Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases: Journal of the COPD Foundation
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases: Journal of the COPD Foundation is an Open Access journal which publishes original manuscripts on all aspects of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, including human clinical studies.
By virtue of submitting a manuscript to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases: Journal of the COPD Foundation, the authors certify that:
(a) The material is original, has not been published except in abstract form, and is not being considered for publication elsewhere, including publicly accessible websites or e-print servers;
(b) All authors have read the manuscript and approve its submission;
(c) All clinical trials have been registered in a public trial registry.
Prior to publication, the corresponding author is responsible for:
- Ensuring that all listed authors have substantially participated in the creation of the submitted work. This participation may include the conception and/or design of the study; the acquisition of the data, data analysis and/or interpretation; writing the article and substantial involvement in its revision prior to submission. All authors should significantly contribute to the intellectual content of the article and give final approval of the version to be published.
- Ensuring that the manuscript is properly prepared (See the Instructions for Authors: Manuscript Preparation).
- Ensuring that the manuscript adheres to the Journal’s ethics policies (See Ethics Policies below).
- Completing an Assignment of Copyright, on behalf of all listed authors (should be submitted at time of manuscript acceptance—See Instructions for Authors).
The JCOPDF reserves the right to reject any manuscript which does not meet these requirements.
All submitted manuscripts are subjected to a rigorous Peer Review process.
Upon receipt of a manuscript, the Editor in Chief assigns an Associate Editor (AE) to the manuscript who is responsible for monitoring the manuscript’s peer review process. The AE selects reviewers (a minimum of two).
The Journal encourages authors to suggest up to 3 potential reviewers (who are not currently working with any of the listed authors and preferably are not affiliated with the authors’ institutions) during the submission process. Complete contact information including institutional address, phone number and email must be provided for all author-suggested reviewers.
Reviewers are asked to immediately report (to the AE) any possible personal, professional or financial conflicts of interest with authors or the manuscript’s topic. If there are conflicts, the AE will find substitute reviewers.
A single blind review process is applied to the manuscript (the reviewers remain anonymous to the author(s) but author names are known to the reviewers).
The Journal instructs the reviewers to:
- be objective in their reviews and findings,
- suggest additional relevant work that the manuscript has not cited and
- handle the manuscript confidentially. Specifically, reviewers should refrain from copying the manuscript, sharing it with others, and discussing their personal evaluations or recommendations. Reviewers should destroy copies of the manuscript once reviews are complete.
Completed reviews are forwarded to the AE who provides a recommendation the manuscript to the Editor in Chief. The Editor in Chief will make a final determination as to whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised or rejected. The reviewers’ comments are compiled and provided to the author(s) in a decision letter.
If revisions are required, authors must provide:
- A revised manuscript with revisions clearly noted via Track Changes
- A “clean” revised version of the manuscript
- A “response to the reviewers’ comments”
The Editor in Chief will review all revisions and make the final decision on the revised manuscript’s acceptability for publication.
Authors may appeal a rejection decision by submitting a written justification for the appeal to the Editor in Chief.
The Journal endorses the recommendations of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975, revised in 2008. Investigators conducting research involving human participants, human material, human tissues or human data should follow these recommendations including seeking approval from the appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board. Manuscripts reporting on this human research and submitted to the Journal must contain:
- A statement about the institutional review board/ethic committee’s approval of the study’s protocols.
- A statement declaring that written consent was obtained from all participants or their surrogates.
The Journal will only consider publishing research in which animals were used if the research is compliant with all subsequent revisions of the Health Research Extension Act (public law 99-158, 1985 Animals in Research). In addition, all animal experiments must conform to the revised: Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources, Commission on Life Sciences, National Research Council. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1996. (These documents may be obtained at http://grants/nih.gov/grants/olaw.htm )
- Authors must provide a statement that all use of animals in their research conformed to the above guidelines.
The Editor reserves the right to reject any manuscript reporting on studies that do not conform to the above recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
At the time of submission, prior to peer review, all contributing authors listed on a manuscript must complete an International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Form for the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest.
In completing this form, authors will be required to disclose:
- any financial compensation received for the work of the submitted manuscript;
- any financial relationships outside of the submitted work (sources of revenue paid to the authors or authors’ institutions on their behalf ,within the last 36 months; monies from sources with relevance to the submitted work; interactions with the works’ sponsor outside of the submitted work; any interactions with ANY entity that could be considered broadly relevant to the work);
- intellectual properties—patents and copyrights (owned, planned or pending) that are broadly relevant to the work;
- any other relationships or activities that readers could perceive to have influenced, or that gives the appearance of influencing, the manuscript;