Manuscript Requirements

MDM Article Categories
MDM P&P Article Categories
Authorship
Manuscript Format and Style
Manuscript Components
- Title Pages
- Anonymized Main Document
Additional Manuscript Policies

MDM Article Categories

Medical Decision Making publishes original research articles, reviews, tutorials, brief reports, technical notes, letters to the editor, essays, case studies, editorials, and clinical or policy rounds. MDM does not consider previously published articles for publication (see Journal Policies and Manuscript Submission for more information.) Descriptions of these article categories are provided below and include guidelines for manuscript word count. Word count is based on the body text of the manuscript, excluding the abstract, acknowledgments, figure legends, and references. Although exceptions to word-limit recommendations are granted by the editor on occasion, manuscript acceptance is more likely when authors stay within these guidelines. These limits do not apply to supplemental material that can be published in a Web-only format, however. Authors should indicate which materials (if any) in their submission may be published in Web-only format (e.g., methodologic appendices, certain figures, evidence tables).

Original research articles (3,000-5,000 words, <4,500 strongly preferred).

Reviews (<5,000 words, <4,500 words strongly preferred). MDM considers systematic reviews as well as informal, narrative reviews. Note: MDM expects that all reviews include at least some degree of integration, synthesis, and interpretation of the reviewed studies. We consider a review that simply reports and categorizes what was done (e.g., many scoping reviews) to be incomplete.

Tutorials (1,500-5,000 words, brevity appreciated). Authors are strongly encouraged to consult with the Editor-in-Chief before submitting a tutorial. Prospective authors should provide an outline of the tutorial with an estimated word count. MDM is interested in tutorials about all types of cutting edge methods used in medical decision making, e.g., techniques and software for advanced mathematical, statistical, and economic modeling. Authors are encouraged to include hyperlinks to online materials that can be used in the tutorial.

Brief reports (<1,500 words). Brief reports describe preliminary or limited results of original research—ideally illustrating a new methodologic approach or a new feature of an established methodology.

Technical notes (<1,500 words). Technical notes describe and propose an approach to a methodologic issue that is part of a larger model or analysis.

Editorials (<1,200 words, ≤8 references. The journal regularly publishes editorials, which are considered as a result of a presubmission inquiry (consult with the Editor-in-Chief) or invitation only.

Letters to the editor (<1,200 words, shorter preferred). Letters in response to articles published in MDM or MDM P&P within the last year will be considered. Letters in response to articles published in MDM or MDM P&P within the last year will be considered. Not all letters are published, and letters containing defamatory, libelous, or malicious statements will not be published.

MDM P&P Article Categories

MDM Policy & Practice publishes original research articles, reviews, case studies, letters to the editor, and editorials. MDM P&P does not consider previously published articles for publication (see Journal Policies and Manuscript Submission for more information.) Descriptions of these article categories are provided below and include guidelines for manuscript word count. Word count is based on the body text of the manuscript, excluding the abstract, acknowledgments, figure legends, and references. Although exceptions to word-limit recommendations are granted by the editor on occasion, manuscript acceptance is more likely when authors stay within these guidelines. These limits do not apply to supplemental material that can be published in a Web-only format, however. Authors should indicate which materials (if any) in their submission may be published in Web-only format (e.g., methodologic appendices, certain figures, evidence tables).

Original research articles (<5,000 words, brevity appreciated). Original research articles in MDM P&P describe studies of decision making focused on clinical or policy applications.

Reviews (<5,000 words, brevity appreciated). MDM P&P considers systematic reviews as well as informal, narrative reviews addressing research questions relating to applications of medical decision making. Note: MDM P&P expects that systematic reviews include at least some degree of integration, synthesis, and interpretation of the reviewed studies. We consider a systematic review that simply reports and categorizes what was done to be incomplete.

Explainers (1,000-4,000 words, shorter preferred). Authors are strongly encouraged to consult with the Editor-in-Chief before submitting a explainer. Explainer articles highlight the relevance and applicability of MDM techniques to solving the practical problems of real-world situations. Explainers should be written for a broad audience that might include practicing clinicians, policymakers, journalists, and/or patients as appropriate to the topic. Prospective authors should provide an outline of the explainer with an estimated word count.

Brief reports (<1,500 words). Brief reports describe preliminary or limited results of original research that nonetheless have implications for policy and/or practice.

Editorials (<1,200 words, ≤8 references). The journal publishes editorials, which are considered as a result of a presubmission inquiry (consult with the Editor-in-Chief) or invitation only. Editorials are not subject to an article publication charge (APC).

Letters to the editor (<1,200 words, shorter preferred). Letters in response to articles published in MDM or MDM P&P within the last year will be considered. Not all letters are published, and letters containing defamatory, libelous, or malicious statements will not be published. Letters to the editor are not subject to an article publication charge (APC).

Case studies (3,000-5,000 words). Case studies can illustrate the application of a decision model or decision support application to an actual patient or patient group. They can also speak to the role of a specific decision model, cost-effectiveness analysis, or other type of mathematical model in an actual policy decision, including, for example, a clinical practice guideline or a national coverage policy decision. The ideal modeling case study includes detailed information about the problem addressed, collaboration among modelers and decision makers in framing questions, the development and results of the model, and how the model influenced (or failed to influence) a decision. A similar level of detail and structure would be expected for case studies reporting other types of decision support interventions.

Authorship (both journals)

Papers should only be submitted for consideration once consent is given by all contributing authors. Those submitting papers should carefully check that all those whose work contributed to the paper are acknowledged as contributing authors.

The list of authors should include all those who can legitimately claim authorship. This is all those who:

Made a substantial contribution to the concept and design, acquisition of data or analysis and interpretation of data,
Drafted the article or revised it critically for important intellectual content,
Approved the version to be published.

Authors should meet the conditions of all of the points above. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. When a large, multicentre group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript. These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship, although all contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments section. Please refer to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship guidelines for more information on authorship.

Manuscript Format and Style (both journals)

MDM welcomes files submitted in Microsoft Office Word (*.doc, *.docx) format. Manuscripts submitted in TeX/LaTeX format are acceptable; however, MDM requires that a PDF version of the manuscript accompany these submissions as a supplementary file.

Although objects (i.e., tables, figures) are generally embedded in a single manuscript file throughout the review process, authors of accepted manuscripts will be required to submit all components in separate, editable files for production purposes. The following graphic formats are acceptable for production: *.eps, *png, *.ppt, *.psd, *.tif, and *.xls. ScholarOne Manuscripts provides helpful information to authors concerning uploading files and images for accepted manuscripts.

Authors should write for a sophisticated general medical readership and follow principles of clear scientific writing. Aim for clear, concise, and logically organized presentations. Paragraphs should make one point, not many. Similarly, avoid convoluted sentences and use the active voice (vs. passive voice) whenever possible.

MDM largely conforms to the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (December 2014) developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Authors are encouraged to consult Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers (2014) throughout manuscript preparation.

Many guidelines exist to guide reporting of different kinds of research studies. (See https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/ for the latest versions). While MDM and MDM P&P do not require documentation of adherence to particular checklists, we encourage use of the following resources to the degree that they are applicable to different study designs:

For randomized trials, adherence to the most recent CONSORT statement and checklists (including providing a flow diagram) is encouraged.
For diagnostic / prognostic studies, consider the STARD checklists.
For observational studies, consider the STROBE checklists.
For qualitative interview and focus group studies, consider the COREQ checklist.
For systematic reviews, MDM’s editors recommend following the PRISMA statement.
For reports of economic evaluations, MDM endorses the CHEERS guidelines.

Use and reporting of individual classification variables in models and analyses: In April 2022, the MDM journals published a policy statement titled Toward transparent demographic analyses: statement on the use and reporting of classification variables presented as measuring individual characteristics such as race, ethnicity, indigeneity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status. The policy statement both describes some of the ambiguities which can exist when individual classification variables are included in models or analyses and lays out specific disclosure requirements for authors. Please see the full policy statement for more details.

To comply with this policy, authors should ask themselves the following questions regarding the analyses and models they report in manuscripts submitted to Medical Decision Making and MDM Policy & Practice:

Are any individual classification variables included in the presented analyses or models? If yes, for each included variable:
- Is it clear in the manuscript and/or supplementary material how this variable was measured and/or created?
- Is it clear in the manuscript why this variable needs to be included in the model or analysis?
- Is it clear to what causal factor(s) any observed differences or variations associated with this variable should be attributed?
Are there any conceptually-relevant individual classification variables that either were available or could have been available that nonetheless were omitted from the model or analysis?
- If yes, have these omissions been acknowledged?

In terms of journal operations, we operationalize these requirements by directing manuscript reviewers and editors to consider the above questions in their reviews of submitted manuscripts.

Spelling. Manuscripts should be written in English, and spellings should be consistent with the authors’ country of origin. In other words, articles may use either American or British spellings as appropriate, but they should be consistent throughout.

Abbreviations. With the exception of units of measure (see also below), the use of abbreviations is strongly discouraged—especially in manuscript titles. The first time an abbreviation appears in a manuscript, unless it is a unit of measure (e.g., mL), it should be preceded by the words for which it stands.

Drug names. Although MDM encourages the use of nonproprietary (generic) names for all drugs noted in a manuscript, proprietary names may be added in parentheses on first mention at author discretion.

Units of measure. All units of measure should be expressed in conventional units with Système International units provided in parentheses throughout the text. Conventional units should also be used in figures and tables with conversion factors provided in legends or footnotes.

Currency may be presented in US dollars, Canadian dollars, British pounds, or Euros. If the study was not conducted in the United States, authors may wish, for the benefit of readers, to provide the rate of exchange to US dollars at the time the study was conducted in the Methods section (e.g., May 2015: 1 Euro = 1.12 US dollars).

Numbers and statistics. Equations should be typed exactly as they are to appear in the final manuscript. Authors are encouraged review recommendations from the Annals of Internal Medicine regarding the presentation of percentages and statistical measures such as error measures, P values, and trends. In particular, for P values between 0.001 and 0.20, please report the value to the nearest thousandth. For P values greater than 0.20, please report the value to the nearest hundredth. For P values less than 0.001, report as “P<0.001.” Likewise, authors are encouraged to consult guidelines from the American Psychological Association for information on presenting statistical results. Authors should ensure that data are reported with a consistent number of significant figures (i.e., do not vary precision within a table or type of result) and avoid reporting data with greater precision than is justifiable given the sample size. For example, use whole number percentages for reporting descriptive statistics of N<100 and percentages with 1 decimal point for N<1000.

Equations. On manuscript acceptance, authors will be required to supply all in-line and full equations within the document in an editable format. Equations submitted as figures are not acceptable for production.

Manuscript Components (both journals)

Both MDM and MDM P&P conduct double-anonymized review of manuscripts. Therefore, authors are required to submit two files:

Title pages that include all identifiable information (e.g. author names, affiliations, and financial disclosures), as well as the full text of of the Acknowledgements section and draft social media content
An Anonymized Main Document

Title Pages

First Title Page

Provide the manuscript’s tentative title. If the study is a randomized trial, systematic review, or meta-analysis, that descriptor must be added as the subtitle (e.g., Effectiveness of a decision aid for patients with asthma: a randomized trial). Provide also a running head of no more than 50 letters and spaces.

All authors’ full names should appear on the title page exactly as they are to appear in print, including highest academic degree(s) earned. Affiliation information and contact information must also be provided for each author. Specify which author will serve as corresponding author for the manuscript.

Please also provide the name of the department(s) and institution(s) where the work was done; meeting(s) at which the work was presented (if any); grant or other financial support (if any). Specify also the word-count total for the manuscript text, excluding the abstract, acknowledgments, references, and figure legends.

The statement that follows should be included (1) in the cover letter and (2) as a footnote on the first title page:

Financial support for this study was provided [choose one: entirely or in part] by a [choose one: grant from or contract with] [insert name(s) of the funding source(s), whether a company, government agency, philanthropic foundation, institute, etc.]. The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. [The following sentence should be inserted, if applicable:] The following author(s) is/are employed by the sponsor: [identify employees].

Second Title Page

In the Title Page file, please also include a second page that includes the following elements

Full text of the Acknowledgements section
Full text of any other parts of the manuscript that have been omitted from the anonymized file (e.g., references to identifiable locations or institutions)
Draft social media content

Acknowledgments. MDM and MDM P&P expect authors to acknowledge persons who have contributed to the scientific content of manuscripts or provided technical support. Authors must obtain written permission from anyone whom they wish to list in the Acknowledgments section on manuscript acceptance. The corresponding author must also affirm that he or she has listed everyone who contributed significantly to the work in the Acknowledgments section. Individuals who provided writing assistance, e.g. from a specialist communications company, do not qualify as authors and so should be included in the Acknowledgements section. Authors must disclose any writing assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input – and identify the entity that paid for this assistance. It is not necessary to disclose use of language polishing services.

Consistent with MDM and MDM P&Ps stated adoption of Level 1 of Standards 1-5 of Version 1.0.1 of the Guidelines for Transparency and Openness Promotion of the Open Science Framework, the Acknowledgments section should also include statements related to data, analytic methods (code), and research methods transparency. Authors must indicate if they will or will not make their data, analytic methods, and/or study materials available to other researchers and, if available, where / how to access (e.g., by specifying the trusted digital repository where materials are held [preferred option] or by stating that materials will be made available upon request to a specific named author).

Social media content. The social media language section should include

1-3 draft tweets (generally <200 characters, shorter is better) that highlight the article’s main highlight in plain language
authors’ twitter names (if available), and
a list of preferred hashtags and organizational tags that they would like to include in any social media postings about the article.

The editors will review this information and may request edits prior to accepting the manuscript. Once reviewed and accepted, this information may be used by the journals for the purposes of promoting the article on social media.

Authors are free to promote their own articles on social media platforms as they wish (and are highly encouraged to do so). To maximize reach, we ask that authors link to the final published article and link to the journals’ account (Twitter: @MedDecMak; Facebook: @meddecismaking).

Anonymized Main Document

For the convenience of editors, reviewers, and editorial staff, MDM encourages authors to submit one file that includes the complete (anonymized) manuscript with components in the following sequence: title page (only listing the manuscript title), abstract, highlights, text, acknowledgments section placeholder, references, tables, figure legends, figures, and appendices (if any). ScholarOne Manuscripts automatically generates a PDF proof for use by the journal. Do not use line numbering in the manuscript; line numbering is automatically applied when the PDF proof is generated. The submitting author is required to ensure the full legibility of this PDF proof.

Abstract. Word for word, the abstract is probably the most important part of a manuscript. Editors use the abstract to decide whether the article is of interest for MDM. Reviewers use it to decide whether to accept an invitation to review the manuscript. Once the manuscript is published, readers use the abstract to decide whether they want to read the article.

Authors are encouraged to take extra time to write a good, clear abstract that addresses all of these “audiences.” Describe why readers will find the article interesting, address the critical points of the methods and results, and list your most important conclusions, including clinical or policy implications. Think about the words and phrases that will help readers and researchers locate your published article—and use them in the abstract.

MDM and MDM P&P require structured abstracts (<275 words) for all original research reports, reviews, cost-effectiveness studies, and systematic reviews, including meta-analyses. Abstracts (unstructured: <175 words; structured: <200 words) are optional for brief reports, but structured abstracts are preferred. The editor-in-chief retains the right to request a structured abstract for any manuscript.

For systematic reviews (e.g., meta-analyses), we require the following headings: Background, Purpose, Data Sources, Study Selection, Data Extraction, Data Synthesis, Limitations, and Conclusions. For all other articles, we are flexible regarding section types and headings on a case-by-case basis. For most studies, we encourage use of the following sections:

Introduction, Background, or Purpose. Regardless of name, this section should clearly define the research question or objective.
Methods or Design. Include information about sample size and characteristics as applicable.
Results. Concisely summarize the primary findings, and include quantitative information about the central results if appropriate.
Limitations. When relevant, include a brief limitations section.
Conclusions. This section should highlight the key takeaway finding(s).
Implications. When appropriate, state the implications of the work for particular audiences.

If the study is a randomized controlled trial, specify where the trial is registered, placing the
unique registration number for the trial at the end of the abstract.

(Although MDM regularly publishes meeting abstracts online on behalf of its sponsoring society, the Society of Medical Decision Making (SMDM), the editors do not review or approve these materials. Please contact SMDM for more information: http://smdm.org/meetings.)

Highlights. After the abstract, please include a highlights section that lists 2-4 short bullet-point sentences summarizing the article’s main takeaway points. The bullet point should describe, in plain and direct language, the article’s primary contribution. When appropriate, we encourage key points that refer specifically to the audience(s) who will benefit from understanding the article’s findings and explicitly tell them why they should care about this work.

Text. For original research—including economic analyses, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses—use four main headings when arranging manuscript text: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion.

Introduction. Set up the context of the research for readers concisely. Keep the Introduction section brief. Avoid repeating background or theory that can be found in textbooks or previously published articles; cite those sources instead. Always end the Introduction section with a clear statement of the study’s objectives or hypotheses.

Methods. For studies involving humans, describe in the Methods section how participants were assembled and selected as well as the sites or setting from which they were recruited. Then, describe study procedures, including any interventions, measurements, and data-collection techniques. Use figures to diagram study processes, including the flow of participants through the study. Provide the number of subjects at each stage of recruitment and follow-up, including the number of subjects who declined to participate and the number of individuals who completed follow-up protocols.

For studies that have numeric data and use statistical inference, include a subsection that describes the methods used for statistical analysis, documenting also the statistical software used.

Authors are reminded that both MDM and MDM P&P have journal policies that expect validation of prediction models using an independent dataset and that discourage dichotomization of continuous variables in analysis.

For all studies, include a statement at the end of the Methods section that describes the role of the funding source for the study. If the study had no external funding source, or if the funding source had no role in the study, state so explicitly.

Results. This section should also be clear and concise—and it should report results only. (Implications, theories, opinions, and findings related to results should be confined to the Discussion section.) Fully describe the study sample so that readers can gauge how well the study’s findings may apply to their patients (i.e., external validity). Then, present primary findings followed by any secondary and subgroup findings. Use tables and figures to demonstrate main characteristics of participants and major findings. Avoid redundancy among text, tables, and figures.

Discussion. Consider structuring the Discussion section as outlined below:

Provide a brief synopsis of key findings with particular emphasis on how the findings add to the body of pertinent knowledge.
Discuss possible mechanisms and explanations for the findings.
Compare study results with relevant findings from other published work.
Discuss the limitations of the study and any methods used to minimize or compensate for those limitations.
Mention any crucial future research directions.
Summarize in a straightforward and circumspect manner the clinical implications of the work. It is common, but not required, to have a separate Conclusion heading.

Tables and figures. Excessive tabular material should be avoided; most data are better presented in text or in figures that highlight the primary findings. Information should never be duplicated among tables, text, and figures. Each table should be titled and appear on its own page.

Acknowledgments. In the anonymized manuscript file, include an Acknowledgements header and the placeholder “(See Title Page for Acknowledgements)” at the end of the article, prior to the Declaration of Conflicting Interests, any notes, and your References.

Permissions. Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from copyright holders for reproducing or adapting any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please visit our Frequently Asked Questions on the SAGE Journal Author Gateway.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests. It is the policy of the MDM journals to require a declaration of conflicting interests from all authors that will appear in all published articles. When authors submit a manuscript, they must disclose all financial relationships (both personal and institutional) that could be viewed as presenting the appearance of a potential conflict of interest or that might otherwise bias their work. (If additional clearances are required by author institutions, these formal clearance statements must be provided by the authors in the manuscript as specified by their institutions.) To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly whether potential conflicts do or do not exist.

When making a declaration the disclosure information must be specific and include any financial relationship that all authors of the article has with any sponsoring organization and the for-profit interests the organization represents, and with any for-profit product discussed or implied in the text of the article. Potential conflicts include, but are not limited to, any financial relationship that involves conditions or tests or treatments discussed in the manuscript and alternatives to the tests or treatments for those conditions. Financial relationships (e.g., employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, paid expert testimony, grants, patents received or pending, royalties) are the most easily identifiable potential conflicts of interest—and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and the science itself.

Disclosure of these relationships is essential not only for original research manuscripts but also for review articles, letters, and editorials. MDM publishes conflict of interest disclosures. When authors are uncertain whether a potential conflict of interest exists, they should err on the side of full disclosure. All such disclosures should be listed in a section headed “Conflict of Interests” immediately following the Acknowledgments section, at the end of the manuscript. If there are no conflicts to disclose, the section should explicitly say “The Author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest.”

References. MDM requires numbered, citation-sequence end references formatted in accord with National Library of Medicine standards. For more information, please refer to Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers. For those using software compliant with Citation Style Language (CSL) 1.0.1, we recommend the SAGE-Vancouver CSL style available in the Zotero CSL library. However, we encourage inclusion of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) formatted as “DOI: 10.XXX” at the end of the reference when available. When possible and appropriate, data, program code, and other methods should be cited with a persistent identifier such as a DOI. Supplemental material should have a separate References list. References that appear in the text and an appendix should be placed in both documents.

Research ethics. We accept manuscripts that report human and/or animal studies for publication only if it is made clear that investigations were carried out to a high ethical standard. All papers reporting animal and human studies must include, in the Methods section, whether approval was obtained from the local Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board. Please ensure that you have provided the full name and institution of the review committee and an Ethics Committee reference number. If approval was waived / the study was declared exempt from review, such should be stated transparently. Studies in humans which might be interpreted as experimental (e.g. controlled trials) should conform to the Declaration of Helsinki. In line with the Declaration of Helsinki 1975, revised Hong Kong 1989, we encourage authors to register their clinical trials (at http://clinicaltrials.gov or other suitable databases identified by the ICMJE). If your trial has been registered, please state this on the Title Page. When reporting experiments on animals, indicate on the Title Page which guideline/law on the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.

Research data. Authors are encouraged to share their research data in a suitable public repository subject to ethical considerations and to include a data accessibility statement in their manuscript file. Authors should also follow data citation principles. In particular, the MDM journals have adopted, and include here by reference, Level 1 of Standards 1-5 of Version 1.0.1 of the Guidelines for Transparency and Openness Promotion of the Open Science Framework, and reserve the rights for Associate Editors, with concurrence of the Editor-in-Chief, to require higher or additional levels of disclosure on a case-by-case basis.

Patient consent. Authors are required to follow the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. Patients have a right to privacy that should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information, including patients’ names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that a patient who is identifiable be shown the manuscript to be published. Identifying details should be omitted if they are not essential. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve, however, and informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning and editors should so note. When informed consent has been obtained it should be indicated in the submitted article.

Additional Manuscript Policies

English language editing services offered by SAGE
Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation, or figure and manuscript formatting to fit the journal’s specifications should consider using SAGE Language Services. Visit SAGE Language Services on SAGE’s Journal Author Gateway for further information.

Plagiarism
The MDM journals and SAGE take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarized other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author’s institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.