina) secretariat office, Associação Paulista de M edicina, Rua Brigadeiro Luís Antônio, 278, 7th floor. 01318- 901
Phone + 55 11 232 3141, extension 210; fax:+ 55 11 3107 7979;e- mail: revistas@ apm.org.br
Sao Paulo Med J/Rev Paul Med 1999; 117(4):179.
N otes for Authors- I CM J E
Manuscripts sho uld be reviewed with due respect fo r autho rs’ co nfidentiality. In submitting the ir m anuscripts fo r re vie w, autho rs e ntrust edito rs with the results o f their scientific wo rk and creative effo rt, o n which their reputatio n and c are e r m ay d e p e nd . Autho rs’ rights m ay b e vio lated by disclo sure o f the co nfidential details o f the review o f their manuscript. Reviewers also have rights to co nfide ntiality, which m ust b e respected by the edito r. Co nfidentiality may have to be breached if disho nesty o r fraud is alleged but o therwise must be ho no red.
Edito rs sho uld no t disclo se info rmatio n abo ut manuscripts (including their receipt, their co ntent, their status in the reviewing pro cess, their criticism by reviewers, o r their ultimate fate) to anyo ne o ther than the autho rs themselves and reviewers.
Edito rs sho uld make clear to their reviewers that manuscripts sent fo r review are privileged co mmunicatio ns and are the private pro perty o f
Confide ntiality
International Committee of
Medical Journal Editors
the autho rs. Therefo re, reviewers and members o f the edito rial staff sho uld respect the autho rs’ rights by no t publicly discussing the autho rs’ wo rk o r ap p ro p riatin g th e ir id e as b e fo re th e manuscript is published. Reviewers sho uld no t be allo wed to make co pies o f the manuscript fo r their files and sho uld be pro hibited fro m sharing it with o thers, except with the permissio n o f the edito r. Edito rs sho uld no t keep co pies o f rejected manuscripts.
O p inio ns d iffe r o n whe the r re vie we rs sho uld remain ano nymo us. So me edito rs require their reviewers to sign the co mments returned to autho rs, but mo st either request that reviewers’ co mments no t be signed o r leave the cho ice to the reviewer. When co mments are no t signed the reviewers’ identity must no t be revealed to the autho r o r anyo ne else.
So m e jo u rn als p u b lis h re vie we rs ’ c o m m e n ts with th e m an u s c rip t. No s u c h p ro c e d ure s ho uld b e ad o p te d witho ut the co nsent o f the autho rs and reviewers. Ho wever, re vie we rs ’ c o m m e nts m ay b e s e nt to o the r reviewers o f the same manuscript, and reviewers may be no tified o f the edito r’s decisio n.
Correction:
