Simultaneous Submission Policy

Simultaneous submission can:

• waste reviewer and editor time;
• create competing publication decisions;
• lead to duplicate publication;
• create conflicting copyright or licensing arrangements;
• distort the scholarly record;
• undermine trust between authors and journals; and
• create unnecessary administrative and ethical disputes.

Examples may include:

• submitting the identical manuscript to two journals;
• submitting minimally altered versions of the same manuscript to different journals;
• changing only the title or abstract while retaining essentially the same study, analysis, and conclusions;
• submitting translations of the same manuscript to different journals without disclosure;
• submitting substantially overlapping reports from the same dataset as if they were independent manuscripts; or
• submitting to JPMHR before another journal has formally closed or withdrawn the same manuscript.

A manuscript may still be under consideration while:

• awaiting initial editorial screening;
• awaiting reviewer assignment;
• under peer review;
• awaiting an editorial decision;
• under revision following reviewer comments;
• under re-review;
• under active appeal where the original submission remains open; or
• awaiting formal confirmation of withdrawal.

Authors should not assume that a manuscript is free for submission elsewhere merely because the journal has not communicated recently.

Authors should ensure that:

• all co-authors are aware of the submission;
• the same manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere;
• any related manuscripts are disclosed;
• prior dissemination is disclosed where relevant;
• previous journal consideration has concluded before resubmission elsewhere; and
• the corresponding author communicates promptly if the manuscript's status changes.

Authors should disclose manuscripts that:

• use the same participant cohort;
• use substantially overlapping data;
• report different outcomes from the same trial;
• represent secondary analyses of the same dataset;
• are companion manuscripts;
• are currently under review elsewhere; or
• have recently been accepted or published and materially overlap with the submission.

The editor may request copies of related manuscripts to determine whether the submissions represent distinct scholarly reports or inappropriate redundant publication.

Authors may ordinarily maintain a preprint while the manuscript is under review by JPMHR, provided that:

• the preprint is disclosed;
• it is not represented as a peer-reviewed JPMHR publication;
• the journal is informed of materially relevant changes where appropriate; and
• the final publication is linked after publication where the platform permits.

A manuscript may remain under consideration at JPMHR while the underlying work is:

• presented orally at a scientific meeting;
• presented as a poster;
• described in a conference abstract; or
• discussed in an academic presentation.

Publication of a full paper in conference proceedings may require separate assessment under the Prior Publication Policy.

Authors may deposit eligible manuscript versions in appropriate repositories in accordance with JPMHR's Self-Archiving Policy.

A withdrawal request should:

• identify the manuscript;
• be sent by or with the knowledge of the corresponding author;
• state clearly that withdrawal is requested; and
• identify any urgent circumstances where relevant.

Authors should wait for JPMHR's confirmation that the submission has been formally withdrawn before submitting the same manuscript to another journal.

If authors consider the editorial process unreasonably delayed, they may:

• request a status update;
• contact the Editorial Office;
• raise an administrative complaint where appropriate; or
• formally withdraw the manuscript before submitting elsewhere.

Silence from a journal does not automatically terminate the active submission.

Where an appeal seeks reconsideration of a rejection and JPMHR has reopened the manuscript for active editorial assessment, the manuscript should not simultaneously be submitted to another journal.

Authors who no longer wish to pursue the appeal should notify JPMHR and request closure before submitting elsewhere.

Submission of substantially the same work in different languages to different journals at the same time is generally considered simultaneous submission unless a legitimate secondary-publication arrangement has been transparently agreed.

The journal may:

• contact the corresponding author;
• request an explanation;
• request documentation of manuscript status elsewhere;
• compare submitted versions;
• contact another journal where necessary and appropriate;
• preserve relevant editorial records; and
• pause peer review until the matter is resolved.

A similarity alert or third-party allegation alone does not establish misconduct. The journal should determine whether concurrent active submission actually occurred.

Relevant explanations may include:

• administrative error;
• failure of another journal to confirm withdrawal;
• a misunderstanding concerning a preprint;
• submission of a genuinely distinct related manuscript;
• authorisation for legitimate secondary publication; or
• other documented circumstances.

The journal will assess the evidence rather than presume intent solely from the existence of an overlapping document.

Depending on the circumstances, JPMHR may:

• request clarification;
• require disclosure of related manuscripts;
• pause editorial review;
• reject the manuscript;
• close the submission;
• notify involved authors;
• communicate with another journal where necessary;
• refer serious concerns to an institution; or
• take another proportionate publication-integrity action.

The appropriate response depends on the seriousness, evidence, consequences, and whether the conduct appears deliberate or inadvertent.

JPMHR may consider:

• publication chronology;
• degree of overlap;
• author disclosures;
• copyright and licensing;
• whether legitimate secondary publication applies;
• whether readers were misled;
• the reliability of the published record; and
• coordination with the other journal where appropriate.

Possible action may include:

• correction;
• notice of duplicate publication;
• retraction of the redundant publication;
• institutional referral; or
• another proportionate scholarly-record response.

The corresponding author ordinarily coordinates submission, but this does not remove the responsibility of co-authors to:

• approve submission;
• understand the manuscript's publication status;
• disclose known competing submissions;
• correct inaccuracies when discovered; and
• cooperate with legitimate editorial inquiries.

Responsibility for a confirmed breach should be assessed according to the evidence rather than automatically attributing identical intent to every listed author.

Any communication should:

• be limited to the legitimate integrity concern;
• avoid unnecessary disclosure of confidential information;
• distinguish allegations from established findings;
• protect reviewer identities unless disclosure is legitimately required; and
• be documented appropriately.

A manuscript rejected or closed because of confirmed simultaneous submission does not become acceptable merely because an author offers to pay an APC.

Because JPMHR's APC is payable only after formal acceptance, ordinary detection of simultaneous submission before acceptance does not itself create an APC obligation.

• ICMJE Recommendations
• 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 independently established.