Conflict of Interest Policy

Competing interests may affect, or appear to affect:

• study design;
• data collection;
• analysis or interpretation;
• manuscript preparation;
• reviewer judgement;
• editorial decisions;
• post-publication assessment; or
• public confidence in the integrity of the publication process.

Disclosure allows the journal and its readers to understand relevant relationships and determine whether appropriate safeguards are needed.

The existence of a competing interest is not, by itself, evidence that a manuscript is unreliable or that misconduct has occurred.

Financial Interests

Financial competing interests may include:

• employment;
• consultancies;
• honoraria;
• speaker fees;
• advisory-board payments;
• research funding;
• travel support;
• stocks or share ownership;
• patents or patent applications;
• royalties;
• commercial contracts; or
• other direct or indirect financial benefits.

Non-Financial Interests

Non-financial competing interests may include:

• close personal relationships;
• professional relationships;
• academic competition;
• institutional responsibilities;
• supervisory or trainee relationships;
• strong intellectual or academic commitments;
• leadership roles in professional organisations;
• advocacy roles;
• editorial positions;
• active disputes;
• personal beliefs relevant to the subject matter; or
• other circumstances that could reasonably affect impartial judgement.

Interests may be direct or indirect and may involve the individual, close family members, affiliated institutions, employers, or other organisations where the relationship is sufficiently relevant.

Authors should disclose interests that could reasonably be perceived as relevant to the submitted work, including relationships involving:

• commercial sponsors;
• medical or pharmaceutical companies;
• device manufacturers;
• diagnostic companies;
• technology companies;
• healthcare providers;
• consulting organisations;
• funders;
• patent ownership;
• intellectual-property interests;
• professional or academic organisations; and
• other parties with a material interest in the work or its conclusions.

Disclosure should be sufficiently specific for readers and editors to understand the nature of the relationship without requiring disclosure of irrelevant personal financial information.

If no relevant competing interests exist, authors should include an explicit statement such as:

The authors declare no competing interests.

Authors must identify research funding and, where relevant, explain the role of the funder in:

• study conception or design;
• data collection;
• data management;
• analysis;
• interpretation;
• manuscript drafting;
• approval of the manuscript;
• decision to submit; or
• other aspects of the research.

A funder may exist without constituting a material competing interest, and a competing interest may exist without direct research funding. Both should therefore be considered separately.

Where the funder had no role beyond financial support, this may be stated explicitly.

Where a sponsor is involved, authors should disclose whether the sponsor had authority concerning:

• access to study data;
• choice of analyses;
• interpretation of findings;
• manuscript wording;
• publication approval; or
• the decision whether or where to submit the work.

Contracts or funding arrangements should not prevent authors from reporting scientifically valid findings merely because those findings are commercially inconvenient or unfavourable to the sponsor.

A reviewer should ordinarily decline an invitation, or seek guidance from the editor, where relevant circumstances include:

• recent or ongoing collaboration with an author;
• a close personal relationship;
• direct professional competition;
• substantial academic rivalry;
• a current supervisory or trainee relationship;
• significant financial interest in the subject;
• employment by an organisation materially affected by the findings;
• active involvement in closely competing work;
• strong prior involvement in the manuscript or underlying research; or
• another relationship that could reasonably impair impartiality.

Reviewers should not assume that a potentially relevant interest is too minor to disclose. Where uncertainty exists, disclosure to the editor is preferred.

The editor determines whether the interest can be managed or whether another reviewer should be selected.

An editor should not control the handling of a manuscript where the editor:

• is an author or co-author;
• is a close collaborator of an author;
• has a close personal relationship with an author;
• has a significant financial interest in the outcome;
• has a supervisory or trainee relationship with an author;
• is involved in a serious professional dispute with an author;
• is directly associated with the research under review; or
• has another material interest that could reasonably affect impartiality.

The manuscript should instead be assigned to another suitably qualified and sufficiently independent editor.

Recusal should include exclusion from:

• reviewer selection;
• confidential editorial discussion;
• access to protected reviewer identities;
• decision-making; and
• appeal adjudication concerning the same matter.

A submission authored by an editor or another person directly involved in journal operations must be handled through an independent editorial pathway.

The author-editor must not:

• select reviewers;
• manage the review process;
• access confidential reviewer identities;
• participate in editorial deliberations;
• determine the decision; or
• receive preferential processing.

BMU Ventures (Private) Limited provides the journal's administrative, technical, production, and financial infrastructure.

Publisher interests must not determine:

• whether a manuscript enters peer review;
• which reviewers are selected;
• whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected;
• whether criticism of a commercial entity may be published;
• whether an integrity investigation is initiated;
• whether a correction is issued; or
• whether an article is retracted.

Where an integrity matter directly involves a publisher representative or owner, that person should not control the editorial investigation or outcome.

The journal's Article Processing Charge must not influence:

• editorial screening;
• reviewer selection;
• reviewer recommendations;
• acceptance or rejection;
• revision requirements;
• ethical assessment;
• complaints or appeals; or
• post-publication correction or retraction.

Financial administration should be kept functionally separate from scientific decision-making.

An advertiser or sponsor must not receive:

• control over reviewer selection;
• advance access to confidential manuscripts;
• authority to approve or reject manuscripts;
• control over editorial conclusions;
• preferential treatment for sponsored authors; or
• authority to suppress valid criticism.

Sponsored collections or special issues must disclose relevant support and remain subject to appropriate editorial independence and conflict-management safeguards.

Guest editors must disclose relationships involving:

• authors in the collection;
• commercial sponsors;
• funders;
• relevant products or technologies;
• professional collaborators;
• competing research groups; and
• other circumstances that could affect impartial handling.

Guest editors must not make decisions concerning their own submissions or manuscripts where they have a material competing interest.

Independent editorial oversight may be used where necessary.

Depending on the nature and significance of the interest, JPMHR may:

• record the disclosure without additional action;
• publish a competing-interest statement;
• request clarification or additional disclosure;
• replace a reviewer;
• require an editor to recuse;
• assign an independent handling editor;
• seek additional independent peer review;
• exclude a person from a complaint or appeal;
• request correction of a published disclosure; or
• take other proportionate action necessary to protect editorial integrity.

Management should be proportionate to the likelihood that the interest could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, impartiality.

If an undisclosed interest is identified, the journal may consider:

• whether the interest was material;
• whether the omission was inadvertent or deliberate;
• whether the interest could have affected peer review or interpretation;
• whether disclosure would reasonably have changed editorial handling;
• whether readers require a correction; and
• whether the reliability of the article is affected.

Possible actions may include:

• requesting clarification;
• updating the disclosure statement before publication;
• replacing a conflicted reviewer or editor;
• conducting additional editorial review;
• publishing a correction;
• issuing another appropriate scholarly-record notice; or
• taking further action under the Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement where serious deception or integrity concerns exist.

Retraction is not an automatic consequence of an incomplete disclosure. The journal considers whether the undisclosed interest materially affects the reliability or integrity of the publication.

Authors should notify the journal if they become aware that a materially relevant relationship existing at the time of the research or publication was omitted from the published disclosure.

Where necessary, JPMHR may publish a correction or other notice so that readers have an accurate disclosure record.

A new relationship arising only after publication does not ordinarily require retrospective disclosure unless it materially changes the interpretation of the earlier work or is otherwise necessary for transparency.

A concern may involve:

• an undisclosed author financial relationship;
• a conflicted reviewer;
• an editor who failed to recuse;
• publisher interference;
• sponsor influence;
• a guest-editor conflict;
• commercial influence on peer review; or
• another material competing interest.

A person directly implicated in the complaint must not be the sole decision-maker concerning its resolution.

Relevant disclosures may be shared with editors, reviewers, journal staff, or other persons where necessary to manage the publication process appropriately.

Material competing interests may be published with the article where reader awareness is necessary for transparency.

JPMHR does not require disclosure of irrelevant personal information merely because it is financial or private in nature.

• ICMJE — Conflicts of Interest
• COPE Guidance and Resources
• Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

Reference to external guidance does not imply membership, accreditation, certification, or endorsement unless such status is independently established.