JMWH Editorial Policies - Wiley Online Library...Writing Practices to Avoid Plagiarism, Text...

Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health

Editorial Policies

5th edition, 2020

Version 5.1 (updated September 30, 2020)

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1

POLICY ON APPEAL OF EDITORIAL DECISION ................................................................... 2

POLICY ON AUTHORSHIP ......................................................................................................... 3

POLICY ON CONFLICT OF INTEREST ..................................................................................... 4

POLICY ON EDITORIAL BOARD ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES .................................. 6

POLICY ON PEER REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 9

POLICY ON PLAGIARISM, TEXT RECYCLING, AND DUPLICATE PUBLICATION ...... 10

Table 1. Types of Plagiarism and How to Avoid Them............................................................ 14

Table 2. Writing Practices to Avoid Plagiarism, Text Recycling, and Duplicate Publication . 16

Table 3. Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to JMWH that Have Potential for Duplicate

Publication ................................................................................................................................. 16

POLICY ON PROTECTION OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS AND PATIENTS ................. 17

POLICY ON PUBLICATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM EVALUATIONS ............. 19

POLICY ON PUBLICATION OF SURVEY RESEARCH WITH MEMBERS OF

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS AS PARTICIPANTS ........................................................ 21

1

INTRODUCTION

Authors, peer reviewers, and editors must follow an ethical process when conducting research,

writing manuscripts, and reviewing submissions to ensure the integrity of every published

manuscript. The following policies have been adopted by the Journal of Midwifery & Women’s

Health (JMWH) in concert with recommendations from the Committee on Publication Ethics

(COPE),1 International Committee of Medical Editors (ICMJE),2 AMA Manual of Style,3 Council

of Science Editors,4 and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).5 More in-depth

discussion of ethical considerations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors can be found in the

references listed.

References

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website. http://publicationethics.org/. Accessed

May 14, 2020.

2. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct,

reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals.

http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/. Updated December 2019. Accessed May 14, 2020.

3. Christiansen S, Iverson C, Flanagin A, et al. AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and

Editors. 11th ed. Oxford University Press; 2020.

4. Council of Science Editors website. http://www.councilscienceeditors.org. Accessed May 14,

2020.

5. World Association of Medical Editors website. http://www.wame.org/. Accessed May 14,

2020.

2

POLICY ON APPEAL OF EDITORIAL DECISION

Authors of rejected manuscripts may appeal the editorial decision if they can provide

information that refutes the reasons noted for the rejection, or if they believe a conflict of interest

influenced the decision. Manuscripts may be rejected for a variety of reasons including, but not

limited to, a lack of compelling new findings, poor writing, flawed research, plagiarism, a topic

that is not germane to the journal’s scope, limited page space, and the presence of another

published or in press article that addresses the same topic. Requests for an appeal that are based

primarily on disagreement about the rejection decision and/or the import of the topic are not

likely to be granted.

The appeal process is as follows:

1. The author must submit the appeal in writing within 30 days of having received the decision

letter. The appeal letter needs to clearly state the rationale for appealing the editorial

decision.

2. The Editor-in-Chief and/or a Deputy Editor who did not make the original decision will

review the appeal letter, editorial decision letter, manuscript, and peer review evaluations

within 30 days.

a. If this editorial review confirms the original decision, that decision will not be

changed, and further appeals will not be considered.

b. If this editorial review determines that an appeal is warranted, the author will be

offered the opportunity to submit a revised manuscript. The revised manuscript must

be submitted within 6 weeks and will be treated as a new submission. The new

submission will be peer reviewed by 2 individuals who did not review the original

submission and are not aware of the appeal. After this review, a new editorial

decision letter will be sent to the author within 6 weeks of receipt of the new

submission. If the new submission is rejected, further appeals will not be considered.

Approved by the JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team: July 1, 2020

3

POLICY ON AUTHORSHIP

An author is someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a manuscript.1 The

Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health (JMWH) authorship requirements are in accordance

with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the

Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.1

Individuals must meet all 4 of the following criteria to be included as an author:

1. substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition,

analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; and

2. drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and

3. final approval of the version to be published; and

4. agreement 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.1

All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should

be listed as authors.1 Each author of a manuscript submitted to JMWH must sign an author

disclosure form indicating they meet all 4 criteria for authorship. Individuals who contributed to

the manuscript but do not meet all 4 of these criteria should be listed in the acknowledgements

section but cannot be an author.

The order of authorship on the byline should be a joint decision of the co-authors, and the

corresponding author must be prepared to explain the order.1-2 Generally authors are listed in

descending order according to their levels of contribution. However, some co-authors choose to

list the most senior author last, irrespective of the amount of their contribution, and some co-

authors choose alphabetical order when all authors have contributed equally.2-3 Co-authors

should make decisions about the order of authorship as early as possible, ideally before a

manuscript is written.3

Requests for changes in authorship (ie, addition of an author, deletion of an author, and/or

revision of the order of authorship) after a manuscript is submitted must include the rationale for

the change(s). All of the original and new authors must consent to the change in writing before it

is made.2-4

References




2. World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Ethics and Policy Committee. Authorship.

http://wame.org/authorship. Updated January 10, 2007. Accessed May 14, 2020.



4. Committee on Publication Ethics. Changes in authorship flowcharts.

https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts. Accessed May 14, 2020.

Approved by the JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team: September 30, 2020

http://wame.org/authorship

4

POLICY ON CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Definitions

A conflict of interest refers to a conflict between the private interests and official responsibilities

of a person in a position of trust.1 Conflicts of interest may be actual, potential, or perceived.

Conflicts of interest occur in publishing when an author, reviewer, or editor may have competing

interests that could lead to biased information being presented in, or biased decisions made

about, a manuscript. Actual conflicts of interest are sometimes difficult to determine, and there

may be disagreement as to whether they exist. Potential conflicts of interest, or the perception of

conflicts of interest, can often be identified and are important to address, regardless of the

individual’s belief that such perceived conflict would not affect their judgment. Having a

competing interest does not equal wrongdoing, but all involved should be comfortable that the

publication is not affected by a conflict of interest, and the process is transparent.

Financial Conflicts exist when the author, reviewer, or editor might benefit financially from, or

has benefited in the past from, a commercial or educational product being reviewed, evaluated,

or recommended in a manuscript. Examples include being a shareholder in, employed by, or

receiving consultant or speaking fees from, the company that produces the product. Current

financial interests and financial interests within the past 3 years are considered potential

conflicts. Financial support for publications must be acknowledged in the manuscript. Any

agreement with the funder that limits an investigator’s access to data, ability to collect or conduct

analyses of data, or freedom to publish without approval of the funder must be identified when

the manuscript is submitted. The editor will decide whether any pertinent information should be

included if the manuscript is published.

Non-financial Conflicts can include political, academic, intellectual, professional, or other

relationships or activities that prevent an unbiased presentation of material, review of a

manuscript, or decision to publish an article. Personal or professional relationships or beliefs

may create a conflict. For example, an editor with strong personal beliefs about abortion might

not be willing to consider a manuscript that covers the management of medication abortion. An

editor or reviewer may have strong professional beliefs that there is only one way to manage a

controversial clinical issue, and thus might not be able to be objective and systematic in

reviewing a manuscript on that topic. A reviewer who recognizes the author of a manuscript as

the head of the department where the reviewer is applying for a position may not be able to

provide an objective critical review of the manuscript.

Unpaid Decision-making Positions such as membership on the board of directors of an

organization or being a peer reviewer for several journals set the stage for potential conflicts but

may or may not create a conflict of interest, depending on whether or not decisions about

manuscripts are affected by perceived needs of the competing organization or journal.

Disclosure

Disclosure maintains confidence in the integrity of the system. Disclosure allows editors to

estimate the extent of any potential conflict of interest before making a decision about the

manuscript. Author disclosure of a potential conflict of interest does not necessarily mean a

5

manuscript will be rejected for publication; rather, disclosure offers readers the opportunity to

make a decision about possible bias in the published article. Disclosure applies to all types of

articles: original research, review articles, editorials, commentaries, and columns.

Authors should disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest when submitting a

manuscript for consideration. If there are no conflicts, this too should be explicitly stated by the

authors. The Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health (JMWH) requires authors to disclose

actual and potential conflicts of interest in the author disclosure form that is submitted with a

manuscript. Conflicts of interest, or the lack thereof, will be published with the manuscript,

should it be accepted for publication.

Reviewers should disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest to the editor as soon as they

recognize the possible conflict. A perceived conflict does not mean there is an actual problem. A

conflict exists only if it would limit the reviewer’s ability to render a fair and impartial review.

Editors will disqualify themselves from a decision-making role on a manuscript if there is a

potential conflict of interest for financial, professional, personal, or other reasons. For example,

an editor may request that another editor read the reviews and make a decision on a manuscript

submitted by a close colleague. If an editor who makes editorial manuscript decisions (ie, Editor-

in-Chief or Deputy Editor) is an author of manuscript submitted to JMWH, the editor will be

excluded from the peer review and editorial decision for the manuscript. If the manuscript is

accepted for publication, it will include the following statement in the conflict of interest

disclosure published with the article: “<Insert author’s name> is <insert author’s JMWH title> of

the Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health and was excluded from the peer review and

editorial decision for this article.”

Undisclosed conflicts are sometimes identified during the review process. If the reviewer or

editor identifies a potential conflict on the part of the author, the manuscript will be returned with

a request that the author describe how the concern is or is not a conflict of interest. If the conflict

is on the part of a reviewer, the manuscript will be re-assigned to another reviewer.

Undisclosed conflicts of interest are sometimes identified after publication. In this case, JMWH

may publish a correction to the conflict of interest statement that was published with the article

and/or retract the article.

Reference

1. Conflict of interest. Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary. http://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/conflict%20of%20interest. Accessed May 14, 2020.


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conflict%20of%20interest

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/conflict%20of%20interest

6

POLICY ON EDITORIAL BOARD ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health (JMWH) Editorial Board has the following

structure:

• The Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editors comprise the senior editors. The responsibilities

of the senior editors are set forth in written agreements with the American College of

Nurse-Midwives (ACNM).

• The Associate Editors, Contributing Editors, and Consulting Editors are appointed by the

Editor-in-Chief for 3-year, renewable terms in these volunteer positions.

• The JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team includes the JMWH Editor-in-Chief,

Deputy Editors, and Associate Editors.

JMWH Editorial Board members may only serve on the editorial boards of other journals with

the express permission of the JMWH Editor-in-Chief. Individuals may not serve on the JMWH

Editorial Board and the ACNM Board of Directors simultaneously.

Editorial Board Responsibilities

Editor-in-Chief

The JMWH Editor-in-Chief directs the content, focus, and strategic development of the Journal.

The Editor-in-Chief’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to:

• Having sole responsibility for the content of the Journal; ACNM will not interfere in the

evaluation, selection, or editing of individual articles, either directly or by creating an

environment in which editorial decisions can be influenced

• Having sole responsibility for the selection and supervision of the Deputy Editors,

Editorial Board members, and Managing Editor

• Maintaining and enhancing the Journal’s high standards for authoritative, innovative, and

high-quality content

• Ensuring that the editorial content of the Journal supports the general aims and scope of

the Journal.

• Establishing goals for JMWH’s editorial quality, processes for JMWH workflow and

communication, and JMWH editorial policies, in consultation with the Deputy Editors

and Editorial Board members

• Overseeing the peer review of all manuscripts submitted to JMWH, including making

acceptance and rejection decisions for these manuscripts and communicating with the

authors regarding these decisions

• Recruiting manuscript submissions and peer reviewers

• Dealing with conflict of interest and ethical issues, errata, and retractions

• Conducting JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team meetings and peer reviewer

meetings

Deputy Editors

The JMWH Deputy Editors help direct the content, focus, and strategic development of the

Journal. The Deputy Editors’ responsibilities include, but are not limited to:

• Making acceptance and rejection decisions for assigned manuscripts and communicating

with the authors and Editor-in-Chief regarding these decisions

7

• Assisting authors with revisions until a final accepted manuscript is completed

• Writing editorials

• Recruiting manuscript submissions and peer reviewers

• Participating in senior editor meetings, JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team

meetings, and peer reviewer meetings

• Fulfilling other duties and responsibilities necessary to support the Editor-in-Chief

Associate Editors

The JMWH Associate Editors help direct the content, focus, and strategic development of the

Journal by:

• Participating in in-person and virtual JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team meetings

• Providing at least one individualized, specific, measurable, relevant contribution to the

Journal per year. Options include but are not limited to:

o Authoring or co-authoring a manuscript

o Authoring or co-authoring an editorial or commentary

o Authoring or co-authoring the Updates from the Literature column

o Updating or reviewing Share with Women patient education handouts

o Recruiting manuscripts for a specific topic, theme issue, or collection of articles

o Making a presentation on a topic related to writing for publication at a midwifery

and/or women’s health conference (eg, ACNM, ICM)

• Reviewing submitted manuscripts, including expedited peer review and editorial review

as needed

• Recruiting manuscript submissions

• Ranking each year’s research and review articles to create a slate of finalists for the Best

Article Award Selection Committees

• Assisting with review and revision of the Journal’s aims and scope, goals, editorial

policies, and other documents

• Recommending new peer reviewers

• Attending the annual peer reviewer meeting

• Serving as an ambassador for the Journal at the American College of Nurse-Midwives

Annual Meeting & Exhibition and other relevant conferences

• Representing the Journal to colleagues, students, and other potential authors

The JMWH Associate Editors are listed on the Journal’s masthead, earn continuing education

units (CEUs) for peer reviews they complete, can receive free CEUs for one continuing

education theme issue per year, and are reimbursed for selected travel expenses to attend the

annual in-person Editorial Board Leadership Team meeting.

Contributing Editors

The JMWH Contributing Editors help direct the content and focus of specific columns for the

Journal by:

• Writing and/or reviewing content for their column

• Recruiting manuscript submissions for their column

• Assisting with review and revision of the format and guidelines for their column

8

• Working closely with the Editor-in-Chief to ensure their column follows the overall

editorial direction of the Journal

• Attending the annual peer reviewer meeting, when present at the American College of

Nurse-Midwives Annual Meeting & Exhibition

The JMWH Contributing Editors are listed on the Journal’s masthead, earn continuing education

units (CEUs) for peer reviews they complete, and can receive free CEUs for one continuing

education theme issue per year.

Consulting Editors

The JMWH Consulting Editors provide expertise in specific areas by:

• Advising the Editor-in-Chief on content and direction for their areas of expertise

• Reviewing submitted manuscripts in their areas of expertise

• Recommending new peer reviewers in their areas of expertise

• Encouraging colleagues and peers to submit manuscripts to JMWH

• Attending the annual peer reviewer meeting, when present at the American College of

Nurse-Midwives Annual Meeting & Exhibition

The Consulting Editors’ areas of expertise may include but are not limited to:

• Certified Professional Midwives

• Diversity and Inclusion in the Midwifery Workforce

• Education

• Ethics

• Global Health

• Health Disparities

• Health and Public Policy

• International Midwifery

• Practice Management

• Public Health

• Qualitative Research Methods

• Quality Improvement

• Statistics

• Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

The JMWH Consulting Editors are listed on the Journal’s masthead and earn continuing

education units (CEUs) for peer reviews they complete.

Approved by the JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team: September 30, 2020

9

POLICY ON PEER REVIEW

Peer review assists the editors in identifying which submissions are appropriate for publication in

the Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health (JMWH). All manuscripts submitted to JMWH

undergo a preliminary review by the editors to assess their quality and suitability for the Journal.

Manuscripts that qualify for external peer review will be evaluated using a double-blind process

in which neither the authors nor the reviewers know the others’ identities. Individuals who peer

review manuscripts for JMWH are expected to adhere to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer

Reviewers.1 Until published, a manuscript is the confidential property of the author. Therefore,

reviewers cannot use, cite, or discuss the content of unpublished manuscripts in any personal or

professional activities, or use the content for financial gain.

Reference

1. Committee on Publication Ethics. COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. September

2017. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9. Accessed May 29, 2020.


https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9

10

POLICY ON PLAGIARISM, TEXT RECYCLING, AND DUPLICATE PUBLICATION

Introduction

There are several types of plagiarism broadly divided into 3 categories: 1) plagiarism, which is

copying material from another person’s work; 2) text recycling, which is an author reusing large

portions of text they have already published (this may also be referred to as self-plagiarism); and

3) duplicate publication, which is publishing the same or nearly the same content in multiple

venues.1,2 Originality is a basic tenet of peer-reviewed publications in the health sciences

literature,3 and all forms of plagiarism are considered scientific misconduct. Table 1 presents

descriptions of different types of plagiarism and suggestions for how to avoid them.

Plagiarism in any of its forms harms the author, the original owner of the work, and the reader of

the plagiarized material. Plagiarism, text recycling, and duplicate publication mislead the reader

who is expecting original work,4,5 and these practices do not contribute new value to the peer-

reviewed literature.1 In addition, these forms of plagiarism waste the time and work of journal

editors and peer reviewers who expect to evaluate original material. Finally, content published in

peer-reviewed journals is copyrighted. Thus, plagiarism is an illegal act with regard to copyright

laws.

There is no standard definition of the amount of copied text that denotes plagiarism. One full

sentence is considered by some as plagiarism. Therefore, a general understanding of the types of

plagiarism and ways to avoid them are an author’s best protection.2,6 The practices outlined in

Tables 1 and 2 can help authors ensure they do not inadvertently commit plagiarism.

The editors of the Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health (JMWH) routinely assess

manuscripts submitted to the Journal with plagiarism detection software. Plagiarism, text

recycling, and duplicate publication may also be detected during editorial and/or peer review.

The editors follow guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)7 when they

suspect any type of plagiarism is present in a manuscript submitted to JMWH. When plagiarism

is detected in a submitted manuscript, actions may include rejection of the manuscript. When

plagiarism is detected in a published article, actions may include publishing a retraction. When

an author commits plagiarism, the editors may inform the author’s superior, the person(s)

responsible for research governance at the author’s institution, and/or the author(s) of plagiarized

material.

Types of Plagiarism

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is “the theft or misappropriation of intellectual property and the substantial

unattributed textual copying of another’s work.”3 Plagiarism can be the misuse of ideas or text.

Plagiarism ranges from unreferenced use of another author’s published or unpublished work to

verbatim or nearly verbatim copying of passages of text without appropriate use of quotation

marks.3,8-10 Plagiarized ideas, phrases, or sentences can be taken from any publication format,

including articles, abstracts, unpublished manuscripts, book chapters, and websites. While most

internet content and publications produced by the United States government are in the public

11

domain (free of copyright restrictions), using material from one of these sources without

attribution is still plagiarism.

Submissions that plagiarize material that has been previously published elsewhere, in print or in

electronic media, will not be accepted for publication in JMWH. Previous publications may

include, but are not limited to, journal articles, books, and websites.

Text Recycling

Text recycling refers to authors reusing large portions of text (eg, passages that are more than a

couple of sentences) from their own previously published work in a “new” written product.1,2

Text recycling is an accepted practice in a few narrowly defined situations.11,12 Large research

studies are often the source of several publications. When this occurs, the methods sections of

different manuscripts that are based on the study are often very similar by necessity. There are a

limited number of ways to describe a study procedure. The reader must be told that the methods

section is describing a larger study and/or referred to other articles based on the parent study.

Text recycling is also acceptable when published oral presentation abstracts and dissertations are

turned into articles (see the next section on duplicate publication). Some authors and editors also

believe text recycling is acceptable when text from a journal article is subsequently used in a

textbook chapter or non-peer reviewed articles.12 This may be called a derivative work, which is

discussed in more detail in the next section on duplicate publication.

The keys to avoiding inappropriate text recycling include: 1) avoid verbatim reuse of any of your

previously published text; 2) when content from a prior publication is referred to or rephrased,

cite the prior publication; and 3) obtain permission from the copyright holder of the previous

publication(s) for any material that must be used unchanged, such as figures or tables. It is

important to remember that the copyright for a publication is most often transferred to the

journal’s publisher or owner when the article is accepted for publication and no longer belongs to

the author once it is published.

Authors who wish to use previously published passages of their own text in manuscripts

submitted to JMWH should cite their previous work in the appropriate places in the manuscript

and provide copies of the previously published work. If unchanged material, such as tables or

figures, from an author’s previous publication(s) are used, the author must obtain written

permission for reuse from the copyright holder of the previous publication(s) and provide

evidence of this permission to JMWH. The decision to accept a manuscript that is a derivative

work from previously published material is made on an individual basis at the discretion of the

editors.

Duplicate Publication

Duplicate publication is “the simultaneous or subsequent reporting of essentially the same

information, article, or major components of an article 2 or more times in one or more forms of

media (either print or electronic format).”8(p 148) This form of plagiarism is also called redundant

publication or overlapping publication and can refer to publishing the same text and/or data in

different articles or venues. There are several forms of duplicate publication including data

segmentation, data aggregation, and data disaggregation (see Table 2).13

12

The consequences of duplicate publication of data can be double counting of results or

inappropriate weighting of those results if the same data are included as independent samples in

a review article or meta-analysis. Duplicate publication can also make one set of data appear

more robust than it is when the same material appears in different venues. In addition to the

ethical misconduct and potential copyright violations, duplicate publication is not a cost-effective

use of resources.

Duplicate publication can be particularly concerning when publishing multiple reports from a

single study or data set. Some studies and data sets have several aims and research questions,

which can be appropriately formatted into multiple manuscripts that present different results or

aspects of the study. The study objective(s) and findings for each manuscript must be clearly

distinct, and each manuscript must represent a unique use of the data. The review of the literature

should also vary based on the particular focus of each manuscript. The data source for and

uniqueness of every report from a single study or data set must be explicit to readers and editors

(see Tables 1 and 3).

A derivative work also has the potential for duplicate publication. An author who publishes an

article in JMWH and later wants to publish a book chapter on the same topic or someone who

writes a book chapter and later wants to write a journal article would be publishing a derivative

work. According to the US Copyright Office, “to be copyrightable, a derivative work must be

different enough from the original to be regarded as a new work or must contain a substantial

amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting

work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must

be original and copyrightable in itself.”14 JMWH grants the right to produce derivative works

back to all authors who publish in the Journal.

In a few specific instances, a new article based on a previous publication is not considered

duplicate publication. Two common examples are oral presentations and dissertations.

Summaries or abstracts of oral presentations at a scientific meeting may be published in the

conference proceedings or a peer-reviewed journal. It is acceptable for authors to also publish an

article based on a presentation if the previous proceedings or abstract publication is disclosed.

Dissertations may be published in dissertation databases or university publications. It is

acceptable for authors to also publish one or more articles based on their dissertation if the

previous dissertation publication is disclosed. A traditional dissertation may be cleanly divided

into multiple manuscripts, as long as each of these has a different focus. Some dissertations are

formatted as multiple publishable manuscripts as a degree requirement. Authors may submit

manuscripts derived from a single dissertation to different journals.

The editors will make a decision about accepting the following types of manuscripts on a case-

by-case basis: manuscripts that report findings from a study or data set that has additional

published articles and/or submitted manuscripts, derivative works, manuscripts based on oral

presentations or dissertations, manuscripts that are translations of articles previously published in

another language, and manuscripts being jointly published in one or more additional journals.

When submitting a manuscript that might have duplicate content or very similar content to a

previous publication or another manuscript currently under review or in press, the author must

13

notify the editor who may request copies of the related publications. In addition, the author

should follow the guidance in Table 3 for required actions specific to the manuscript.

References

1. Roig M. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism: what every author should know. Biochem Med.

2010;20(3):295-300. doi:10.11613/BM.2010.037

2. Roig M. Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism and other questionable writing practices: a

guide to ethical writing. Office of Research Integrity. https://ori.hhs.gov/content/avoiding-

plagiarism-self-plagiarism-and-other-questionable-writing-practices-guide-ethical-writing.

Published 2003. Updated 2015. Accessed May 13, 2019.

3. Office of Research Integrity. ORI policy on plagiarism. https://ori.hhs.gov/ori-policy-

plagiarism. Accessed May 12, 2019.

4. Committee on Publication Ethics. Text recycling guidelines. http://publicationethics.org/text-

recycling-guidelines. Accessed May 13, 2019.

5. Šupak Smolčić V. Salami publication: definitions and examples. Biochem Med.

2013;23(3):237-41. doi:10.11613/BM.2013.030

6. Alam M, Ratner D, Coleman WP. How to understand, detect, and avoid plagiarism.

Dermatol Surg. 2019;45(5):631-637. doi:10.1097/DSS.0000000000001927

7. Committee on Publication Ethics. https://publicationethics.org. Accessed May 13, 2019.

8. Iverson C, Christiansen S, Flanagin A, et al. AMA Manual of Style: A Guide for Authors and

Editors. 10th ed. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2007.

9. Kumar PM, Priya NS, Musalaiah SVVS, Nagasree M. Knowing and avoiding plagiarism

during scientific writing. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2014;4(Suppl 3):S193–S198. doi:

10.4103/2141-9248.14195




11. Moskovitz C. Text recycling in scientific writing [published online March 15, 2018]. Sci Eng

Ethics. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-0008-y

12. Thurman RH, Chervenak FA, McCullough L, Halwani S Farine D. Self-plagiarism; a

misnomer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214(1):91-93. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.09.004

13. von Elm E, Poglia G, Walder B, Tramèr MR. Different patterns of duplicate publication: an

analysis of articles used in systematic reviews. JAMA. 2004;291(8):974-980.

doi:10.1001/jama.291.8.974

14. US Copyright Office. Circular 14: copyright registration for derivative works. Washington,

DC: US Copyright Office; May 2010.

Approved by the JMWH Editorial Board Leadership Team: May 18, 2019

14

Table 1. Types of Plagiarism and How to Avoid Them

Type of Plagiarism Description How to Avoid This Form of

Plagiarism

Plagiarism of ideas Using another person’s ideas,

such as explanations, theories,

conclusions, hypotheses, and

metaphors, which are the

intellectual property of the

originator.

Attribute all ideas or theories

in text from any source,

including but not limited to

print media, electronic

media, and the internet, to

the originator.

Plagiarism of text Using another person’s text

without attribution. There is no

standard definition of the

amount of copied text that

constitutes plagiarism.

Place all verbatim text copied

from another source in

quotation marks with the

source cited.

Mosaic plagiarism

or inappropriate

paraphrasing

Changing a few words in a

sentence or several sentences

together without changing the

order or content of the

sentences. Mosaic plagiarism

can be identified when the

sentence and paragraph

structure are the same with

different words replaced in

sentences. In addition to being

plagiarism, this technique can

alter the meaning of the original

passage if the replacement

words have a different meaning

than the original words.

State your ideas in your own

words, which means the

passage is restated or

altered enough to be

considered a new piece of

writing.

Cite sources used for the ideas

articulated in your

manuscript.

Text recycling Using large portions (eg,

paragraphs or passages that are

more than 2-3 sentences in the

same order) of the author’s text

from a previous publication in a

subsequent written product.

Reorganize text so the outline

has a different flow of

logic.

Avoid copying more than a

sentence.

Cite the previous publication.

Duplicate

publication

Publishing the same or nearly the

same content 2 or more times in

one or more forms of media

(print or electronic). The

duplicate content can be text

and/or data.

If more than one publication is

planned from a single study or

data set, each manuscript must

be a unique use of the data.

Acknowledge and describe the

purpose of the parent study in

each manuscript and cite the

previous publication(s).

State clearly how this analysis

differs from the previous

publication(s).

15

Data Segmentation Artificially separating parts of a

study into different

publications. This is also

known as “salami slicing” or

the least publishable unit.

An example of data segmentation

is dividing the results of an

online survey with 29 closed-

ended questions and one open-

ended question into 2

manuscripts that report the

quantitative and qualitative

findings separately when the

free-text responses to a single

question did not generate

substantive findings that

warrant their own publication.

Rather than looking at the

least publishable unit, first

consider the data and

whether the components of

a study would best be

published together or

warrant separation into

multiple publications. Ask

yourself if quantity will

harm quality.

Data aggregation Publishing the same study and

results with the addition of a

new cohort added to the

original cohort.

An example of data aggregation

is an author publishes the

results of a study that included

50 participants then the author

adds 10 participants and

publishes the same study and

findings with the additional

participants included.

Acknowledge and describe the

purpose and key findings of the

prior publication in the new study

and cite the previous publication.

State clearly how this analysis

differs from the previous

publication.

Data disaggregation Writing a secondary analysis of a

parent publication that uses the

same methods but deletes one

cohort, or uses the same cohort

and applies a slightly different

analysis that does not

appreciably change the results

of the prior publication.

An example of data

disaggregation is publication of

the outcomes of a style of

prenatal care for a cohort of

women who represent diverse

racial and ethnic groups. The

duplicate publication then

repeats the same analysis for

only one racial group that was

Do not consider publication if

the methods and findings of

a subgroup analysis are

similar to the methods and

results of the previously

published larger analysis.

16

included in the parent study and

original publication.

Table 2. Writing Practices to Avoid Plagiarism, Text Recycling, and Duplicate Publication

Re-outline the content you want to convey so the new text does not flow in the exact same order

as the text you are describing.

When summarizing a distinct concept that is the original work of another author, enter that

author’s name and/or cite the reference as part of writing the passage. If summarizing text

from a prior publication of your own, enter your name and citation as a reference.

Do not have another publication open or text visible as you write. This prevents unconscious

repetition.

Do not cut and paste text into any document you will be submitting for publication. If cutting

and pasting is a helpful technique for identifying content you want to include, always place

that copied text into a separate document from the one that will be your submitted work.

Table 3. Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to JMWH that Have Potential for

Duplicate Publication

Manuscript Description Author Actions

Original research, same

study or data set has been

used in other published

articles and/or submitted

manuscripts

Notify the editor of other published articles and/or submitted

manuscripts from the same study or data set

See the JMWH Instructions for Authors for specific information

that must be included in the cover letter

Reference the related published articles and/or submitted

manuscripts in the manuscript submitted to JMWH

Derivative work Notify the editor of the previous publication (eg, book chapter on

the same topic)

Reference the original work in the manuscript submitted to JMWH

Original research, study

findings that have already

been reported in an oral

presentation

Notify the editor of any conference proceedings publications

and/or published or submitted abstracts from the oral

presentation

Reference all related published conference proceedings and/or

abstracts in the acknowledgements section of the manuscript

submitted to JMWH

Manuscript is part of or

derived from a dissertation

Notify the editor of other published articles and/or submitted

manuscripts from the dissertation

Reference the related published articles or submitted manuscripts

in the manuscript submitted to JMWH

Translation of article

previously published in

another language

Notify the editor of the previous publication

Reference the original work in the manuscript submitted to JMWH

Manuscript being

submitted for joint

publication in one or more

other journals

Notify the editors of JMWH and the other journal(s) of the request

for joint publication prior to submission

17

POLICY ON PROTECTION OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS AND PATIENTS

Ethical Review of Studies and Informed Consent

Any research utilizing human participants or data obtained from human participants (eg, medical

records) requires approval or exemption from an institutional review board (IRB) or independent

ethics review committee. Research is “a systematic investigation, including research

development, testing, and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable

knowledge.”1 A human research participant is, “a living individual about whom an investigator

(whether professional or student) conducting research: (i) obtains information or biospecimens

through intervention or interaction with the individual, and uses, studies, or analyzes the

information or biospecimens; or (ii) obtains, uses, studies, analyzes, or generates identifiable

private information or identifiable biospecimens.”1

When reporting research that utilized human participants, authors must state in the methods

section of the manuscript that an IRB or ethics committee approved the study or determined the

study was exempt from approval.2 State why the exemption was granted if the study was

determined to be exempt. The Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health (JMWH) may request

documentation of IRB or ethics committee approval or exemption prior to accepting

submissions. If the author is unable to provide evidence of IRB or ethics committee approval or

exemption, the submission will be rejected.

When reporting research that utilized human participants, authors should indicate in the methods

section of the manuscript that informed consent was obtained all from participants and describe

how this consent was obtained.2 If informed consent was not required by the IRB or ethics

committee, the author should provide an explanation for the waiver.2

Privacy and Confidentiality

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Uniform Requirements for

Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals,3 which JMWH follows, includes the following

statement on the privacy and confidentiality of patients and study participants:

Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent.

Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be

published in written descriptions, photographs, or 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 an

identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should disclose to

these patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the

Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and

archived with the journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or

laws…Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be

obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. 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, and editors should so note, that such alterations do

not distort scientific meaning.3

18

The AMA Manual of Style2 provides additional clarification for case descriptions and case

reports:

Case descriptions and case reports serve as important contributions to the medical

literature…Traditionally, such reports have included specific details about

patients….Only those details essential for understanding and interpreting a specific case

report or case series should be provided. In most instances, the description can be more

general than specific to ensure anonymity, without substantive loss of

meaning…Although the degree of specificity needed will depend on the context of what is

being reported, specific ages, race/ethnicity, and other sociodemographic details should

be presented only if clinically or scientifically relevant and important.2(p 316)

Do not include identifying information (eg, name, address, medical record number) in

manuscripts submitted to JMWH. Sociodemographic details (eg, age, race/ethnicity) should be

reported only if inclusion of these characteristics is clinically or scientifically relevant and

important.2 Manuscripts should not include the initials of patients or research participants. Use a

pseudonym or some other designator that does not hint at the person’s identity. If a manuscript

includes detailed case descriptions or photographs that might permit a patient or research

participant to be identified, the author must obtain written permission from the individual to

publish the information and provide JMWH with a copy of the permission.

Reports of qualitative research frequently use personal quotations to highlight thematic findings.

Quotations should not be altered, but individual names or other personal identifiers should not be

included. Quotations from research participants can sometimes be traced because of the “story”

that is told. It is essential to protect the confidentiality of the participant, and the researcher

should be sensitive to these possibilities and make sure permission to present the story is

obtained from the study participants.

References

1. US Department of Health and Human Services. Code of Federal Regulations. Title 45 Public

Welfare, Part 46 Protection of human subjects. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-

bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=83cd09e1c0f5c6937cd9d7513160fc3f&pitd=20180719&n=pt4

5.1.46&r=PART&ty=HTML. Updated July 19, 2018. Accessed May 14, 2020.



3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts

Submitted to Biomedical Journals. http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html. Updated December

2019. Accessed May 14, 2020.


https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=83cd09e1c0f5c6937cd9d7513160fc3f&pitd=20180719&n=pt45.1.46&r=PART&ty=HTML



19

POLICY ON PUBLICATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAM EVALUATIONS

In general, public health program evaluations that are only intended to evaluate and improve

specific public health programs and not be published in peer-reviewed journals are not

considered to be research and thus do not need IRB or ethics committee approval. Investigations

and evaluations that are intended from the outset to produce generalizable knowledge and be

disseminated via published articles in peer-reviewed journals are considered to be research.1

When a program evaluation produces some information that later is determined to be of general

interest and potentially publishable, and individual participants were involved, the issue of

research participant protection issue arises. In general, the research versus non-research

distinction will still be based on the primary intent of the project. However, journal editors have

the responsibility to see that authors who submit articles for publication are explicitly aware of

standards for protection of human participants, and will generally consider projects that involve

human participants to be research until proven otherwise.

In order to be responsive to international standards regarding research with human participants,

JMWH requires the following for all manuscripts addressing public health program evaluations:

A. An explicit statement in the introduction section of the manuscript that describes the

original intent of the project: an “in-house” program specific evaluation (non-research)

versus generalizable knowledge that was intended to be disseminated (research). For

projects originally intended to be non-research, the wording of the “purpose statement”

should be text that is similar to the following: “Although the primary original intent of

this project was a specific public health program evaluation intended only for the

agencies involved, some of the findings that emerged from the evaluation might be of use

to other programs. The purpose of this article is to present …..”

B. An explicit statement in the methods section of the manuscript describing approval or

oversight of the project.

1. If the project was originally intended to produce generalizable knowledge beyond

just the internal evaluation, it is considered research, and the manuscript requires

a statement about human participant oversight by an IRB or ethics committee.

2. If the manuscript is being positioned as non-research, it should explicitly identify

the entity or entities charged with approval or oversight of the project being

evaluated. This is generally an entity or entities with an interest in the protection

of the rights of any individuals involved, according to the laws or regulations of

the country where the program being evaluated is situated, for example a Ministry

of Health or other local government agency charged with protection of citizens, or

the US agency or the non-governmental organization (NGO) funding or managing

the project.

Reference

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Distinguishing Public Health Research and

Public Health Non-Research. https://www.cdc.gov/os/integrity/docs/cdc-policy-

https://www.cdc.gov/os/integrity/docs/cdc-policy-distinguishing-public-health-research-nonresearch.pdf

20

distinguishing-public-health-research-nonresearch.pdf. Updated July 29, 2010. Accessed

May 19, 2020.

Additional Resources

Amoroso PJ, Middaugh JP. Research vs. public health practice: when does a study require IRB

review? Prev Med. 2003;36(2):250-253.

MacQueen KM, Buehler JW. Ethics, practice, and research in public health. Am J Public Health.

2004;94(6):928-931.


https://www.cdc.gov/os/integrity/docs/cdc-policy-distinguishing-public-health-research-nonresearch.pdf

21

POLICY ON PUBLICATION OF SURVEY RESEARCH WITH MEMBERS OF

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS AS PARTICIPANTS

Members of professional associations, such as the American College of Nurse-Midwives

(ACNM), are periodically asked to participate in survey research for the purpose of

characterizing specific demographic or practice profiles. These survey results help guide policy,

provide information for governmental agencies, and supply data for tracking national trends.

When the results of these surveys are of general interest to both the profession of midwifery and

to persons interested in midwifery, they may be submitted for publication in the Journal of

Midwifery & Women’s Health (JMWH).

Manuscripts that include results of surveys of professional association members usually fall into

one of the following categories: (1) internal surveys that may be routine or episodic and (2)

external survey research that uses professional association members as participants.

Category 1—Membership surveys conducted under the auspices of a professional association.

Such surveys may be routinely conducted to collect a standard set of membership data. Some

analyses of membership data will be compiled as official reports that are made available upon

request. These data can be referred to in articles that are published in JMWH, and the reports will

be cited as references.

There are some instances in which the results of membership surveys are both important to share

publicly with the profession and of value to persons or agencies outside of the profession. JMWH

recognizes that professional associations are not an IRB. JMWH further recognizes that

membership surveys are a tool for collecting information that can be used for a number of

important purposes. Nonetheless contemporary publication policies as well as overriding ethical

concerns demand some statement that addresses how members’ personal information was

protected in the data collection process. Therefore, manuscripts in this category that are

submitted to JMWH must address the following:

1. Evidence that the professional association members surveyed for the research reported in

the submitted manuscript were notified that their de-identified data might be used for

survey research and gave informed consent to participate.

2. Description of how confidentiality and de-identified data were protected must be

described in the text of submitted manuscripts. Example: “data were stored in a secure

database.”

3. Description of why IRB approval or exemption was not required must appear in the

methods section. Example: “Because our membership database is considered an

administrative database, data collection and the type of analyses we describe are waived

from requirements for review by an institutional review board. Respondents are assured

confidentiality because personal identifying information is not reported to authors or

researchers using the data. Completion and return of the survey are considered evidence

of agreement to participate."

Episodic membership surveys for a specific purpose may also be considered. In these cases, the

persons responsible for conducting the survey need to seek protection of research participant

oversight via the usual channels, generally by submitting the research proposal to an IRB at the

22

home institution of a member of the research group. JMWH reserves the right to verify that

necessary approvals were granted. JMWH suggests that it would be prudent to outline an

agreement about ownership of the data and authorship of any publications prior to initiating an

internal survey in order to avoid confusion.

Category 2—External survey research that uses professional association members as

participants. For external surveys that access professional association members for research

purposes, IRB approval is necessary. Some professional association require prior approval to

solicit members for research. Such policies and guidelines must be followed. JMWH reserves the

right to verify that IRB approval was granted, and professional association policies and

guidelines were followed. Researchers conducting studies with ACNM members as participants

can find relevant policies and guidelines at https://www.midwife.org/ACNM-Research-

Guidelines. Researchers conducting studies that use data from the American Midwifery

Certification Board can find relevant policies and guidelines at

https://www.amcbmidwife.org/get-involved/research-committee.

In today’s era of web-based survey research, access to professional association membership

contact information can be obtained unofficially via various electronic mailing lists or

membership directories. JMWH will not accept manuscripts that have surveyed members via

such means without official approval if required by the professional association. Explicit

description of how the rights of the research participants were ensured is required.


https://www.midwife.org/ACNM-Research-Guidelines

https://www.midwife.org/ACNM-Research-Guidelines

https://www.amcbmidwife.org/get-involved/research-committee

JMWH Editorial Policies - Wiley Online Library...Writing Practices to Avoid Plagiarism, Text...

Documents

Transcript of JMWH Editorial Policies - Wiley Online Library...Writing Practices to Avoid Plagiarism, Text...