Journal Policies

Journal Policies

1.     Aims and scope

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is an international, online-only, open access journal that publishes continuously in one annual volume. It publishes rigorous work in clinical pediatrics, child health, and pediatric medical education and training, particularly where these relate to resource-limited, underserved, or inequity-affected contexts. The journal thus aims at advancing context-relevant evidence for clinical care, service delivery, workforce development, and child health policy. The journal particularly welcomes submissions from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). It also welcomes relevant work from high-income countries when the research addresses contexts in which children face limited access to quality care, essential resources, or adequate system capacity, or when it offers insights or solutions applicable to such contexts. The journal also welcomes pediatric surgery articles when their main focus is relevant to general pediatrics or child health and does not center on surgical techniques or operative procedures. The journal serves clinicians, researchers, educators, trainees, and others working to improve child health in these settings.

1.1 Access model

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is an open access journal that doesn’t charge readers any fees to read. All scholarly content is freely available immediately upon publication, without subscription, embargo, or registration, under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.

1.2 Language

Contributions to the journal shall be submitted in English, with summaries in English. The journal is open to all researchers globally, regardless of gender, career stage or ethnic and religious affiliation.

1.3 Publication criteria

Submissions are assessed primarily on methodological rigor, technical soundness, ethical and reporting standards, and relevance to the journal’s scope, rather than on perceived novelty or likely impact.

1.4 Article types

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings publishes original papers that have not formally been published as a journal article or substantially published elsewhere; preprints and conference abstracts are handled as described below. It publishes a range of article types, including original research, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, brief reports, medical education papers, case reports/series, viewpoints, and selected commissioned or invited content. Further details on article types, manuscript requirements, and journal policies are provided in the journal’s Instructions for Authors pages.

1.5 Publication frequency

Continuous publication in one annual volume.

1.6 Publication format

Online only.

1.7 Digital preservation/archiving

Digital copies of the journal are archived in the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN).

1.8 Ownership, management, and publishing

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is an independently owned scholarly journal founded by Mohammed A. Alhassan, MD, with the support of a group of clinician-researchers concerned with pediatric practice and research capacity building in resource-limited settings (see editorial board below). The journal is owned by Mohammed A. Alhassan, MD, and is published under the publisher name Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings. Mohammed Alhassan, MD, serves as the founding Editor-in-Chief and, in consultation with the Editorial Advisory Board, is responsible for overall journal governance, strategic oversight, and editorial leadership. Editorial policies, peer-review procedures, and editorial decisions are determined by the Editor-in-Chief and the journal’s editorial leadership in accordance with the journal’s published policies. The journal may contract external providers for technical, operational, and publishing-support services, including website hosting, submission-system support, production, metadata management, DOI/Crossref services, archiving or preservation support, and related services. Such providers act only as contracted service providers; they do not own the journal, appoint editors, set editorial policy, select reviewers independently, participate in editorial decision-making, or exercise editorial authority over manuscripts.

1.9 Publisher and contact information

Publisher: Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings.
Owner: Mohammed A. Alhassan, MD.
Publication address: Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
Editorial Office contact: editor@jprls.org
Website domain (attained): www.jprls.org

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is independently owned and published under the publisher name Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings. All editorial correspondence, submissions, complaints, appeals, and publication-ethics concerns should be directed to the Editorial Office at the contact address above.

1.10 Financial support.

The journal is currently financially supported by its owner, with in-kind editorial/advisory support from the Editorial Board. It does not presently receive institutional, society, or commercial sponsorship.

 

2.     Editorial policies

2.1 Editorial responsibilities

The editorial bodies of the journal include: the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial (Advisory) Board, and the Editorial Office. At launch, the journal is led by one Founding Editor-in-Chief: Assoc. Prof. Mohammed Abdulrahman A. Alhassan — Sudanese by Nationality; Associate Professor of Pediatric Endocrinology at Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University; Consultant Pediatrician and Pediatric Endocrinologist; researcher in pediatric endocrinology, child health in resource-limited settings, medical education, and pediatric research capacity building. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1282-3683.

The Editorial Board shall comprise the following members at launch:

  • Prof. Satti Abdelrahim Satti Mohamed — Professor of Pediatrics at Almughtarabeen University, Sudan; Editor-in-Chief, the Sudanese Journal of Pediatrics; former President/Vice President of the Sudanese Pediatricians Association; former Vice President of the Pediatric MD Council at the Sudan Medical Specialization Board. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6225-4098 
  • Prof. Abdelhafeez Hassan Abdelhafeez — Professor at the University of Rochester, USA; pediatric global medicine expert; Chair-elect of the Global Initiative for Children’s Surgery; Executive Member of the International Society of Pediatric Surgical Oncology. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7671-3037 
  • Prof. Sulafa Khalid M. Ali — Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Khartoum and University of Sharjah; leading pediatric cardiologist; founder of the Pediatric Cardiology Fellowship Program in Sudan and the Rheumatic Heart Disease Control Program; recipient of the WHO Kuwait State Prize and World Heart Federation Advocacy Award. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9436-1680 
  • Prof. Eisa Osman Elamin— Professor of Pediatrics and Child Health; Head of the National Advisory Board for Neonatal Health, Sudan. 
  • Prof. Ishaya Ibrahim Abok — Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Jos / Jos University Teaching Hospital, Nigeria; Dean of the Faculty of Clinical Sciences; Editor-in-Chief of the African Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0488-5072 
  • Dr. Taha Ibrahim Yousif — Consultant Pediatrician and Pediatric Gastroenterologist at Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare; former Senior Clinical Lecturer at the RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ireland; reviewer for Sudanese Journal of Pediatrics, BMJ Case Reports, and BMC Pediatrics. ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5859-097X 

 The Editorial Office is operated by freelance copyediting and production/typesetting provider personnel. These personnel provide administrative and technical support only; they do not appoint editors, evaluate manuscripts, select reviewers, make editorial recommendations, or exercise any authority over peer review or publication decisions.

Future Editors-in-Chief shall be appointed by the journal owner in consultation with the Editorial Board, based on appropriate academic standing, editorial experience, subject expertise, integrity, and alignment with the journal’s aims and scope. Editorial Board members are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief based on subject expertise, academic standing, publication and/or editorial experience, relevance to the journal’s scope, and willingness to contribute to the journal’s editorial and advisory functions. Where required for conflict management or operational reasons, an independent Handling Editor may be appointed for an individual manuscript in accordance with the journal’s conflict-of-interest procedures.

The Editor-in-Chief has primary responsibility for the scientific quality of the journal and for the integrity of the editorial process. Editorial operations related to content and peer review are independent and free from the influence of potential future sponsors, advertisers, commercial partners, and service providers.

The Editor-in-Chief, or an independent Handling Editor appointed for a specific manuscript where required, is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal will be published. Editorial decisions are guided by the journal’s editorial policies and by applicable legal and ethical requirements, including those relating to defamation, copyright infringement, plagiarism, confidentiality, and research and publication ethics.

The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor reserves the right to reject submitted manuscripts if they are outside the journal’s scope or do not meet the journal’s standards concerning the content and formal aspects, methodological rigor, technical soundness, reporting quality, ethical compliance, language clarity, or formal presentation. The Editorial Office will notify authors of the initial editorial decision as soon as reasonably practicable after submission. The journal does not guarantee acceptance of any manuscript and does not promise acceptance decisions within a fixed period.

Primary research articles are subject to independent double-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected for their subject expertise and are not part of the manuscript’s authorship team. Editorial decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or, where applicable, by an independent Handling Editor after consideration of the peer reviewers’ reports and the journal’s editorial standards. Other article types are handled in accordance with the journal’s Peer Review policy. Content not sent for external peer review is subject to appropriate editorial review and oversight, and the applicable review route is stated in the journal’s article-type policies (see the Instructions for Authors page).

The Editor-in-Chief, any Handling Editor, and Editorial Board members must have no actual, potential, or reasonably perceived conflict of interest with respect to the manuscripts they handle. If a conflict exists, or may reasonably be perceived to exist, the manuscript shall be reassigned to an independent Handling Editor with appropriate expertise and no relevant conflict. If the Editor-in-Chief has a conflict of interest in relation to a submission, full responsibility for reviewer selection, peer-review oversight, editorial correspondence, and the final decision shall be transferred to an independent Handling Editor appointed for that manuscript, and the Editor-in-Chief shall have no involvement in the editorial process for that submission.

Submissions authored or co-authored by the Editor-in-Chief or by a member of the Editorial Board shall be handled under the same standards applied to all other submissions, but entirely by an independent Handling Editor with no relevant conflict of interest. The editor-author shall have no role in reviewer selection, peer-review oversight, editorial deliberation, or the final decision, and shall have no access to confidential peer-review information except as provided to authors in the ordinary course of the review process.

The Editor-in-Chief, any Handling Editor, and Editorial Board members shall evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of scholarly merit, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical and reporting standards, and relevance to the journal’s scope, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, nationality, sex, gender, sexual orientation, religion, disability, age, institutional affiliation, career stage, or political beliefs.

The Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board, reviewers, and Editorial Office must not disclose or use unpublished materials, data, arguments, or interpretations contained in submitted manuscripts without the authors’ express written consent. All manuscripts and related correspondence shall be treated as confidential and shall not be used for personal, institutional, financial, or academic advantage.

Where double-anonymous review applies, the Editor-in-Chief, any Handling Editor, reviewers, and the Editorial Office shall take all reasonable measures to preserve reviewer anonymity to authors and author anonymity to reviewers throughout peer review, including administrative checks for anonymization, subject to the practical limits of anonymization and the information provided in submitted files.

Further details of reviewer selection, number of reviewers, revision rounds, and decision pathways are provided in the journal’s Peer Review section.

2.2 Author’s responsibilities

2.2.1 Originality, prior dissemination, preprints, and related submissions

Authors warrant that a submission to the Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is their original work, has not been formally published in whole or in substantial part elsewhere, and is not under consideration by another journal or publisher at the time of submission. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript, in the same or a different language, to more than one journal or publisher is unacceptable and constitutes misconduct and eliminates the manuscript from consideration by the journal. Undisclosed redundant or duplicate publication, including substantial overlap with published, accepted, or concurrently submitted work, is also unacceptable. Any potentially overlapping publication must be fully disclosed at submission and will be assessed by the editors in accordance with accepted publication-ethics standards. If a submission is closely related to another manuscript or report from the same study, dataset, or project, the authors must disclose this at submission and provide copies or details of the related material to assist editorial assessment.

Posting of a manuscript on a recognized preprint server or repository does not constitute prior publication for this journal. Authors must disclose any preprint posting at the time of submission and provide the corresponding link or DOI in the submission system or cover letter for editorial use. Because the journal uses double-anonymized peer review, authors should not include preprint links, DOIs, repository identifiers, or other unnecessary preprint-identifying information in the blinded manuscript files submitted for peer review. Authors are responsible for ensuring that any preprint posting complies with the policies of both the journal and the preprint server or repository used. If the article is published, authors must update the preprint record to identify the final published version and include the journal citation and DOI linking to the article. Authors must not post peer-review-stage revised versions that incorporate journal feedback while the manuscript is under review. Posting or redistribution of later manuscript versions after editorial decision is governed by the journal’s self-archiving, copyright, and licensing policies. The journal will take reasonable measures to preserve author anonymity during peer review, but complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed where a publicly available preprint or other public dissemination may reveal authorship.

Prior presentation of the work at a scientific meeting, or prior dissemination in the form of an abstract, poster, trial-registration record, thesis, or other preliminary non-journal output, does not in itself preclude consideration, provided that this is fully disclosed at submission and does not amount to prior formal publication of the article. Relevant details of prior presentation, conference dissemination, related project support, or closely related outputs should be stated in the manuscript, preferably in the Acknowledgements or another appropriate disclosure section.

If the manuscript has previously been reviewed by another journal, authors may, but are not required to, provide the previous editor’s and reviewers’ comments together with their responses. This information may assist the editors in the assessment process, but its disclosure is optional.

Each author is responsible for ensuring that the manuscript is prepared and submitted in accordance with applicable ethical and legal requirements and that it does not contain defamatory or otherwise unlawful material or infringe the copyright, privacy, confidentiality, or other rights of third parties. For research involving human participants, human material, or human data, authors must comply with applicable ethics-review and informed-consent requirements and, where applicable, the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. For studies involving animals, authors must comply with applicable institutional and national standards for the care and use of animals and obtain any required ethical approval. Where permission, ethical approval, or consent is required, including for the reproduction of previously published material or the inclusion of identifiable personal information, images, or case details, authors must obtain and provide the necessary written permissions or documented consent. The journal will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.

Additional requirements relating to authorship, ethical approval, informed consent, conflicts of interest, reporting standards, and data sharing are set out in the journal’s related policy sections and author instructions.

2.2.2 Reporting standards, permissions, and responsibility for submitted materials

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is committed to serving the research community by ensuring that all articles include enough information to allow others to reproduce the work. A submitted manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit reviewers and, subsequently, readers to verify the claims presented in it - e.g. provide complete details of the methods used, including time frames, etc. Authors are required to review the standards available for many research applications from Equator Network and use those that are relevant for the reported research applications. The deliberate presentation of false claims is a violation of ethical standards.

Where relevant, authors may be requested to submit completed reporting-guideline checklists and any other documents. Supplementary materials intended to support the manuscript form part of the submission record and should be provided at submission so that they can be considered during peer review together with the main manuscript. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s reporting requirements may be returned for technical revision before peer review, held pending completion of the submission, or rejected. All supplementary files must be clearly labeled, relevant to the submission, and prepared to an appropriate standard for editorial and peer-review assessment.

Authors are exclusively responsible for the contents of their submissions and must make sure that they have permission from all parties involved to make the content public. Authors may be required to provide the proof that they have obtained such permission. Authors are also exclusively responsible for the contents of their data/supplementary files. Authors affirm that data protection regulations, ethical standards, third party copyright and other rights have been respected in the process of collecting, processing and sharing data.

Authors wishing to reproduce or adapt figures, tables, images, questionnaires, or other material published elsewhere must acknowledge the original source and obtain any necessary written permission from the copyright holder before submission, unless the material is clearly in the public domain or its reuse is permitted under an applicable license. The journal may require authors to provide documentary evidence of permission or license-based reuse rights at submission, during peer review, during editorial assessment, at acceptance, or during production.

2.2.3 Inclusive language

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings promotes accessible, and inclusive language to ensure that scientific research is widely understood and respectful of all individuals. To promote accessibility, authors should:

·       Use clear, simple language that is understandable across disciplines and for non-native English speakers;

·       Avoid overly technical or unnecessary terminology, unnecessary complexity, long sentences, repetition, uncommon acronyms and abbreviations, stereotypes, idiomatic speech, slang, and cultural assumptions;

·       Explain technical terms when needed;

·       Respect diversity and avoid implying superiority of any group based on gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, disability, health status, age, or socio-economic background.

·       Use inclusive and appropriate language in relation to race and ethnicity and provide participants with a comprehensive range of categories and subcategories to choose from when collecting self-reported racial or ethnic identity data, as well as the option to select multiple, not mutually exclusive categories;

·       Be cautious in generalizing findings from studies to groups simply on the basis of a shared identity category and provide the rationale behind any racial or ethnic groupings used in the Methods section;

·       Where it is necessary to make reference to the indigenous identity of a person or group, use the terms preferred by the person or group. If in doubt, ask the person or group;

·       Use "impairment" for medical conditions and "disability" for societal barriers. Avoid discriminatory language and offensive terms (derogatory labelling, depersonalizing, stereotyping and emphasizing the disability) in relation to the portrayal of people with disabilities (e.g. use ‘a person diagnosed with cancer’ rather than ‘a cancer victim’)

Authors are encouraged to consult the C4DISC (Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communications) Guidelines on Inclusive Language and Images in Scholarly Communication and relevant discipline-specific style guidance when preparing manuscripts. https://c4disc.org/toolkits-for-equity/

2.2.4 Authorship and contributorship

Authors must make sure that only contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as authors and, conversely, that all contributors who have significantly contributed to the submission are listed as authors. The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings follows the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) on authorship. All those designated as authors must meet all four ICMJE criteria for authorship, and all who meet all four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who contribute to the work but do not meet all four criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors but may be acknowledged appropriately, with their permission.

To qualify for authorship, an individual must meet all of the following criteria:

  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.

Activities such as acquisition of funding, general supervision of the research group or team, administrative support, routine data collection, technical editing, language editing, or proofreading, without meeting all four authorship criteria, do not by themselves justify authorship.

In addition, all authors must agree to be listed as authors, approve the final author list and author order, and consent to the submission and publication of the manuscript. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors meet the journal’s authorship requirements and that no eligible author has been omitted.

Each author’s specific contribution must be reported using the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy). Where the submission system supports CRediT role selection, authors must complete the contributorship information during submission. Where this is not supported, authors must include a structured Author Contributions statement in the manuscript using CRediT role terms. CRediT is used to improve transparency about each contributor’s role, but it does not by itself determine authorship eligibility; authorship remains governed by the journal’s authorship criteria. A contributor may hold one or more CRediT roles. Where authors wish to indicate the degree of contribution, descriptors such as lead, equal, or supporting may be used if appropriate, but these are optional and are not part of the CRediT taxonomy itself. Designation of contributor roles through CRediT does not limit or replace the responsibility and accountability of each author for the integrity of the work as a whole.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship, including those who provided technical assistance, writing assistance, administrative support, data collection support, or general supervision, should be named in the Acknowledgements section rather than in the byline, provided that they have given permission to be acknowledged. Ghost authorship, guest authorship, gift authorship, and honorary authorship are unacceptable and will be treated as publication misconduct.

Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be made in writing, must include a clear and justified explanation, and must include written agreement from all listed authors, including any author to be added or removed, unless exceptional circumstances justify an alternative process determined by the editors. The journal reserves the right to suspend editorial assessment until any authorship issue or dispute has been resolved to the satisfaction of the editors. The journal may also refer unresolved authorship disputes to the authors’ institutions or other appropriate bodies where necessary.

Artificial intelligence tools and other non-human systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors because they cannot satisfy authorship criteria or accept responsibility and accountability for the work. If such tools are used, their use must be disclosed appropriately elsewhere in the manuscript in accordance with the journal’s policy.

Related requirements on disclosures, acknowledgements, use of AI tools, and publication ethics are set out in the journal’s other policy sections and author instructions.

2.2.5 Acknowledgment of sources

Authors must appropriately acknowledge the work of others and must cite sources that have directly informed the conception, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or reporting of the submitted work. Authors should cite original primary sources wherever possible and should not present another person’s ideas, data, words, images, tables, figures, equations, or other material as their own. Information obtained through personal communication, private correspondence, confidential discussions, peer review, grant or ethics applications, submitted manuscripts, or other unpublished materials must not be used, cited, or otherwise relied upon without the source’s explicit written permission. Where reuse of previously published material requires permission or is governed by license terms, authors must comply with those requirements and provide documentation on request.

When claims, analyses, or conclusions rely on datasets, authors should cite the underlying data in the reference list in the same manner as other scholarly sources and provide sufficient information, including a relevant persistent identifier where available, to identify, access, and verify the specific dataset, version, or subset used. Authors are encouraged to follow the FORCE11 Data Citation Principles when citing data.

2.2.6 Plagiarism

Plagiarism, including the presentation of another person’s ideas, words, data, images, figures, tables, equations, or other creative work without appropriate acknowledgment, is unacceptable and constitutes a serious breach of publication ethics. Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

·       Word for word, or almost word for word copying, or purposely paraphrasing portions of another author's work without clearly indicating the source or marking the copied fragment (for example, using quotation marks); and

·       Copying equations, figures or tables from someone else's paper without properly citing the source and/or without permission from the original author or the copyright holder.

Unacceptable text recycling and undisclosed redundant overlap with previously published or submitted work are also not permitted.

All submissions may be screened for textual overlap using iThenticate as part of the journal’s editorial assessment; overlap reports are assessed editorially and do not by themselves determine whether misconduct has occurred. Manuscripts showing evidence of plagiarism, substantial unattributed overlap, or other forms of misappropriation may be rejected immediately and may be subject to further action in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policies. Such action may include contacting the authors for explanation, notifying the authors’ institutions or funders where appropriate, and applying additional editorial sanctions where justified. Any editorial action will be proportionate to the nature, extent, and context of the concern identified.

If plagiarism or substantial unattributed overlap is identified after publication, the journal will investigate the matter and take appropriate corrective action in accordance with its complaints, investigations, and post-publication correction or retraction policies. Depending on the nature and severity of the concern, this may include publication of a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction.

2.2.7 Conflict of interest

All authors must disclose, at submission and in the manuscript, all relationships and activities, whether financial or non-financial, that might bias, or be seen to bias, their work. Each author must provide a complete and accurate disclosure of relevant interests in accordance with the journal’s submission requirements. If there is any uncertainty about whether a relationship or interest is relevant, it should be disclosed. Relevant disclosures will be considered by the editors and, where appropriate, published with the article. The journal may require completion of a standardized disclosure form or equivalent submission disclosure fields for this purpose.

Examples include, but are not limited to:

  • employment, consultancies, honoraria, advisory roles, grants, salary support, travel support, stock ownership or options, or other payments from an organization that may be affected by publication of the work;
  • patents, patent applications, licenses, royalties, or other intellectual property interests related to the work;
  • leadership roles, formal affiliations, or memberships in organizations, advocacy groups, or professional bodies with an interest in the subject matter;
  • other relevant personal, institutional, academic, or ideological interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the work.

Authors employed by, advising for, or otherwise affiliated with pharmaceutical companies or other commercial organizations that sponsor or support the reported work must declare these relationships clearly. Where relevant, the manuscript must state the role of the sponsor or funder in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication, or explicitly state that the sponsor or funder had no such role.

If no competing interests exist, the manuscript should include the statement: “The authors declare that they have no competing interests.” Failure to disclose relevant competing interests fully and accurately may lead to editorial action before or after publication, including correction, expression of concern, or retraction where appropriate.

Manuscripts must not contain advertising, promotional, or product-marketing material unrelated to the scholarly reporting of the work.

Editorial conflicts of interest and their management are addressed separately in the journal’s editorial-responsibilities and peer-review policies.

2.2.8 Fundamental errors in published works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published article, the author must promptly notify the journal and cooperate fully with the editors in assessing the matter and, where appropriate, issuing a correction, an expression of concern, a retraction, a retraction and republication, or another appropriate post-publication notice. Honest errors that do not invalidate the overall results or conclusions may be corrected; errors that materially affect the reliability, integrity, results, or conclusions of the article may require retraction, retraction and republication, or another appropriate editorial action. Detailed procedures for corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and republications are set out in the journal’s post-publication correction and retraction policies.

By submitting a manuscript to the Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings, all authors confirm that they have read and agree to comply with the journal’s editorial policies, publication ethics requirements, and Instructions for Authors.

2.2.9 ORCID

Corresponding authors are required to register for a free ORCID iD (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) and to provide their ORCID iD during submission. Other coauthors are also encouraged to do so. Where provided and technically supported, ORCID iDs will be included in the published article and associated metadata; authenticated ORCID iDs are preferred. ORCID provides a unique, persistent identifier that supports accurate attribution, interoperability across scholarly systems, and improved discoverability of published work.

2.2.10 Funding information

All sources of funding and other direct material support for the submitted work must be disclosed in the manuscript. Authors must provide this information accurately and completely through both the manuscript funding statement and the journal’s submission metadata or disclosure fields, where requested. The funding statement should identify the funder or funders, relevant grant or award number(s) where applicable, and, where relevant, the role of the funder or sponsor in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit the work for publication; if the funder or sponsor had no such role, this should be stated explicitly. General institutional support for an author’s time should be distinguished from direct support for the reported work. If no specific funding or direct material support was received for the work, this should be stated explicitly.

To support accurate indexing and metadata, authors should provide funder names and grant numbers accurately and consistently and, where requested by the journal or submission system, use standardized funder names or identifiers.

Funding disclosures do not replace authors’ obligations to disclose competing interests separately under the journal’s conflict-of-interest policy.

 

2.3 Reviewers’ responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to provide written, informed, objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of manuscripts within the agreed timeframe. Reviews should focus on the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s scope, methodological rigor, technical soundness, ethical standards, clarity of reporting, and the validity and importance of the work for the journal’s readership.

Reviewers should assess whether the research question, methods, analysis, interpretation, and conclusions are appropriate and adequately supported by the data presented. They should also identify important relevant work that has not been cited where this is necessary for accuracy, context, or scholarly completeness. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate; comments should be expressed clearly, respectfully, and with supporting reasons. Recommendations should be supported by clear reasons and should distinguish essential concerns from optional suggestions for improvement.

Reviewers should promptly notify the Editor of any well-founded concerns or the knowledge of possible violations of ethical standards by the authors, including suspected plagiarism, substantial overlap with published or submitted work, duplicate or redundant publication, inappropriate citation practices, serious methodological flaws, or concerns relating to research ethics or reporting. If reviewers become aware of a possible simultaneous or parallel submission of the same manuscript to another journal or publisher, they should notify the Editor.

Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest or other relationships or activities that could reasonably be perceived to affect their review, and they must decline the review if such a conflict exists or if they cannot provide an impartial assessment. Any reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to assess a manuscript, or who cannot complete the review in a timely manner, should inform the Editor without delay and decline the invitation where appropriate. Reviewers must not involve another person in the review of a manuscript without prior permission from the Editor; if such permission is granted, the reviewer must ensure that confidentiality is maintained.

Manuscripts and all associated review materials must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, retain, or use unpublished manuscript content, data, interpretations, or ideas for personal, professional, or financial advantage. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own work without the authors’ express written consent. Reviewers should not retain manuscript files for personal use and should delete or destroy copies of the manuscript and related materials after completing the review, subject to the journal’s systems and recordkeeping needs.

Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts or related review materials to generative AI systems or other external AI tools where confidentiality cannot be assured. Generative AI must not be used to generate the substantive scientific assessment or replace the reviewer’s independent judgment. Limited use for language editing, grammar, clarity, or organization of a reviewer-written report is permitted, provided that no confidential manuscript content is disclosed to an external system, the reviewer verifies the final text, remains fully responsible for the review, and discloses such use to the Editor where required by journal policy. Any limited AI-assisted use expressly permitted by the journal must be disclosed to the Editor, and the reviewer remains fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, confidentiality, and integrity of the review.

Additional requirements relating to the journal’s peer-review model, reviewer anonymity, and restrictions on the use of AI tools in peer review are set out in the journal’s Peer Review and AI-use policies.

2.4 Peer review

After submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated handling editor to determine whether it is suitable for the journal’s scope, meets basic standards of scholarly and ethical quality, and is sufficiently prepared for external review. Manuscripts that are clearly outside the journal’s scope or do not meet the journal’s basic requirements may be declined without external peer review.

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings applies article-type-specific peer review. Original Research articles and Brief Reports undergo double-anonymous (double-blinded) peer review by at least two independent peer reviewers; authors are required to prepare these manuscripts for anonymized review. Invited or commissioned mini-reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and case reports/case series undergo single-anonymous (single-blinded) peer review by at least two independent peer reviewers; invitation or commission does not guarantee acceptance. Editorials, viewpoints, commentaries, correspondence, and other non-research front-matter are assessed by the editors and may also be sent for independent peer review at editorial discretion.

The journal ordinarily seeks reports from at least two independent peer reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers may include external experts or suitably qualified Editorial Board members, provided they are independent of the manuscript, have no relevant competing interests, and are not involved in the editorial decision-making for that submission. Reviewers act independently and are not informed of one another’s identities.

Reviewers are selected by the editor-in-chief or handling editor on the basis of being knowledgeable about the subject area of the manuscript and independence. Reviewers should not have conflicts of interest that could reasonably affect, or be perceived to affect, their judgment; the journal avoids selecting reviewers with obvious competing interests, including reviewers from the same institution as any of the authors. The journal also seeks to avoid selecting reviewers who have recent joint publications or other close collaborative relationships with any of the authors. Reviewers provide independent assessments, and, where needed, the journal may invite additional expert review.

Peer review is intended to support fair and informed editorial decision-making and to help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewer and editor assessment focuses on relevance to the journal’s scope, methodological rigor, technical soundness, ethical and reporting standards, clarity of presentation, and whether the conclusions are adequately supported by the data. In the main review phase, the Editor sends submitted manuscripts to the number of reviewers experts in the field. Reviewers may be asked to complete the journal’s structured review form and to provide comments for both the authors and the editors. The form uses a brief structured assessment with narrative comments, including the manuscript’s principal merits, any major issues, minor or optional suggestions, and confidential comments to the Editor where appropriate.

If reviewer recommendations differ materially, if the reports are insufficiently reasoned, or if additional specialist input is required, the handling editor may seek one or more additional reviews or make an editorial decision based on the full record. The editorial team monitors the quality, relevance, and objectivity of reviewer reports and may obtain further review where there is a reasonable concern about the fairness or adequacy of a review. Following revision, the handling editor may return the manuscript for further external review or may make a decision on the basis of the revised submission and the full review record, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions.

During editorial assessment or peer review, authors may be asked to provide additional information or documentation needed for evaluation, such as raw data, reporting checklists, study protocols, statistical analysis plans, ethics documentation, supplementary files, or other materials relevant to the manuscript. Such materials are handled confidentially within the editorial and peer-review process.

The journal aims to complete the first round of independent peer review within approximately 4 weeks after a manuscript is sent for review. This timeframe is indicative only and may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the submission, and whether additional review is needed.

Editors, editorial board members, guest editors, and other individuals with an editorial role in the journal may submit manuscripts to the journal. Any such submission is handled under an independent editorial process: the author-editor is removed from all editorial tasks for that paper and excluded from all editorial consideration and decision-making for that manuscript, and responsibility is assigned to another qualified handling editor with no relevant conflict of interest. The same standards and peer-review procedures apply as for all other submissions. Any special-issue or guest-edited submission is subject to the same editorial standards, conflict-management procedures, and peer-review requirements as regular submissions, under the oversight of the Editor-in-Chief or another independent editor.

Where any article type is handled by editorial review rather than external peer review, the applicable review route is stated clearly in the journal’s article-type policies or author instructions.

2.5 Post-publication discussions

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings encourages responsible post-publication scholarly discussion of published articles. Where appropriate, the journal will ordinarily give the authors of the published article an opportunity to respond to substantive post-publication comments or concerns. Comments may be submitted as letters to the editor, and the journal may also take into account substantiated concerns raised on external moderated platforms such as PubPeer. Where warranted, post-publication concerns will be assessed editorially and, where necessary, investigated in accordance with the journal’s complaints, investigations, and post-publication correction or retraction policies; this may lead to a correction, clarification, expression of concern, retraction, or another appropriate update to the scholarly record.

Any formal post-publication notice will be published in a citable form and linked to the relevant article to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

2.6 Use of Large Language Models and generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools

The journal’s policy on the use of artificial intelligence in scholarly publishing is informed by current guidance from the ICMJE, WAME, and COPE. Large language models, chatbots, and other AI-assisted tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors because they cannot assume the responsibility and accountability required for authorship, including responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work. Human authors remain fully responsible for all submitted content, including any text, data displays, code, or images produced with AI assistance.

Authors must disclose at submission, and in the manuscript where applicable, any substantive use of large language models, chatbots, image creators, or other generative AI tools in producing the submission. The disclosure should identify the tool used and describe how it was used. Where applicable, authors should also report the model or version used and provide sufficient methodological detail to allow readers and editors to understand and assess how the tool contributed to the work; for research uses of AI, this should include prompts or other operational details where relevant to reproducibility. Use of AI for writing assistance should generally be disclosed in the Acknowledgments or other appropriate section; use affecting data collection, data generation, code generation, analysis, interpretation, or figure generation should be described in the Methods or other relevant section. Authors must carefully review and verify all AI-assisted content, ensure appropriate attribution and citation, and must not cite AI-generated output as an author or as a primary source in support of factual claims, analyses, or conclusions. Nondisclosure of relevant AI use may require editorial action and, in some circumstances, may be treated as misconduct. Concealment or nondisclosure of relevant AI use is unacceptable and may be treated as a breach of publication ethics. The use of AI-based tools for copyediting and spell checking does not need to be declared.

Generative AI or other AI-assisted tools must not be used to create, alter, enhance, remove, or insert features in images, audio, or video in a way that could misrepresent original data, clinical material, or other evidentiary content. Any disclosed use of AI-assisted tools for figure or media creation or modification that does not affect the evidentiary integrity of the material will be evaluated by the journal on a case-by-case basis. Use of non-generative software tools to adjust, combine, or enhance existing images or figures without altering their scientific meaning must also be disclosed where relevant, including in the figure caption where appropriate, and may be reviewed by the journal on a case-by-case basis.

To protect confidentiality and the integrity of peer review, editors and reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, peer-review reports, or related confidential materials to generative AI systems or other external AI tools. Generative AI must not be used to generate the substantive scientific assessment or replace the reviewer’s independent judgment. Limited use for language editing, grammar, clarity, or organization of a reviewer-written report is permitted, provided that no confidential manuscript content is disclosed to an external system, the reviewer verifies the final text, remains fully responsible for the review, and discloses such use to the Editor where required by journal policy. Any editorial or production use of AI must remain consistent with confidentiality, transparency, and editorial oversight. Editors remain responsible for ensuring that any permitted internal editorial or production use of AI is subject to human oversight, does not compromise confidentiality, does not replace editorial judgment, and is consistent with the journal’s transparency requirements.

Related requirements on authorship, acknowledgements, reviewer confidentiality, and misconduct are addressed elsewhere in the journal’s authorship, peer-review, and publication-ethics policies.

2.7 Procedures for dealing with complaints and appeals

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings welcomes complaints and appeals concerning editorial processes, peer review, publication ethics, published content, or the conduct of authors, reviewers, editors, journal staff, or the journal itself. Concerns about suspected misconduct or ethical problems may be raised at any stage before or after publication by authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, funders, or other relevant parties.

A complaint concerns the journal’s processes, conduct, or published content. An appeal is a request for reconsideration of an editorial decision. Complaints and appeals must be submitted in writing to editor@jprls.org and should include sufficient detail, relevant documents, and any supporting evidence necessary for fair assessment. Appeals against editorial decisions should clearly explain why the decision should be reconsidered and should identify any specific error in the editorial or peer-review process or provide relevant new information. Anonymous complaints may be considered where they are sufficiently specific and supported to permit proper evaluation.

All complaints, appeals, and misconduct concerns will be assessed fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with relevant COPE guidance and flowcharts. They will normally be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or, where this is inappropriate because of direct involvement or a conflict of interest, by another suitably independent editor or other appropriately qualified independent person appointed by the journal. Relevant parties will normally be given an opportunity to respond. The journal may request additional information or documents and may seek independent expert advice or clarification from institutions, funders, or other journals where appropriate. The journal may decline to pursue complaints or appeals that are abusive, repetitive without new evidence, or unsupported by sufficient information.

The journal will normally acknowledge receipt of a complaint or appeal within 7 working days and will aim to provide an initial update within 30 working days, although more complex cases may require additional time. Outcomes will be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the concern and may include clarification, correction of the record, editorial reassessment, additional peer review, expression of concern, retraction, notification of relevant institutions or funders, or other appropriate editorial action. Where a complaint or appeal raises concerns affecting the reliability, integrity, or ethics of the scholarly record, the matter will also be handled in accordance with the journal’s policies on corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions. Following reconsideration under these procedures, the journal’s decision on an appeal will normally be final.

2.8 Research and publication misconduct policy

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is committed to safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record. The journal will take reasonable steps to identify, assess, and address allegations of research or publication misconduct before or after publication. Such allegations may relate to submitted, accepted, or published manuscripts and may involve authors, reviewers, editors, or journal staff.

Research and publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to, plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, data fabrication, data falsification, deceptive image manipulation, unethical research or publication practices, undisclosed competing interests, authorship or contributorship misrepresentation, inappropriate use of confidential information, peer-review manipulation, citation manipulation, and other serious breaches of research, reporting, or publication ethics.

Concerns or allegations should be submitted in writing to editor@jprls.org with sufficient detail and supporting information to permit assessment. Anonymous allegations may be considered where they are specific, credible, and supported by adequate evidence.

Allegations will be assessed fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with relevant COPE guidance and flowcharts. They will normally be handled by the Editor-in-Chief or, where this is inappropriate because of direct involvement or a conflict of interest, by another suitably independent editor or other appropriately qualified independent person appointed by the journal. Relevant parties will normally be given an opportunity to respond. The journal may request original data, ethics documents, authorship explanations, disclosure information, peer-review records, or other relevant materials, and may seek clarification or assistance from institutions, employers, funders, ethics committees, other journals, or independent experts where appropriate.

The journal will evaluate each case on its merits and will take action proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the concern. Outcomes may include requests for clarification or correction, editorial reassessment, additional peer review, rejection of a submission, publication of a correction, expression of concern, retraction, removal or replacement of reviewers or editors from journal roles, notification of institutions, funders, or relevant authorities, or other appropriate editorial action. Where concerns affect the reliability, integrity, or ethical basis of the published record, the matter will also be managed in accordance with the journal’s corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions policy.

The journal does not normally make a final determination of institutional or legal misconduct where such determinations properly fall within the remit of employers, institutions, regulators, or courts. However, the journal reserves the right to act editorially to protect the scholarly record whenever there is sufficient reason to do so.

This policy should be read together with the journal’s policies on complaints and appeals, peer review, authorship and contributorship, conflicts of interest, ethical oversight, and corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions.

2.9 Retraction policy

The journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, retraction, retraction and republication, removal from public view, or another appropriate post-publication notice to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. Retraction may be warranted where there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, whether because of major error or misconduct; where there is fabrication, falsification, serious image or data irregularity, plagiarism, multiple submission, duplicate or redundant publication, unethical research, peer-review or publication-process manipulation, material authorship or contributorship misrepresentation, serious undisclosed competing interests affecting interpretation, major legal or copyright infringement, or material undisclosed use of generative AI or related tools where the nondisclosure undermines the provenance, transparency, or reliability of the work. Honest error may justify correction, retraction, or retraction and republication, depending on its nature and its effect on the reliability of the article.

Errors introduced during submission handling, editing, production, or publication will normally be addressed through correction, versioning, or republication rather than retraction, unless the published article has thereby become materially unreliable. Where a concern is serious but the available evidence is inconclusive or an institutional investigation is ongoing, the journal may publish an expression of concern pending resolution. Where an article is corrected and republished, the republished version will carry its own clear citation information and updated metadata, and the relationship between the original and republished versions will be made transparent.

Retraction notices will be published promptly in citable form, will be prominently labeled, and will be freely accessible. Retraction notices will be clearly identified, linked to the original article, and will state the reason for retraction and who is issuing the notice, with sufficient detail to distinguish misconduct from honest error where appropriate. The original article will normally remain online to preserve the scholarly record, but it will be clearly marked as retracted in all available versions and metadata. In the journal’s online version, the retraction notice and the original article will be cross-linked. The journal may add a clear watermark such as “Retracted” to the article PDF. Removal from public view will be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as legal requirements, court order, defamation, copyright infringement requiring takedown, or serious breach of privacy or patient confidentiality arising from continued public availability.

 

3.     Research data, code, protocol sharing, and preregistration

3.1 Research data sharing

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings encourages authors to make the data and, where relevant, the analytic code, study protocols, statistical analysis plans, and other materials underlying the reported work available to the extent that this is ethically, legally, and practically possible, under the principle “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.” Shared materials should be sufficiently documented to allow readers to understand, assess, verify, and, where appropriate, reuse the work. Authors are expected to retain the primary data and analytic procedures underpinning the published results and to cooperate with reasonable journal requests for data or related information if questions arise before or after publication. The journal may request access to underlying data or related materials for editorial assessment or investigation, even where those materials are not publicly shared.

All manuscripts reporting original research must include a Data Availability Statement. This statement should specify whether the underlying data, analytic code, protocol, and other relevant materials are publicly available; where they can be accessed; and any conditions of access. Where materials are deposited in a repository, authors should cite the repository name and the relevant persistent identifier or accession number. Where the underlying data or related materials cannot be made openly available, the Data Availability Statement must explain the reason for the restriction, describe the nature of the restriction, and state whether and how access may be requested. The Data Availability Statement will form part of the published article. Unless the journal’s article template specifies otherwise, the Data Availability Statement should appear in a distinct section of the manuscript before the reference list.

Deposit in a trusted disciplinary, institutional, or general-purpose repository that supports persistent identifiers, stable metadata, and clear repository standards is strongly encouraged. Authors may use services such as re3data and other repository-discovery tools to help identify an appropriate repository. Where feasible, authors should share the minimum dataset and accompanying documentation needed to interpret and verify the findings. This may include data dictionaries, metadata, readme files, analytic code, software version information, study protocols, and statistical analysis plans. Where feasible, deposited data should include an open, non-proprietary file format and sufficient labeling and documentation, such as sensible variable names, metadata, data dictionaries, and readme files, to allow third parties to understand and reuse the material. Where appropriate and legally permissible, shared datasets should be made available under an open license that allows access and reuse. Where possible, authors should choose a repository with a clear sustainability or long-term preservation model.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that any sharing of data or other materials complies with participant consent, ethics approval, privacy and data-protection requirements, copyright, contractual obligations, and other applicable legal or regulatory requirements. Where open sharing is not possible, authors should still provide descriptive metadata and a clear access statement so that readers can understand what data or materials exist and, where applicable, how access may be requested. Where human data cannot be effectively de-identified, the data must not be shared publicly unless participants have provided explicit written consent for public release of identifiable information. Where access is restricted for ethical, privacy, security, or regulatory reasons, authors should also state any relevant conditions of access and, where applicable, whether the ethics committee or other oversight body imposed specific limits on sharing. Where relevant, the manuscript should also state what, if anything, the approving ethics committee, institutional review board, or other oversight body required or permitted regarding data sharing. Research involving human participants, human material, or human data must have been conducted in accordance with applicable ethical standards and, where required, approved by an appropriate ethics committee; where applicable, informed consent to participate and any required consent for data sharing or publication must have been obtained.

3.1.1 Ethical and security considerations

If access is restricted for ethical, legal, privacy, intellectual-property, or security reasons, the manuscript must state:

  • the nature of the restriction;
  • whether any form of controlled access is permitted under the relevant consent, ethics, or governance framework; and
  • the contact point, repository, or other mechanism by which access requests may be considered, together with the applicable conditions of access.

In addition to the above data-sharing expectations, manuscripts reporting clinical trials must comply with applicable trial-registration and data-sharing requirements. Clinical trials should be registered in a publicly accessible registry at or before first participant enrollment, and manuscripts reporting clinical trials must include the registry name, registration number, and the required data sharing statement. For other study designs, preregistration is encouraged where an appropriate public registry exists; where preregistration has been undertaken, the registry name and registration number should be reported in the manuscript.

Related requirements on code availability, protocol sharing, and preregistration are addressed in the journal’s corresponding policy sections.

3.1.2 Data protection issues

To protect participant privacy and confidentiality, data from research involving human participants, human material, or human data must be shared only in a manner consistent with ethics approval, applicable law, participant consent, and accepted standards for de-identification. Where data cannot be sufficiently de-identified, they must not be made publicly available unless publication or sharing of identifiable data is scientifically justified and the participant, parent/guardian, or other legally authorized representative has provided explicit written consent for such disclosure. Research involving human participants, human material, or human data must have been conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and, where applicable, approved by an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board.

All original research manuscripts must include a Data Availability Statement. At this journal, the statement should appear before the References. It must state whether the data supporting the findings are publicly available; where and under what conditions they can be accessed; and, where relevant, the repository name and persistent identifier (for example, a DOI or accession number). Where code, protocols, statistical analysis plans, or other supporting materials are available, these should also be identified in the statement.

If data cannot be made openly available because of privacy, confidentiality, consent, legal, contractual, intellectual-property, or security constraints, the Data Availability Statement must include:

  • a concise explanation of the restriction;
  • whether any de-identified subset, metadata, code, or other intermediary material can be shared without compromising privacy;
  • the position of the relevant ethics committee or institutional review board on data sharing, where applicable; and
  • where relevant, the mechanism by which access requests may be considered, including the contact point, repository, data access process, and conditions of access.

Statements that data are available only “on reasonable request” are permitted where public deposition is not feasible or appropriate and the basis for the restriction and access route are clearly explained.

Where data are deposited, authors are encouraged to use trusted repositories that support long-term preservation, persistent identifiers, clear licensing, and adequate metadata. Publicly shared data should, where feasible, be provided in open or widely reusable formats and be accompanied by sufficient documentation to permit interpretation, validation, and appropriate reuse. Open licenses are encouraged where lawful and appropriate, but more restrictive access or licensing arrangements may be justified when required by ethics, consent, law, or other legitimate constraints.

Examples of Data Availability Statements include:

  • “The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT IDENTIFIER OR LINK].”
  • “The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available because [REASON] but are available through [CONTROLLED ACCESS MECHANISM OR CONTACT POINT] under the conditions described above.”
  • “Data sharing is not applicable to this article because no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.”
  • “All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.”
  • “The data that support the findings of this study are available from [THIRD PARTY NAME], but restrictions apply to their availability; the data may be available from the authors with permission of [THIRD PARTY NAME].”

(Readers can visit Data Science Journal for further information)

3.2 Code sharing

Authors are encouraged to share any code, scripts, workflows, or computational procedures used to generate, process, analyze, or visualize the data reported in the manuscript, particularly author-generated code that is necessary to understand or reproduce the study findings. If proprietary or commercial software was used, the manuscript should report the software name, version, and, where relevant, the manufacturer or provider. This information should normally be reported in the Methods section.

Where feasible, code should be deposited in a trusted public repository that supports persistent identifiers and versioning. Authors are encouraged to provide sufficient documentation to enable reuse and reproducibility, such as a readme file, installation and usage instructions, operating-system or computing-environment details, programming language and package information, software dependencies and versions, and any other information needed to run the code. Where sharing the original data is not possible, authors should provide, where feasible and appropriate, simulated, synthetic, test, or otherwise non-identifiable sample data sufficient to demonstrate code structure and execution.

For studies in which custom code, scripts, models, or mathematical algorithms are material to the reported findings, authors should include a Code Availability Statement. This statement should describe the code, indicate where it can be accessed, provide the repository name and persistent identifier or version information where available, and explain any restrictions on access. A separate Code Availability Statement is preferred and should appear immediately after the Data Availability Statement where applicable.

(Readers can refer to force11.org for further information)

3.3 Experimental protocols sharing

Authors are encouraged to share sufficiently detailed study protocols, laboratory methods, intervention procedures, questionnaires, manuals, or other step-by-step materials that would help readers understand, assess, or replicate the work. Protocols may be deposited in a suitable protocol-sharing platform or other trusted repository. Where a protocol is publicly available, authors should provide the citation and persistent identifier or link in the manuscript and at submission.

Where relevant, authors are also encouraged to make available associated documents such as statistical analysis plans, data dictionaries, or other supporting materials that are important for interpretation or reproducibility.

3.4 Preregistration

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings supports preregistration of research and, where appropriate, preregistration of study protocols and analysis plans in public registries or repositories. For clinical trials, prospective registration in a publicly accessible registry at or before first participant enrolment is required. For other study designs, preregistration is encouraged where a suitable public registry or repository exists.

Authors should indicate at submission whether the study, or any part of it, was preregistered. Where preregistration has been undertaken, the manuscript should report the registry or repository name, registration number or identifier, registration date, and public link in the Methods section. Any material deviations from the preregistered protocol or analysis plan should be disclosed and explained in the manuscript.

 

4.     Open Access policy

The Journal of Pediatrics in Resource-Limited Settings is an open access journal. All published content is made freely and immediately available online to all readers upon publication, without subscription, embargo, or registration requirements. In keeping with the standard understanding of open access, users may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, and link to the full text of articles, and may use the content for any lawful purpose, subject to the terms of the applicable license.

4.1 Article-related charges

The journal does not charge subscription or access fees to readers. At present, the journal does not charge authors any submission, peer-review, editorial processing, page, color, or publication fees. Any author-facing fees or fee changes, if introduced, will be stated clearly and separately on the journal website.

4.2 Self-archiving policy

Authors may deposit and share their preprints, Author Accepted Manuscripts (AAMs), and Versions of Record (VoRs) in institutional, disciplinary, or general-purpose repositories of their choice, as well as on personal or departmental webpages and scholarly networking or profile platforms, without embargo. When sharing the AAM or VoR, authors should provide full bibliographic details of the published article and include the article DOI and the applicable license information.

4.3 Copyright and licensing

Authors retain copyright in their work. By publishing in the journal, authors grant the journal a non-exclusive right to publish the article, to identify itself as the original publisher, and to distribute the article in all media and formats. Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. This license permits sharing and adaptation, including for commercial use, provided appropriate attribution is given and any changes are indicated. The applicable license will be stated on the article webpage and in the published full text.

Authors may also enter into separate, additional non-exclusive arrangements for distribution or reuse of the published version, provided that the original publication in this journal is acknowledged.

4.4 Metadata policy

Journal- and article-level metadata are made openly available to support discovery, indexing, linking, and reuse. The journal’s metadata may be reused without restriction under the CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication, except where a metadata element is not owned by the journal or cannot legally be waived. This metadata policy is separate from the copyright and license that apply to the full-text article content.

4.5 Disclaimer

The opinions and statements expressed in published articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors, editorial board, or publisher. Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and legal and ethical compliance of their work. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the journal, editors, and publisher disclaim responsibility for errors in, or consequences arising from the use of, published content. Publication of an article does not constitute endorsement by the journal, editors, editorial board, or publisher of the article’s content, conclusions, or any products or services mentioned.