Peer Reviewing

All submissions to the journal are first assessed for completeness and alignment with the submission guidelines and then sent to be assessed by an Editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. All articles published in PoEM undergo single-blind peer review by two independent experts.

Editors will consider the peer-reviewed reports when making a decision but are not bound by these recommendations. Authors receive peer review reports with the editorial decision on their manuscript.

Authors can appeal a reviewing decision they have reason to find unfair or biased. They can do so by contacting the editorial office and voicing their concerns in a detailed email.

Corrections and Retractions

Corrections to, or retractions of, published articles will be made by publishing a Correction 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.

Authors, readers or organizations who become aware of errors or ethics issues in a published article are encouraged to contact PoEM Editorial Office. All reports will be considered by the Editors; additional expert advice may be sought when deciding on the most appropriate course of action.

Author Responsibilities

When authors submit an article to PoEM it is implied that:

• the work described has not been published previously except in the form of a preprint, an abstract, a published lecture, academic thesis or registered report. See PoEM policy on multiple, redundant or concurrent publication.
• the article is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
• the article's publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out.

PoEM adheres to the authorship requirements laid out by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Reporting of Conflicts of Interest

Authors are requested to disclose interests that are directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication. Interests within the last 3 years of beginning the work (conducting the research and preparing the work for submission) should be reported. Interests outside the 3-year time frame must be disclosed if they could reasonably be perceived as influencing the submitted work. PoEM favors COIs reported using the ICMJE template.

Using Artificial Intelligence

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools are not allowed to be used as a substitute for human critical thinking, expertise, academic writing and evaluation. However, AI tools can be used to improve language and readability.

The use of AI tools in the manuscript preparation process must be declared by adding a statement at the end of the manuscript when the paper is first submitted. The statement will appear in the published work.

Data Availability Statements

Reproducibility of scientific claims is integral to the integrity of published research. While not mandatory, PoEM favors transparent access to the original data. Mandatory data availability statements consolidate information on availability of data associated with the manuscript, whether data are in repositories, available on request, included with supplementary information.

Standards of Reporting

PoEM advocates complete and transparent reporting of research. When applicable, the checklists below must be completed before peer review, and made available to the Editors and reviewers.

• Randomized controlled trials: CONSORT
• Randomized controlled trial protocols: SPIRIT
• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA
• Case reports: CARE
• Preclinical animal studies: ARRIVE

In addition, PoEM strongly encourages the use of the following checklists and reporting guidelines:

• Observational studies: STROBE
• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocols: PRISMA-P
• Diagnostic/prognostic studies: STARD and TRIPOD
• Clinical practice guidelines: AGREE and RIGHT
• Qualitative research: SRQR and COREQ
• Quality improvement studies: SQUIRE
• Economic evaluations: CHEERS

Research Involving Animal or Human Participants & Informed Consent

When reporting a study that involved human participants, their data or biological material, authors should include a statement that confirms that the study was approved (or granted exemption) by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee) and certify that the study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

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.

For all research involving human subjects, freely-given, informed consent to participate in the study must be obtained from participants (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 16) and a statement to this effect should appear in the manuscript.

In the case of articles describing human transplantation studies, authors must include a statement declaring that no organs/tissues were obtained from prisoners and must also name the institution(s)/clinic(s)/department(s) via which organs/tissues were obtained.

Sex and Gender in Research (SAGER Guidelines)

PoEM encourages authors to follow the 'Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines' and to include sex and gender considerations where relevant.