Pjns Policies

MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION AND REVIEW PROCEDURE

Submission, screening, and triage

  • Every new manuscript submitted to PJNS will be immediately checked by editorial office for an initial inspection to ensure the completion of submitted files as per journal requirements and adequacy of documentation including author’s undertaking and ethical review committee approval.
  • Manuscripts not submitted according to PJNS instructions for authors, will be returned to the author for correction prior to the initiation of further processing.
  • After initial scrutiny, manuscripts will be triaged by any editor/member editorial board. During this initial (internal) review, the editor will check the manuscript for originality, significance and suitability of manuscript as per scope and format of the journal.
  • At this point, the editor may reject the manuscript if deemed unsuitable for the journal, the quality of the manuscript is poor, the subject matter is outside the scope of the journal or criteria for the submission of manuscripts are not met.
  • All manuscripts are subject to a similarity check using the Turnitin service. As per HEC policy, articles exceeding the limit of similarity are returned for clarification and/or correction.
  • Editor may send the manuscripts back to authors for revision/correction as pointed out during editorial review
  • Revised manuscripts are judged on the adequacy of responses to suggestions and criticisms made during the initial review. If editor is satisfied with the changes made by authors, he/she will initiate the external peer review of the manuscript.
  • The manuscript will be sent to the subject experts for external peer review.

Peer Review

  • The manuscript with publication potential will be sent to at least TWO subject experts for peer review. Peer reviewer will evaluate the suitability of the article for publication based on its quality, novelty, and relevance for publication.
  • A period of minimum 4 weeks will be given to reviewers to go through a manuscript and send their suggestions to the editor. Failing which will generate a reminder from the editor with additional 4 weeks’ time for review to be completed.
  • If a reviewer is unable to meet the period agreed upon or they decline to review the manuscript, the manuscript will be sent to another reviewer.
  • The editor may establish a system for rapid review of especially important manuscripts. This may include review only by editors or asking reviewers to complete their evaluations within a shorter period of time than is allowed routinely. Authors who seek rapid review should explain why their manuscripts merit such review.

Final decision

  • Reviewers are advisors to authors and editors. The editor may ask reviewers to make recommendations regarding acceptance, revision or rejection of manuscripts.
  • Editor will pay attention to the recommendations of the reviewers, but the final decision will be taken by editor.
  • Manuscript suggested revision would be sent back to authors for revision.
  • Authors will be requested to do relevant corrections in the manuscript as suggested by the reviewers and resubmit within two weeks.
  • Authors will be asked to send a detailed covering letter addressing the issues pointed out by the reviewers with a point by point answer describing the corrections done/ reasons for not doing so.
  • If reviewers and editors are satisfied with the changes, the manuscript will be accepted and will be assigned to the future issue for publication.
  • The editor/copy editor reserves the right to edit the accepted article as per format of the journal.

PEER REVIEW POLICY

PJNS is a PEER REVIEWED journal following DOUBLE BLIND PEER REVIEW system. PJNS is having a panel of peer-reviewers with diversity in knowledge, viewpoint and expertise in relevant specialties.Responsibilities of reviewers

  1. The first responsibility of reviewers is to evaluate manuscripts critically but constructively and to prepare detailed comments about the research and the manuscript to help authors improve their work. The reviewers have to assess the manuscript according to the reviewers’ proforma sent to each reviewer along with the manuscript. The evaluation should include:
  • Assessments of the originality and importance of the research;
    The design of the study;
    • The methods of study, including analytic and statistical methods;
    • The presentation of the results;
    • Important findings of results discussed with new emerging findings
    • Possible confounding; the strength of the conclusions
    • The overall quality of the manuscript.
  1. The second responsibility is to make recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in that journal. Reviewers may be asked to write some narrative comments about the manuscript that support their recommendation to the editor regarding acceptance or rejection. They also can be asked to grade some characteristics of the manuscript, such as originality, quality, accuracy, readability and interest to readers, or to complete detailed questionnaires about these qualities and even assign a priority score.
  2. Reviewers should declare to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review, and in most instances when such conflicts exist should decline to review the manuscript.
  3. Other responsibilities of reviewers include treating the manuscript as a confidential document and completing the review promptly. Reviewers should not show the manuscript to anyone else without the express consent of the editor.
  4. Reviewers should not make derogatory comments about the manuscript in their comments for the authors. If reviewers do make such comments, the editor may choose to edit the comments or even withhold all the reviewer’s comments from the authors.
  5. Reviewers must not make any use of the work described in the manuscript.
  6. The editor may provide guidance to the reviewers, particularly new reviewers, regarding how the editor wishes the reviewers to evaluate the manuscript and how the reviewers should meet their dual responsibility of providing constructive comments for the author and advice to the editor.
  7. Reviewers should meet the agreed-upon deadline (usually 4 weeks) for manuscript review and should respond to the reminders if sent any.

Identification and evaluation of reviewers

  1. The editor will establish a reviewer database that includes information about the expertise of each reviewer as well as addresses and other contact information.
  2. The editor may identify potential reviewers on the basis of personal knowledge of the topic or from among the authors of references in the manuscript, the membership of the professional societies, colleagues at affiliated institutions, or computer searches of databases such as PubMed, Medline, Publon etc or by asking for names from reviewers who decline to review the manuscript (see below).
  3. Only those reviewers who consent to be on review panel will be added to the PJNS online review and tracking system.
  4. Authors may suggest reviewers for their manuscript, whether invited to do so by the editor or not. The editor may choose to use one or more of these reviewers, but are under no obligation to do so. Authors may ask that certain people not be asked to review their manuscript and editor may decide the case accordingly.
  5. The editor will ask reviewers, by telephone or  e-mail, if they are willing to review a particular manuscript, and give them a date that the review is due at the editorial office (usually 3 to 4 weeks), rather than simply sending the manuscript to the reviewer. As the same time, the editor can ask for the names of others who might review the manuscript should the person initially contacted decline.
  6. The editor is responsible for keeping track of reviewers, and taking steps to make sure reviews are completed in a timely manner. Each peer review is rated by the editor assigned to the manuscript and stored with the reviewer’s profile. This rating becomes part of the reviewing history of each peer reviewer, and can be viewed by the editors as they select potential reviewers for future manuscripts. The reviewer database also contains information on the reviewers’ areas of expertise; the number of previous invitations to review and number accepted; dates of submitted reviews, and days taken to produce reviews. Reviewers who consistently decline invitations or who write brief unhelpful reviews are eventually removed from the database.
  7. To avoid overworking reviewers, each reviewer will be asked to evaluate no more than one manuscript per month. Reviewer has the right to decline the review due to any reason.

Note: Due to blind peer review policy, review details are not shared publicly, however can be shared to International Indexing agencies, Higher Education commission Pakistan & Pakistan Medical Commission on demand or during journal evaluation process, as the case may be.

Rewarding reviewers 

  • “Thank you” email will be sent immediately on completion of the review to each reviewer through online review system.
  • Review-credit certificate, duly signed by the editor will be sent through email to the reviewer on demand.
  • Names of reviewers will be published online as well as in print copy of the journal.

DECISION MAKING AND COMMUNICATION TO AUTHORS

  • The editor makes a decision about the manuscript (accept, invite a revision, or reject) based on a consideration of all the reviewer comments, his own critique, and other external factors.
  • What considerations should enter into the decision? These may include the comments and recommendations of the reviewers, the availability of space, and the most important is the judgment of the editor(s) regarding the suitability of the manuscript for the journal and the value and interest of the manuscript to the journal readers.
  • The editor may always seek additional review and advice if required.
  • Editor will communicate the decisions to authors. This means that the editor may need to provide explanations for the decision independent of the comments of the reviewers that are to be sent to the authors.
  • Decisions to reject a manuscript may be based on scientific weakness (poor research design, inappropriate methods of study), lack of originality, lack of importance and interest to readers, or simply lack of space. The editor will explain to authors the reasons for decisions to reject manuscripts. This is particularly important when the editor rejects a manuscript but the tone of the comments of the reviewers that will be sent to the authors is favorable.
  • The editor should actively encourage revision of manuscripts thought to be potentially acceptable. When an editor seeks revision of a manuscript, he should make clear which revisions are essential, and which are optional.
  • If the comments of the reviewers are contradictory, the editor must decide and tell the authors which comments the authors should follow. Editors may also add their own comments and suggestions for revision.

ERRATA, RETRACTIONS, AND EXPRESSIONS OF CONCERN                           

Editorial board of PJNS believes in integrity of published research. Editorial board is committing to maintain the content it publishes, and to alert the readers about the changes in the contents, if and when they occur. PJNS provides its forum to the readers for offering responsible alternative opinions and will publish any correspondence (Letter to the editor or a reply to the letter) regarding its published contents. 

As suggested by ICMJE, corrections are needed for errors of fact. In case, any error or misconduct is reported after publication, editor of PJNS will undertake complete and fair investigation of the matter to update, correct, or retract the contents, if such actions are deemed appropriate.  

Erratum

An erratum refers to a correction of errors introduced to the article by the journal in editing or production, including errors of omission such as failure to make factual proof corrections requested by authors within the deadline provided by the journal and within journal policy. 

During proof stage, PJNS sends the final PDF copy to the corresponding author to identify any errors to be corrected by the journal and approval of the final version by the author before final publication. Errors identified after publication by authors or readers are corrected in PDF copy of the online version. Errata are generally not published for simple, obvious typing errors identified after publication, but are published when an apparently simple error is significant (for example ‘cm’ in place of ‘mm’ or a typing error in the corresponding author's email address). A significant error in the figure or table is corrected by publication of a new corrected figure or table as an erratum. The figure or table is republished only if the editor considers it necessary.

Corrigendum

A corrigendum refers to a change to their article that the author wishes to publish at any time after acceptance. Corrigenda submitted by the original authors are published if the scientific accuracy or reproducibility of the original paper is compromised. PJNS will publish corrigenda if there is an error in the published author list, but not usually for overlooked acknowledgements. Authors should contact the editor of PJNS, who will determine the impact of the change and decide on the appropriate course of action.

Readers wishing to draw the journal's attention to a significant published error should submit their comments as a "Letter to the Editor". Such "Letters to the Editor" will be carefully reviewed by unrelated and neutral referees. On editorial acceptance, the paper will be sent to the authors of the original paper to provide an opportunity for their early response.

Addenda

Addenda are judged on the significance of the addition to the interpretation of the original publication. Addenda do not contradict the original publication, but if the authors inadvertently omitted significant information available to them at the time, this material will be published as an addendum after peer review.

Expressions of concern

PJNS may consider issuing an Expression of Concern (EOC) if editors have well-founded concerns and feel that readers should be made aware of potentially misleading information contained in an article.

PJNS will consider an expression of concern if:

  • They receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors
  • There is evidence that the findings are unreliable, but the authors’ institution either will not investigate the case or the editors believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive
  • An investigation is underway, but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time

Retractions

Papers having serious errors to invalidate a paper's results and conclusions, or publication misconduct may require retraction. Retractions may be requested by an article’s author(s), by an institution, by readers, or by the editor.

As per COPE retraction guidelines, PJNS will consider retracting a publication if:

  • There is a clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)
  • It constitutes plagiarism
  • The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
  • It contains material or data without authorization for use
  • Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue
  • It reports unethical research
  • It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
  • The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.

Retraction Process
PJNS adopts the following retraction process to ensure best practice of retraction:

  1. An article requiring potential retraction is brought to the attention of PJNS editor.
  2. Editor will follow the step-by-step guidelines according to the COPE flowcharts and will seek the response from the author of the article as well.
  3. Editorial team will evaluate the evidence of the misconduct and response of the authors. Based on the findings, they will take a final decision whether to retract the publication or otherwise.
  4. The final decision is then communicated to the author and, if necessary, any other relevant bodies, such as the author's institution as deemed appropriate.
  5. The retraction-note titled “Retraction: [article title]” will be published with its own DOI, in the paginated part of a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list.
  6. The text of the retraction will explain why the article is being retracted.
  7. The statement of retraction and the original article will be clearly linked in the electronic database so that the retraction will always be apparent to anyone who comes across the original article.

 

RESEARCH & PUBLICATION ETHICS POLICY

PJNS promotes the research integrity and adherence to the core values of research like objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. We expect that researchers who want to submit their manuscripts to PJNS believe in the culture of responsible research.
PJNS endorses the core practices of COPE and deal any suspected misconduct as per COPE guidelines. PJNS is also following the policies of WAME regarding research ethics and professionalism and Council of Science Editors.


Research Ethical Committees approval

  • It is mandatory for authors to provide the institutional ethical review board/committee approval/exemption for all research articles, at the time of submission of article.
  • Authors have to submit the approval of relevant authority or institution where research was conducted, if required.
  • When reporting experiments on human subjects, indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional or regional) and with the latest version of Helsinki Declaration. Avoid using patient’s names, initials, or hospital numbers, especially in illustrative material.
  • When reporting experiments on animals, indicate whether the institution’s or a national research council’s guide for, or any national law on, the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.


PROTECTION OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS: HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS POLICY

  • PJNS aims to publish ethical and responsible research and expects from its contributors to adhere to international and national guidelines for the safety and protection of the research participants.
  • PJNS requires all authors to declare any issues related with human and animal rights that may be inherent in their submissions.
  • All articles under consideration that experiment on human subjects and animals in research are required to have institutional review board approval in accordance with ethical standards set forth in the ICMJE- Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals.
  • On rare occasions, when there is a suspicion that research has not been conducted within an appropriate ethical framework, editorial board of PJNS may reject the manuscript (even if approval from an ethics committee has been obtained) and/or contact the author(s)’ ethics committee about the issue concerned.

       

HUMAN RIGHTS POLICY 

 

Informed consent & maintaining the confidentiality of research participants

  • Authors of manuscripts presenting research on human subjects should provide a copy of ethical approval certificate along an undertaking that “informed consent to participate” was taken from adult participants and/or from parents/guardians of participants under 16 years of age. This should also be documented in methods section of the manuscript.
  • Consent must be obtained for all Case Reports, Clinical Pictures, and Adverse Drug Reactions.
  • Authors should avoid identifying patient information, including patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers, in written descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent/ guardian) gives written, informed consent for publication.
  • Consents might be required by the editor on images from participants in the study. Consent form must be made available to Editors on request, and will be treated confidentially.
  • Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained, e.g. masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity.
  • Masked Study Participants- If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic malformations, authors should provide written assurance to the editors that alterations do not distort scientific meaning.
  • Authors are advised to follow the CARE guidelines for case reports.

ANIMALS RIGHTS POLICY

  • Prior to acceptance of a manuscript, to verify compliance with the above policies, the authors must:
    • Provide ethical review committee approval certificate indicating that the study protocol was in accordance with international, national, and/or institutional guidelines.
    • Declare that the experiments on animals were conducted in accordance with local Ethical Committee laws and regulations as regards care and use of laboratory animals.
    • Sign a letter certifying that legal and ethical requirements have been met with regards to the humane treatment of animals described in the study;
    • Indicate in the Methods (experimental procedures) section that appropriate measures were taken to minimize pain or discomfort, and details of animal care should be provided.


INFORMED CONSENT: Authors should submit the undertaking that informed consent was taken from the client if they involved the client-owned animals.

AUTHORSHIP

  • All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship. An author is generally considered to be someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study. To qualify as an author one should meet all the 4 criteria for authorship as recommended by The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
    1) have made substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data [must have contributed for at least ONE of these] AND
    2) have been involved in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
    3) have given final approval of the version to be published, AND
    4) agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
  • Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, alone, does not justify authorship.
  • Authors are advised to consult COPE guidelines to avoid and handle disputes regarding authorship 

PLAGIARISM

  • All articles submitted to PJNS are screened through Turnitin software for similarity index.
  • PJNS follows the standard definition and description of plagiarism and we endorse The COPE, ICMJE, & Higher Education Commission (HEC) Pakistan policies regarding plagiarism.
  • Intellectual contribution and originality of every article is to be defined by the authors and this is the responsibility of authors to be aware of various forms of plagiarism like plagiarism of ideas, text, paraphrasing, self-plagiarism including redundant/duplicate publication, salami slicing (data fragmentation) and text recycling etc. ignorance regarding plagiarism and its various forms will not be considered as an excuse.
  • Any manuscript submitted for publication or a manuscript accepted for publication or even an article that has already been published in the journal is found to be plagiarized, the matter will be dealt with according to COPE guidelines.
  • Editorial Board will immediately stop the processing/ publication of the article and will ask for an explanation from the authors. The corresponding author will be required to respond with an explanation within 30 days of receiving the letter from the editor.
  • In case an acceptable explanation is provided by the author(s), the PJNS editorial board may recommend appropriate changes after which the review process for the submitted manuscript may commence.
  • In case of non-response in the stipulated time or unsatisfactory explanation, the PJNS editorial board will decide regarding the fate of the article and authors including
    o REJECTION of the manuscript,
    o RETRACTION of already published article (as the case may be)
    o Debarment of the authors(s) from further publication in the PJNS for one year or permanent depending upon the nature of offence.
    o The author will be on watch.
  • HEC, PMC, PAME and authors ‘institute will also be notified for information and possible action.
  • The author(s) will have to provide documentary proof of retraction from publication, if such a defense is pleaded.
  • Those claiming intellectual/idea or data theft of an article must provide documentary proof in their claim.

 

DATA SHARING POLICY

Pakistan Journal of Neurological Sciences ENCOURAGES authors to share and make data (including, but not limited to: raw data, processed data, software, algorithms, protocols, methods & materials) open where this does not violate protection of human subjects or other valid subject privacy concerns. Authors are further encouraged to cite data and provide a data availability statement. Authors can choose appropriate statement regarding availability of the data, from the templates given below.

 

          Availability of data

              Template for data availability statement

 Data openly available in a public repository that issues datasets with DOIs

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in [repository name e.g “figshare”] at http://doi.org/[doi], reference number [reference number].

 Data openly available in a public repository that does not issue DOIs

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in [repository name] at [URL], reference number [reference number].

Data derived from public domain resources

 The data that support the findings of this study are available in [repository name] at [URL/DOI], reference number [reference number]. These data were derived from the following resources available in the public domain: [list resources and URLs]

Embargo on data due to commercial restrictions

 The data that support the findings will be available in [repository name] at [URL / DOI link] following an embargo from the date of publication to allow for commercialization of research findings.

Data available on request due to privacy/ethical restrictions

 The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Data subject to third party restrictions

 The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party]. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for this study. Data are available [from the authors / at URL] with the permission of [third party].

Data available on request from the authors

 The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Data sharing not applicable – no new data generated

 Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Author elects to not share data

 Research data are not shared.

Data available in article supplementary material

 The data that supports the findings of this study are available in the supplementary material of this article

 Data sharing not applicable – no new data generated, or the article describes entirely theoretical research

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study

 

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

 

  • At the end of the text, under a subheading “Conflict of interest”, all authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work.
  • Examples of financial conflicts include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patents or patent applications, and travel grants, all within 3 years of beginning the work submitted.
  • If there are no conflicts of interest, authors should state that.
  • All authors are required to provide a signed statement of their conflicts of interest as part of the author’s declaration.
  • The reviewers are also required to declare any conflict of interest as regards the manuscript they are requested to review.

          PJNS will publish conflict-of-interest statement for each article.

 

COMPLAINT POLICY

 

  • If any reader, author or reviewer has any complaints against the journal, its staff, editorial board or publisher, it may be submitted to “mohammadwasay@hotmail.com" or “wajid.jawaid@outlook.com” through an email with a subject mentioning COMPLAINT.
  • Complaints may also be submitted regarding issues related to inappropriate authorship, gift and ghost authorship; undeclared conflicts of interests, plagiarism, multiple, duplicate, concurrent publication/simultaneous submission, unethical research; fabrication/falsification of results, selective reporting; research standards violations, reviewer bias/competitive harmful acts by reviewers or any contribution to PJNS that infringes copyright or other intellectual property rights.
  • PJNS will investigate the complaint and after enquiry report, PJNS will establish a decision about the complaint, which will be communicated to all relevant parties.
  • Although every effort is taken to improve the standard of PJNS and to make it free from errors, however, we accept that occasionally mistakes might happen. PJNS welcomes highlighting any error or mistake to be corrected.

ARTICLE PROCESSING CHARGES

There is no processing or publication fee required from the authors for publication in PJNS.

 

ADVERTISEMENT POLICY

Pakistan Journal of Neurological Sciences follows the Advertisement of Therapeutic Goods Guidelines by the Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan.

  1. What will be advertised?
  • Advertisements related to therapeutic drugs and devices may be published.
  1. What will not be advertised under any condition?
  • The products that are prohibited for advertisement in Pakistan will not be advertised.
  • Advertisements containing exaggerated claims or indecent/offensive contents will not be published.
  • Advertorials (sponsored articles that convey information about a product) will not be published.
  1. Who controls what advertisements will be published?
  • The decision to publish a particular advertisement lies with the editor and/or the publisher only.
  1. Where will the advertisements be published?
  • The advertisements may be published in the print versions of the journal.
  • The advertisements will be clearly distinguishable from the editorial content.
  • The exact location of the advertisement within the digital/print version of the journal is the prerogative of the editor/publisher only.
  1. Can the advertisements be aligned with specific editorial content for more relevance?
  • Advertisements will not be specifically published close to a journal article that may be seen as an endorsement of the advertisement.
  • Advertisers will have no control over, or knowledge of, specific editorial content that is yet to be published.
  1. What are the minimum requirements for a product to be advertised in this journal?
  • The drug/ device must be FDA approved or approved by local authorities.
  • The trademark or identifying signature of the advertiser must be clearly displayed.
  • Brand names of pharmaceutical products must be accompanied by generic name, quantity of active substances, generic names of other ingredients known to cause problems, approved indications, recommended dosage, major adverse reactions, precautions, contraindications, warnings, major interactions, reference to appropriate scientific literature, price, and the name and address of manufacturer or distributor.
  1. When will advertisements be published?
  • A print advertisement will be published in the following print issue of the journal, provided the request is received at least two weeks before the scheduled printing.  
  1. Who will be responsible in case of false information in an advertisement?
  • Publication of an advertisement in the journal is neither an endorsement nor a guarantee of a product, company, or the claims made in such advertising.
  • The advertiser is solely responsible for any false, deceptive or misleading information; the consequences of such advertisements (legal or otherwise) shall be borne solely by the advertiser.

ARCHIVING AND SELF-ARCHIVING POLICY

 

ARCHIVING POLICY OF PJNS

All articles published in PJNS are digitally archived in ecommons@aku, maintained by the Aga Khan University Libraries.

 

SELF-ARCHIVING POLICY OF PJNS

A: PRE-PRINT

[A pre-print is the author’s version of the article before peer-review has taken place]

Prior to acceptance for publication, author(s) retain the right to make a Pre-Print of their Article available on any of the following

  • their own personal, self- maintained website
  • a legally compliant pre-print server such as but not limited to arXiv and bioRxiv

Once the Article has been published, the Author(s) should update the acknowledgement and provide a link to the definitive version on the website of PJNS.

“This is a pre-print of an article published in Pakistan Journal of Neurological Sciences [Year, Volume number, Issue Number]. The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/[insert DOI]”.

B: AUTHOR’S ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT (AAM)

[AAM is the version accepted for publication in a journal following peer review but prior to copyediting and typesetting]  

Author(s) retain the right to make an AAM of their Article available immediately on acceptance, without any embargo period, on any of the following

  • on their own personal, self- maintained website
  • their employer’s internal website
  • their institutional and/or funder repositories

After publication, an acknowledgement in the following form should be included, together with a link to the published version on the PJNS website:

“This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Pakistan Journal of Neurological Sciences [Year, Volume number, Issue Number]. The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/[insert DOI]”.

C: PUBLISHED ARTICLE (VERSION OF RECORD)

[Published article is the version published (online/print) in a journal following peer review, copyediting and typesetting]  

Author(s) retain the right to share/disseminate the published article without any embargo period, by any means including twitter, scholarly collaboration networks like Google Scholar, LinkedIn, Academia.edu, ResearchGate, Twitter, and any other personal, professional or academic website, with a link to the published version on the publisher’s website:

Authors should preferably give a link to the published version on the PJNS website:

 “This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Pakistan Journal of Neurological Sciences [Year, Volume number, Issue Number]. The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/[insert DOI]”.