Editorial Board

Editor

• Professor Pravin Manga - University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg   

Journal Manager 

• Pam Singh - pam@wjcm.co.za

Statistics Editor

• Dr Caroline Dickens

Associate Editors

• Prof Raquel Duarte
• Prof Saraladevi Naicker
• Prof Deirdre Kruger

Editorial Board

• Dr Dwomoa Adu - University of Ghana
• Prof Daynia Ballot - University of Witwatersrand
• Prof Ashraf Coovadia - University of Witwatersrand
• Prof Keertan Dheda - University of Cape Town
• Prof Zodwa Dlamini - University of Pretoria
• Prof Michael Hasenkam – Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark
• Prof Nomandla Madala - Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University
• Prof Rafique Moosa - University of Stellenbosch
• Prof Martin Smith - University of Witwatersrand
• Prof Mboyo-di-tamba Vangu - University of Witwatersrand
• Prof Cheryl Winkler - National Institute of Health, Maryland, USA

Author Guidelines

The Wits Journal of Clinical Medicine aims to provide peer reviewed publication of original articles, reviews, opinion papers, case and meeting reports dealing with all facets of Clinical Medicine practice and research. All articles will be independently peer-reviewed. Material accepted for publication is done on the undertaking that it has not been submitted for publication anywhere else.

To submit a manuscript, click on the "Submit manuscript" button in the header. Here you will find a short video tutuorial for manuscript submissions: How to Submit a Manuscript on ScienceOpen - YouTube

We encourage authors to be aware of standardised reporting guidelines when preparing their manuscripts:

• Case reports - CARE
• Diagnostic accuracy - STARD
• Observational studies - STROBE
• Randomized controlled trial - CONSORT
• Systematic reviews, meta-analyses - PRISMA
• Animal research / In vivo experiments - ARRIVE

Submissions

All submissions should follow the style of the Journal and be clear and concise. The word count, including references, should not be exceeded. Articles must be submitted via ‘submit manuscript’ button.

How to submit a Manuscript 

Please check this short video that guides you on how to submit a manuscript to Wits Journal of Clinical Medicine.

Article Structure

All articles should have a title page, specify the type of article being submitted and include the following: a short descriptive title, authors surname and first name, affiliation, full postal address, telephone numbers and email addresses for the author, as well as co-authors. The corresponding author should be identified with an Asterix. All authors will require an ORCID number which should also be submitted as an alphanumeric string. Please register at www.orcid.org if you do not already have one. The Editors may later request validation authorisation for this publication.

The Text

Please submit all text in Times New Roman, 12 point with 1.5 spacing in English (UK or South African). Text must be submitted as a Word document. Tables and figures placement must be indicated in the text as part of the sentence example, see Table 1, or in parentheses (Table 1). All tables and figures must include a descriptive heading with appropriate attribution and permissions indicated. Figures and tables must be submitted within the Word document. All tables and graphs (containing original data or which are not archival in nature) may be redrawn to suit the house style. Please ensure that all elements are included especially legends, scale indicators and all axes. 

References

References should be numbered in the order of appearance in the text (in parentheses after punctuation) and be presented according to Vancouver styling.

For articles

• Author A, Author B, Author XYZ. Title of article. Journal title abbreviated Year; volume: xx-zz.
• Leurs R, Church MK, Taglialatela M. H1 -antihistamines: inverse agonism, anti-inflammatory actions and cardiac effects. Clin Exp Allergy. 2002; 32(4):489-498.

List first 5 authors. If more than 5 authors list the first three and add et al.

For chapters in edited books 

• Author A, Author BC. Title of the book chapter. In: Editor E, Editor FG, ed. Title of the book, X edn. Location: Publisher, year: xxx-zzz.
• Glennon RA, Dukat M. Serotonin receptors and drugs affecting serotonergic neurotransmission. In: Williams DA, Lemke TL, editors. Foye’s principles of medicinal chemistry. 5th ed.  Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.

For authored books 

• Author A, Author B, Author C. Title. Edition. Location: Publisher; Year.
• Rang HP, Dale MM, Ritter JM, Moore PK. Pharmacology. 5th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2003.

For all other reference queries eg datasets, websites and social media please consult the Vancouver style guide. When submitting articles to the Journal please adhere to the conventions outlined above as closely as possible.

Structure

The abstract (250 words) should outline the main purpose of the study, the key methods, the main results, and conclusion. The Introduction provides a background to the study and should be sufficient to permit non-specialists to understand the framework of the work. Include a well-defined statement regarding the purpose of the study. The methods: provide a description of the study design, all procedures, techniques, and statistical analyses. The results: stipulate the study findings and ensure to cross-reference figures and tables. The discussion should elicit an interpretation of the study set against the background of current knowledge of the field and provide definitive conclusions. Reviews will comprise a title page as above; an abstract (250 words), providing the setting of the review, any key messages and conclusions drawn. The body should be presented with headings and subheadings and lead to summary with conclusions to end. A few (2-5) key statements could be itemised in separate box. Acknowledgements, references, tables, and figures must be as detailed above.

Research Article

Total word count should not exceed 4500 words. 

1. The format should include an abstract (max 250 words), the text (introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion), tables, figures (maximum 5-6) and references. 

2. The reference count should not exceed 30. 

3. The Ethics Clearance/Approval Certificate from the relevant institution should accompany the submission.

Research Letter

1. The word count should not exceed 1600 words. 

2. The abstract should have a maximum of 250 words. 

3. The reference count should not exceed 15. 

4. The Research letter should have a maximum of 5 tables, figures, or images. 

5. The Ethics Clearance/Approval Certificate from the relevant institution should accompany the submission.

Opinion Piece or Perspective

1. The word count should be between 2000 – 2300 words.  

2. The abstract should not exceed 250 words. 

3. The article should have a maximum of 2 figures or images. 

4. A maximum of 15 references are permitted.

Case Reports

1. The word count should not exceed 1600 words. 

2. The article should have a maximum of 3 figures, tables, or images. 

3. A maximum of 6 references are permitted. 

4. The Ethics Approval/Clearance Certificate from the relevant institution should accompany the submission.

COPYRIGHT

• All previously published images, photographs, tables, etc. are protected by copyright. An author must get permission from the original publisher or copyright holder to re-publish any of their content.
• If a submitting author has adapted the content that they wish to replicate and re-publish, it should appropriately be referenced as ‘Adapted from [citation]‘.
• It is the responsibility of the author(s) to ensure that they own the copyright (or have obtained permission from the copyright holder) for the content of their submitted manuscripts. The WJCM will not be liable for any content that is replicated without permission.

Statistical Reporting Guidelines

These are recommended guidelines for reporting statistical data in manuscripts submitted to the WJCM.

For All Studies

• In the methodology section, include an outline of the calculations used to ascertain the study’s power and sample size, along with a summary of the methods used for the analyses of the data. The methods used for determining the distribution of the data should be included where appropriate. 
• Unless missingness is rare, manuscripts should explain how missing data was handled. Analysis of data sets with missing data must include an appropriate form of analysis such as multiple imputation, pairwise deletion, or inverse probability case weights for randomly missing data. Alternatively, model-based methods can be included. All methods should be detailed in the methodology section. A way of approaching missing data in clinical trials is found in Ware et al (N Engl J Med 2012; 367:1353–1354).
• Where appropriate, confidence intervals for measures of association, estimated effect sizes, and other parameters of interest should be included. The widths of the confidence intervals and the significance levels in the corresponding tests should correlate. 
• Two-tailed p-values should always be reported, except where the design study requires one-tailed tests. Generally, p-values should be presented as three decimal places with p-values  smaller than 0.001 presented as p<0.001. Extremely small p-values, such as those observed in genome-wide association studies and criteria linked to termination protocols in clinical trials, may be reported to three significant digits. 
• Presentation of statistical results should be at a level that is meaningful and has scientific value. Essentially, results from statistical modelling must be presented with an appropriate number of significant digits e.g., odds ratios to two significant figures.

Clinical Trials

• Approved protocols and statistical analysis plans (SAPs) must be included in the submission of manuscripts reporting on clinical trials. Except in unusual circumstances, analyses of the primary outcome should correspond to the analyses outlined in the protocol. 
• The methods section of the manuscript must include a brief overview of the data analysis used to generate the results. 
• The methods outlined in the protocol and SAP to control for type I and type II errors (e.g., Bonferroni corrections) when comparing two or more groups must be included. Adjustments in levels of significance for multiplicity in p-values must be included in the manuscripts and clearly labelled as such. The p-values generated from hierarchical testing should be reported up until the last statistically significant comparison. 
• Recommendations for the analysis of subgroups can be found in Wang et al (N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2189–2194).
• When possible, absolute counts and/or rates should be given prior to relative risks or hazard ratios thus giving both the actual and relative frequencies of the event. Clinical trials should avoid reporting odds ratios that overestimate the relative risks in a setting. 

For Observational Studies

Observational studies must include descriptions in the methods section of how relevant issues such as sample selection and measured and unmeasured confounding were controlled for in the design and analysis of these studies. 

• Studies with pre-specified SAPs and descriptions of hypotheses to be tested, must include these with the manuscript submission. Authors are encouraged to deposit SAPs in an appropriate online repository and reference this in their manuscript. 
• If a pre-specified SAP does not exist, a description of the effect or association to be studied and the reason for this choice should be given. An outline of the analysis performed must be included in the methodology section and should include the case, control when appropriate, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the method used for sampling data.
• Methods to control for type I and type II errors (e.g., Bonferroni corrections) when comparing two or more groups must be included. Adjustments in levels of significance for multiplicity in p-values must be included in the manuscripts and clearly labelled as such. The p-values generated from hierarchical testing should be reported up until the last statistically significant comparison. 
• Observational studies with two or more distinct groups (for example, treatment versus non-treatment) should include possible confounding factors and additional variables. These should be stratified by group. Differences in the distribution of confounders should be analysed with appropriate statistical tests and the results included in the manuscript. Potential biases brought on by unmeasured confounders should also be included in the discussion section of the manuscript. 

Peer Review Policy

Purpose and significance of peer review

Peer review serves as a critical tool for editors in the decision-making process and to offer authors constructive feedback for improving their manuscripts. It is a fundamental role in scholarly discourse and is central to the scientific process. WJCM uses a blinded peer review process.

Reviewer confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for review are to be treated as confidential material. Disclosure or discussion of these documents with third parties is not permitted unless explicitly authorised by the Editor-in-Chief, and then only under exceptional and specific conditions. This confidentiality requirement extends to reviewers who decline the invitation to review.

Objectivity standards

Reviewers are expected to maintain a high standard of objectivity in their evaluations. Observations should be clearly articulated and supported by reasoned arguments to facilitate manuscript improvement. Personal criticisms directed at the authors are inappropriate.

Citation and source acknowledgement

Reviewers are responsible for identifying pertinent literature that the authors have not cited. Any observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously published should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. Reviewers should also inform the editors of any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other work, published or unpublished, of which they are aware. 

Timeliness and conflicts of interest

Reviewers who feel they are not qualified to evaluate a manuscript, or who anticipate that a timely review will not be feasible, should promptly inform the editors and decline the invitation to review, allowing for alternative reviewers to be engaged. Reviewers who have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript should immediately inform the editors, declare their conflicts, and decline the invitation to review, enabling the editors to seek alternative reviewers. 

Disclosure

Reviewers may not use unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research activities, unless written permission is obtained from the authors. Information or insights gained during the peer review process must remain confidential and should not be used for personal gain by the reviewer. This confidentiality obligation extends to reviewers who have declined the invitation to conduct a review. 

Publication Ethics Statement

The Wits Journal of Clinical Medicine (WJCM) and its publisher, Wits University Press, follows these guidelines on publication ethics:

• COPE’s ‘Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors’
• Academy of Science of South Africa’s (Assaf) ‘Peer review guidelines for Journals’
• ICMJE’s Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals

WJCM expects authors, reviewers, and editors to comply with the ethical guidelines outlined in these documents. While a summary of crucial points is provided below, it is important to consult the aforementioned three documents for comprehensive information.

Editors Responsibilities

Conflicts of interest and disclosure

Editors and members of the editorial team or editorial board may not use unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research activities, unless written permission is obtained from the authors. Any confidential information or insights gained by Editors during the manuscript review process must be safeguarded and not used for personal gain. In
instances where editors have conflicts of interest due to collaborative or other affiliations with any authors, organisations, or institutions associated with the manuscript, they will abstain from the review process. An alternative member of the editorial team or board will be assigned to manage the manuscript. 

Editorial independence and fair practice

Manuscripts submitted to the journal are assessed solely on their scholarly merit, including significance, originality, validity of the study, and clarity, as well as their alignment with the WJCM’s focus. The evaluation process is impartial, with no consideration given to the authors’ ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religious beliefs, political views, or institutional affiliations. The decision to edit and publish manuscripts is independent of any external government policies or other organisational influences. The Editor-in-Chief holds complete authority over the journal’s entire editorial content and the schedule for its publication.

Confidentiality protocols

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Ethical oversight and responsive action

Should ethical issues arise concerning a submitted manuscript or published article, editors, in collaboration with the publisher and/or relevant society, will take appropriate measures. All reported instances of unethical publishing conduct will be thoroughly investigated, regardless of when they are discovered. If the investigation substantiates the ethical concerns, the journal will publish a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other pertinent note.

Financial impartiality

WJCM policy mandates that its editors maintain no financial affiliations with any biomedical companies.

Decision-making on publication

Manuscripts submitted for consideration are subject to a peer-review process, conducted by a minimum of two experts in the subject matter. The Editor holds the responsibility for determining which manuscripts will be published. This decision is based on the work’s validity, its significance to the academic community, comments from reviewers, and compliance with current legal standards concerning libel, copyright, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with other editors or reviewers to arrive at decisions.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Purpose and significance of peer review

Peer review serves as a critical tool for editors in the decision-making process and to offer authors constructive feedback for improving their manuscripts. It is a fundamental role in scholarly discourse and is central to the scientific process.

Reviewer confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for review are to be treated as confidential material. Disclosure or discussion of these documents with third parties is not permitted unless explicitly authorised by the Editor-in-Chief, and then only under exceptional and specific conditions. This confidentiality requirement extends to reviewers who decline the invitation to review.

Objectivity standards

Reviewers are expected to maintain a high standard of objectivity in their evaluations. Observations should be clearly articulated and supported by reasoned arguments to facilitate manuscript improvement. Personal criticisms directed at the authors are inappropriate.

Citation and source acknowledgement

Reviewers are responsible for identifying pertinent literature that the authors have not cited. Any observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously published should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. Reviewers should also inform the editors of any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other work, published or unpublished, of which they are aware. 

Timeliness and conflicts of interest

Reviewers who feel they are not qualified to evaluate a manuscript, or who anticipate that a timely review will not be feasible, should promptly inform the editors and decline the invitation to review, allowing for alternative reviewers to be engaged. Reviewers who have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript should immediately inform the editors, declare their conflicts, and decline the invitation to review, enabling the editors to seek alternative reviewers. 

Disclosure

Reviewers may not use unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research activities, unless written permission is obtained from the authors. Information or insights gained during the peer review process must remain confidential and should not be used for personal gain by the reviewer. This confidentiality obligation extends to reviewers who have declined the invitation to conduct a review. 

Author Responsibilities

Reporting on human subjects

Reporting research that involves human subjects or data requires a declaration that the investigations were carried out following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/). Approval from the institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee must be obtained before undertaking the research to confirm the study meets national and international guidelines. A statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must be included as ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ article. For example: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)." The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

The manuscript should follow the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals and aim for the inclusion of representative human populations (sex, age and ethnicity) according to those recommendations. The terms sex and gender should be used correctly. Additionally, when studies describe groups by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, disease, etc., explanation regarding why such categorization was needed should be clearly stated in the article.

Data management and preservation

Authors may be required to furnish the raw data from their study along with the manuscript. Authors are expected to make the data available to qualified professionals for a minimum of 10 years post-publication, ideally through an institutional or specialised data repository. This is subject to the condition that participant confidentiality and proprietary data rights are not  compromised.

Ethical reporting standards

For original research, authors are expected to provide a precise account of the methodology and outcomes, along with objective discussion regarding the work’s implications. Review articles should maintain accuracy, impartiality, and comprehensiveness, while pieces expressing editorial viewpoints must be clearly labelled as such. The manuscript should offer enough details and citations to enable replication by others. Deliberate inaccuracies or fraudulent statements are considered unethical and are unacceptable. 

Originality

Any form of plagiarism, whether it involves claiming another’s work as their own, or copying or paraphrasing significant portions from another author’s study without credit, is considered unethical and is unacceptable. Authors are obligated to submit only wholly original works. If the work or words of others are incorporated, proper citation is mandatory. Influential publications that have shaped the submitted work should also be cited. 

Restrictions on multiple submissions and publications

Manuscripts that describe the same research should not appear in more than one primary publication. Therefore, submitting a manuscript that has already been published elsewhere is considered unethical and is not acceptable. Concurrent submissions to multiple journals are also deemed unethical. In specific cases, publishing in more than one journal may be justified. This requires the consent of both the authors and the editors of the journals concerned. The secondary publication must not alter the original data and interpretation, and the primary source must be cited. 

Engagement in peer review

Authors need to be actively engaged in the peer review process. They should comply promptly with requests for raw data, additional information, and documentation such as ethics approval, patient consents, and copyright permissions. If the initial decision indicates that revisions are needed, authors should systematically address all reviewers’ comments and resubmit the revised manuscript by the specified deadline.

Correction of errors in published articles

If authors identify substantial mistakes or inaccuracies in their published work, they are required to immediately inform the journal’s editors or publisher and collaborate to either issue a correction via an erratum or withdraw the article. Should the editors or publisher be alerted by a third party about significant errors in a published article, the authors must either promptly rectify or withdraw the article, or provide evidence countering the third-party observation.

Publisher Responsibilities

Content availability and preservation

The publisher is dedicated to ensuring the ongoing accessibility and preservation of academic research. This is achieved by collaborating with various organisations and by maintaining a digital archive of the journal’s content. 

Open Access

The WJCM adheres to an Open Access model, publishing all articles under a CC-BY-NC-ND Creative Commons license.

Copyright and permissions

All material published in the Wits Journal of Clinical Medicine is protected by copyright. All rights are reserved in accordance with South African and international laws. The University of the Witwatersrand holds the copyright for all works it publishes. Authors are required to complete copyright transfer forms for accepted contributions. Wits University Press and its licensees are granted the rights to use, reproduce, transmit, create derivative works, publish, and distribute the contribution in WJCM or other platforms, in any format or medium. Authors are prohibited from using or authorising the use of their contributions without written consent from Wits University Press, except as permitted by copyright law exemptions. 

Addressing unethical publishing conduct

The publisher and Editors are committed to taking reasonable measures to detect and prevent the publication of articles involving research misconduct, and will not knowingly facilitate or endorse such misconduct. In instances of suspected or confirmed scientific misconduct, fraudulent publications, or plagiarism, the publisher will collaborate closely with the editors to take suitable measures for resolving the issue. This may involve the swift issuance of an erratum, clarification or, in extreme cases, retraction of the affected article. 

Data policy

By publishing in the journal authors are required to make research data available to editors and reviewers, and to readers upon request. For some research data, deposition in repositories is required and this is encouraged for all research data. For some papers, the decision to publish will be affected by whether or not authors share their research data.

Required

• Data sharing via repositories for some research data
• Data availability statements
• Data sharing on request

Optional / Encouraged

• Data citation
• Data sharing via repositories for all research data
• Prepare and share Data Management Plans

WJCM Conversations are recorded and presented regularly to highlight current and pressing health issues with experts. Please subscribe to our Youtube Channel for more.

January 2023

Prof Pravin Manga (Editor of the Wits Journal of Clinical Medicine) and Prof Shabhir Madhi (Dean of Health Sciences at Wits University) discuss the new Covid-19 variant XBB.1.5 and its potential impact in South Africa. Recorded January 2023.

October 2022

Prof Pravin Manga (Editor of the Wits Journal of Clinical Medicine) and Prof Francois Engelbrecht (Director of Climate Change Institute at Wits University) discuss the tipping points of climate change in Africa. Recorded October 2022.

March 2022

Prof Derick Raal in conversation with Prof Pravin Manga (Editor of the WJCM) about new cholesterol lowering therapies to decrease cardiac risk. Recorded March 2022.

March 2022

Prof Lynn Morris in conversation with Prof Pravin Manga (Editor of the WJCM) about HIV vaccines. Recorded March 2022.

June 2021

Prof Pravin Manga (Editor of the Wits Journal of Clinical Medicine) and Prof Francois Venter (Director of Ezintsha) who discuss prevention measures and vaccine strategies for COVID-19 in South Africa. Recorded June 2021

June 2020

A panel of medical experts discuss current management protocols and the impact of Covid-19 in South Africa and other parts of Africa. Recorded June 2020. Made possible with the kind support of Sabinet and GoToMeeting.

Wits University Press champions knowledge from and about Africa to local and global readers. Since 1922 we have been curating and publishing innovative research that informs debate for the greater good of society. If knowledge drives change, we are committed to publishing excellence and passionate about bringing writers with bold ideas and a progressive agenda to the world. Our mission supports the University of the Witwatersrand’s vision to promote research excellence, public engagement and social justice.

African Content. Global Impact.

Author Contribution Statements

Every manuscript submitted must be sent with a statement outlining each author’s contribution and their responsibilities in relation to the manuscript and its publication. This statement should adhere to the guidelines in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE Recommendations 2018). According to these guidelines, authorship must meet the following four criteria:

• Significant involvement in the conceptualization or planning of the work, or in the gathering, examination, or interpretation of the data.
• Participation in drafting or critically reviewing the manuscript for intellectual substance.
• Endorsement of the final version slated for publication.
• Commitment to take responsibility for investigation and resolution of any issues concerning the work’s accuracy or integrity.

Acknowledgements (if applicable)

Individuals who have meaningfully participated in the research project, but do not meet the criteria for authorship, should be named in an Acknowledgment section with a note detailing their contribution. Ensure such individuals have agreed to being named in the acknowledgement section.

Funding Information (Compulsory)

Authors must describe the funding that supported the research work. If there was no financial support for the work the following should be stated: 

Funding: No funding involved.
 

Conflicts of Interest (Compulsory)

Each author is required to disclose any affiliations that could present a conflict of interest, whether they are financial, occupational, or personal, for all submitted manuscripts. Authors employed by pharmaceutical firms, or who have significant affiliations with pharmaceutical companies or other commercial entities sponsoring clinical trials, must specify these as conflicting interests. These declarations should be placed before the manuscript’s Reference section. If no conflicts of interest exist, place the following statement before the Reference section of the manuscript:
Conflicts of interest: Authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval (Compulsory)

All research studies that involve human subjects must comply with national regulations, relevant institutional guidelines and the policies of the Helsinki Declaration. They must have the approval of the authors’ institutional review board or other relevant institutional committee, and this approval must be stated in the manuscript’s Methods section. 

Informed Consent (if applicable)

Where the identification of personal information is necessary for the study, authors must obtain documentation of informed consent, including written permission from the individuals involved in the study, prior to inclusion in the study. Include a statement in the Methods section:
Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.

Figures, photographs and illustrations

Upon manuscript submission, authors must explicitly state and describe any alterations made to digital images. Authors must verify that all figures, photographs and illustrations included in the manuscript meet these criteria:

• No elements within an image have been exaggerated, enhanced, concealed, moved, deleted or added.
• Modifications to luminosity, hue, or contrast have been uniformly applied to the whole image and do not misrepresent any aspects of the original image.
• No image has been duplicated within the manuscript or published elsewhere.

No Prior Publication

In determining the suitability of manuscripts, the WJCM editorial team places significant emphasis on the submission’s accuracy, originality, and significance. They are also committed to facilitating an impartial peer review of the scientific content prior to its public release. Consequently, WJCM will not entertain submissions that have been previously published or whose primary findings have been disclosed, with the following exceptions:

• Sharing research findings at scientific conferences.
• Uploading the manuscript to a non-commercial preprint server for input from the scientific community.
• Disclosing results to government bodies to fulfill legal obligations or address immediate public health concerns.

Presenting research at scientific conferences or submitting findings to government regulatory agencies prior to publication is not in conflict with WJCM’s policy against prior publication.