Information for Authors
1.1. Types of Publications
Manuscripts submitted to Frontiers in Bioscience-Landmark (Landmark) should neither be under consideration for publication in another journal nor previously published in another journal. The main article types considered for publication are:
• Articles: Reports of research on original works, includes Original Research, Short Communication, Rapid Report, Brief Report, etc. The journal considers all original research manuscripts provided that the work reports scientifically sound experiments and provides a substantial amount of new information. Authors should not unnecessarily divide their work into several related manuscripts, although Short Communications of preliminary, but significant, results will be considered. The quality and impact of the study will be considered during peer-review. Articles should follow but not limited to the following guidelines:
• Randomised trials: CONSORT
• Observational studies: STROBE
• Qualitative research: SRQR
• Diagnostic / prognostic studies: STARD
• Animal pre-clinical studies: ARRIVE
• Study protocols: SPIRIT
• Clinical practice guidelines: AGREE
• Reviews: This is a comprehensive overview of a specific hot topic aligned with addressing the aims and hypothesis through the literature. They are often written by leaders in a particular discipline. Reviews are often widely read (for example, by researchers looking for a full introduction to a field) and highly cited. Reviews commonly cite approximately 100 primary research articles. Systematic review is a type of literature review that uses systematic methods to collect secondary data, critically appraise research studies, and synthesize findings qualitatively or quantitatively. Systematic Reviews should follow the PRISMA guidelines.
• Case Report: A case report is a detailed report of the symptoms, signs, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of an individual patient in medicine. Case reports may contain a patient's demographic profile but usually describe an unusual or novel occurrence. Some case reports also contain a literature review of other reported cases. Case reports are professional narratives that provide feedback on clinical practice guidelines and offer a framework for early signals of effectiveness, adverse events, and cost. They can be shared for medical, scientific, or educational purposes. Case Report should follow the CARE guidelines.
• Editorial: Editorials are opinion articles from the editor or an invited author. When submitted by an invited contributor, editorials may introduce the subject being brought into focus in a special issue or thematic section. Editorials may comment on one or more articles in the same Landmark issue or on an area of current interest in Bioscience. They should be brief and focused. Editorials should not exceed 1,000 words, 15 references, and 1 table or figure. Editorials may have a maximum of 3 authors. The body of the Editorial can be continuous text or divided into subsections. There is no abstract. Editorials on topics of current interest are welcome.
1.2. Accepted File Formats
Authors must use the Microsoft Word template available on our website to prepare their manuscript. If this requirement presents a problem, please contact the Editorial Office (Front.Biosci.Landmark@fbscience.com). Accepted file formats are:
• Microsoft Word: Manuscripts must be converted into a single file before submission. When preparing manuscripts in Microsoft Word, the Landmark Microsoft Word template file must be used.
• Language: Manuscripts should be written in clear, concise English and should contain all essential data in order to make the presentation clear and the results of the study replicable. If the author is not a native English speaker, we recommend that you have your manuscript professionally edited before submission or read by a colleague proficient in English.
• Figures: Please save and submit figures as jpg. or tif. files (see below for further details).
• Supplementary Materials: These materials may be in any format, but it is recommended that authors use common, non-proprietary formats where possible (see below for further details).
1.3. Submission Process
• Manuscripts that are ready for submission should be scientifically sound and without errors in English (including spelling, grammar, proper sentence flow, etc.).
• Properly-formatted manuscripts should be submitted using the online submission page. Figures should be named according to the following format: figure1.jpg, figure2.jpg, etc., and submitted as separate files. TIFF images should not contain layers and preferably use Lempel-Ziv-Welch (LZW) compression as it does not reduce image quality. JPEG (only if originally saved at the highest quality) images are also acceptable. Tables can be inserted into the end of main manuscript or submitted as separate files.
• Please read the checklist carefully before submission.
• Manuscripts for Landmark should be submitted online at https://jour.ipublishment.com/bri. The submitting author, who is generally the corresponding author, is responsible for the manuscript during the submission and peer-review process. The submitting author must ensure that all eligible co-authors have been included in the author list (read the criteria to qualify for authorship) and that they have all read and approved the submitted version of the manuscript. To submit your manuscript, register and log in to the submission website.
• ORCID is an optional field which the submitting author can fill in. Landmark uses ORCID to clearly link authors and reviewers—and all their name variants—with their research work, by embedding ORCID IDs into their publication metadata and displaying them on finished publications. Therefore, we recommend that the author complete this optional field.
• When a manuscript is submitted, the corresponding author will receive a response within a few days regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in the Landmark.
• All manuscripts will be peer-reviewed by experts. A manuscript will be published if the manuscript receives a high impact score. Every attempt will be made to keep the duration of the review period to a minimum.
2.1. General Guidelines
Read submission review Guidelines to Authors, view a properly formatted sample document ready for submission.
2.1.1. Title Page (word template)
There should be a title page with the following:
The title of the manuscript in sentence form. No abbreviations other than gene names or abbreviations in common use are allowed.
• Full Names, Email Address and Affiliations Including Postal Codes of All Authors
Authors affiliations should reflect where their primary contribution to the research was made. Affiliations of the authors indicated by numbers (not symbols); equal contribution indicated by †.
• Corresponding Author and Corresponding Email Address
Clearly indicate who will handle correspondence at all stages of review, publication, and post-publication. Responsibilities includes answering any future queries concerning Methodology and Materials. Landmark allows up to two corresponding authors and when two are listed, no priority is given to either. The submitting author is required to be a corresponding author. Please provide the corresponding author Name, full postal address, including street number and name, and institutional email address.
• Author Contributions
Use this section to acknowledge contributions from each author listed on the manuscript. Authorship must include, and be limited to, those who have contributed substantially to the work. Please read the section concerning the criteria to qualify for authorship carefully.
• Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate
This section is required for all papers involving humans or animals.
Use this section to acknowledge contributions from non-authors.
List funding sources. As this section contains important information and many funding bodies require inclusion of grant numbers here, please check carefully that manuscript details are accurate and use standard spelling of funding agency names at https://search.crossref.org/funding, as errors may affect your future funding.
• Conflict of Interest
This section is required for all papers. Please read the section concerning the conflict of Interest carefully.
2.1.2. Cover Letter (word template)
Summarize briefly the important points of the submitted work including a brief description of the study to be submitted, that it is an original study presenting novel work, that it has not been previously submitted to or accepted by any other journal, that is has been approved by all authors, that ethics approval and written informed consent have been obtained, and explain whether any author has a conflict of interest.
2.1.3. Manuscript Content
The research articles, and technical notes contain a title, table of contents, abstract, keywords, introduction, materials and methods, result, discussion, author contributions, acknowledgment, conflict of interest, references, legends to figures, tables and figures, running title. If necessary, the result and discussion sections may be combined. Review articles and Case Report contain a title, table of contents, abstract, keywords, introduction, body of text, author contributions, acknowledgment, conflict of interest, references, legends to figures, tables and figures, running title. Editorial contain a title, body of text, conflict of interest, references.
2.2. Format of Manuscript
2.2.1. General Formatting Guidelines
• Format, revise, and correct the manuscript and save it as a MS Word document (not as a text or any other type of file). It is important that manuscripts should be written in clear, concise English and should be submitted free of grammar, spelling or scientific errors. Subsequent to submission of the manuscript, please do not send any other revised form of the same document. Such documents will not be used.
• If you are including text, tables or figures that were previously published, please obtain the permission of the publisher. By simply calling or writing to the publisher, you can easily obtain such permissions.
• If you are referring to previously published text, figure or table, please add the following comment to text, the figure or table legend "Reproduced with permission from, (ref #)".
• All terms such as et al, in situ, in vitro, in vivo, etc. should be italicized.
• Please do not use automatic numbering in table of contents, titles, subtitles or references. The numbering used by Word is proprietary and does not allow conversion to HTML documents. Please remove automatic numbering and manually number numbered items in text.
• All supplementary materials (where applicable) should be submitted through online submission system as separated files. All supplementary figures and tables must be referred to by sequential numbers in text.
• Do not include footnotes throughout the text. All footnotes must be included at the end of the references and referred to sequentially by superscripted numbers both in text and in footnotes.
• All files must be scanned for viruses prior to submission.
• Page Layout: General.
• Times New Roman. Font size 12. Single line spacing. Alignment Justified.
• The first line indents 0.5 inch of a new paragraph.
• Sub-headings and general headings should be presented in lower case letters (not capitals).
• Use either British English or American English spelling throughout your manuscript, but not both.
• Do not use page breaks in your manuscript.
• Divide your article into clearly defined and numbered sections. Subsections should be numbered 1.1 (then 1.1.1, 1.1.2, ...), 1.2, etc. Use this numbering also for internal cross-referencing: do not just refer to 'the text'. Any subsection may be given a brief heading.
The title of the manuscript in sentence form. No abbreviations other than gene names or abbreviations in common use are allowed.
• Table of Contents
Number section and subsection throughout the text according to the numbers in the table of contents.
This section should be structured and without references. Abbreviations that appear once only should be defined in full unless they correspond to a gene name. If abbreviations appear more than once, the definition should be provided once, and then subsequently used throughout the abstract.
Include at least five key words. Include the word "Review" for reviews. The first letter and abbreviations must be capped.
State the objectives of the work and provide an adequate background to clarify why the study was undertaken and what hypotheses were tested, avoiding a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results. The information in this section should always be referenced and must discuss the literature.
• Materials and Methods
The materials used and procedures conducted should be described with sufficient detail to allow others to replicate and build on published results. New methods and protocols should be described in detail while well-established methods can be briefly described and appropriately cited. Methods that have been published in detail elsewhere should not be described in detail and avoid unnecessary detailed descriptions of widely used techniques. SI Units should be used throughout the text. Reports of experiments involving patients and healthy volunteers must describe the steps taken to obtain consent and to maintain confidentiality. Experiments involving animals must conform to accepted ethical standards.
Statistical analyses should provide the name of the statistical test used, the number for each analysis, the comparisons of interest, the alpha level and the actual p-value for each test. It should be clear which statistical test was used to generate every p-value. Error bars on graphs should be clearly labeled, and it should be stated whether the number following the ± sign is a standard deviation or a standard error. The word ‘significant’ should only be used when referring to statistically significant results and should be accompanied by the relevant p-value. Significance indicators should be used on graphs and tables, and should be described in the figure or table legend, clearly indicating which groups are being compared. Describe any statistical software used to perform analyses.
Include a concise summary of the data presented in all display items (figures and tables). Excessive elaboration of data shown in display items should be avoided. Numerical data should be analyzed using appropriate statistical tests described in the Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis section. Authors must provide detailed information for each statistical test applied. If some references are needed to support the results they can be inserted in the Discussion section.
Reproducibility of Results and Statistical Analysis:
Submission of data for publication is an indication that the authors are confident of data reproducibility. Appropriate statistical analysis should be used to determine that the findings are significant. The term "significant" should be used only if such determination has been made. The probability of the significance should be stated. When reporting a new assay, the following data should be listed:
• Within-assay variability
• Between-assay variability
• Slope of the dose-response curve
• Mid-range of assay
• Sensitivity. Least detectable concentration
• Parallelism of the standard and the unknown on recovery
• Comparison with another method for the detection of the compound
This section should explore the significance of the results of the work, not repeat them. A combined Results and Discussion section is often appropriate. Avoid extensive citations and an overly discussion of published literature.
• Informed Consent Statement
Any research article describing a study involving humans should contain this statement. Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, date of birth or hospital numbers, images or statements should not be included in the manuscript unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) has provided written informed consent for publication. A statement must be included in the manuscript declaring that the patient, parent, guardian, or next of kin (in case of deceased patients) provided written informed consent for the publication of any associated data and accompanying images. The consent form must be made available to the Editor if requested, and will be treated confidentially.
• Figure Legends (do not place the reference to figure legends in table of contents)
• Tables (do not place the references to tables in table of contents)
• Running Title (do not place the reference to the running title in table of contents)
• Place a hard return after each paragraph.
• Indent each paragraph 0.5 inch.
• Place two returns after section titles and one return after subsection titles.
• Please cite references throughout the text in sequential numbers and place references inside parenthesis at the end of sentences throughout the text.
2.2.3. Page Arrangement
Article (word template)
Review and Case Report (word template)
Editorial (word template)
• Reference list is sorted numerically. The reference list should be limited to only those citations essential to the presentation.
• Please verify the accuracy of all references and check that all references have been cited in the text.
• Please list all authors’ names if the authors number less than 6. For the authors of more than 6, use "et al.".
• Please List the full name of journal, do not abbreviate the page number.
• Use the [number] for the references in the text.
Sample reference citation (Download EndNote style).
① Single Author
 Boyden EA. A critique of the international nomenclature on bronchopulmonary segments. Dis Chest. 1953; 23: 266-269.
② Two Authors
 McNarry AF, Goldhill DR. Simple bedside assessment of level of consciousness: comparison of two simple assessment scales with the Glasgow Coma scale. Anaesthsia. 2004; 59: 34-37.
③ More than 6 authors
 Churpek MM, Yuen TC, Park SY, Churpek MM, Yuen TC, Park SY, et al. Derivation of a cardiac arrest prediction model using ward vital signs. Crit Care Med. 2012; 40: 2102-2108.
 Kolacek S, Mestrovic J. Vascular access, including complications. In: Langnas AN, Goulet O, Quigley EMM,
Tappenden KA, editors. Intestinal failure, 1st ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing; 2008. p. 142-150.
 Lang TA, Secic M. How to report statistics in medicine. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians; 1997.
 Anninos PA, Tsagas N. Electronic apparatus for treating epileptic epileptic individuals. USA patent NO. 5453072, 1995.
(4) If there are non-English journals in the reference, please insert the journal language as the ending:
 Wiese L, Kurtzhals J A, Penkowa M. Neuronal apoptosis metallothionein expression. German Neurology 2006; 200: 216-226. (In German)
 Ricou B, Bandschap O. Propofol and perioperative inflammation. ClinicalTrials.gov 2010. accessable on: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01115179.
• Naming of chemicals should follow that outlined in Chemical Abstracts Service.
• Use standard abbreviations where possible. Use the generic name of any drug unless making claims about a specific brand or formulation.
• New abbreviations must be defined at first usage within the manuscript.
• Include tables at the end of the document.
• Do not submit tables in any other format such as an image, Excel file, PDF file, etc.
• Each table must be a real table with columns, rows and cells.
• Do not use tab to create tables.
• Each piece of information should reside in its own cell.
• Tables must be numbered sequentially in the text and in the table title.
• Do not place any period after the table title.
• Do not use any numbering style other than 1, 2, etc.
• Each table should have a short title. Any other text should be included at the bottom of the table and not in the table title.
• Please refer to any notation within the table with sequential superscripted numbers and not by any other attribute such as a, #, *, etc.
• Please cite references in the right column by numbers referenced in the reference section. Do not use the name of author followed by et al.
• If possible, please do not use abbreviations in tables.
• If abbreviations are used, please list them below the table such as IFN: interferon.
• If a figure has been previously published, please obtain permission from publisher and then add the comment "Reproduced with permission from, (reference number)." to the legend.
• Figures should be submitted as high resolution files (at least 300 dpi). Any previously published figure that is scanned, is low quality or has blurred image or text should be re-created and submitted as a high quality-high resolution file. Figures that do not have sufficient resolution, or clarity cannot be used for publication.
• Figures with a dark or black background do not display or print well. Submit figures with a bright or white background.
• For bar graphs use white, black and shades of gray. Do not use any other style such as hashed bar graphs, etc.
• For bar graphs, provide X and Y axis legend.
• If available, provide figures in color.
• Avoid using various types of fonts, or font sizes in any figure. Use the same type of font. Use “Arial font size 10” in all figures. If multiple fonts are required, they all should be clearly visible when reduced to the journal page size.
• Multi-part figures should be submitted as one figure with one figure placed on the top of the other.
• Do not leave any white space around or between different parts of the figure. Place all figures with the least amount of white space between them.
• Do not place figure legend, a title, figure number, or author’s name within any figure. Titles can be added to the figure legend if required. Legends must be included at the end of the document as a text.
• Do not box any bar graph or figure.
• In multi-part figures, place labels such as "A", "B", etc. in the left upper corner of each figure. If there are more than two parts to the figure put them in two column format with part A above B and C to the right of A and on the top of D.
• Please cite references within the figure legends by their numbers.
• Save and submit figures as jpg or tif files.
• Please number figures as follows fig1.jpg, fig2.jpg. Please do not use any other naming style. Please do not make the filenames in upper case.
• Do not include the “jpg” extension within the figure filename.
• Do not submit figures in any other file format such as PDF, PowerPoint, Word, GIF, etc.
2.2.8. Label Styles, Units and Symbols
Labels must be prepared according to our in‐house style, be phrased in accordance to the manuscript, and free of spelling and other language errors.
†:These authors contributed equally
§:The author's own special request
The SI system of units is preferred. For detailed advice please refer to the guidelines in Baron, DN (1988). Units, symbols and abbreviations, 4th edn. (Obtainable from The Royal Society of Medicine, 1 Wimpole Street, London W1M 8AE, UK).
• Always use a leading zero (0) before decimal points: 0.5 NOT .5.
• Decimal points must use a full stop/period (.) NOT a comma (,).
• A space must be inserted before measurement units: 132 bp NOT 132bp, 5 mm NOT 5mm, 1 h NOT 1h.
• Measurements must be written as:
* second(s): sec
* minute(s): min
* hour(s): h
* day(s): day(s)
* week(s): week(s)
* month(s): month(s)
* micro: μ, μ (available in Times and Helvetica) NOT u
• liter(s): L NOT l
* kilo Dalton: kDa NOT kD, Da, bp, kb
In order to ensure the integrity and scientific validity of blotting techniques (including, but not limited to, western blots) and gel data reporting, original, uncropped, and unadjusted images should be uploaded as Supporting Information files at time of initial manuscript submission.
A single PDF file or a zip folder containing all the original images reported in the main figure and supplemental figures is suggested. Authors should annotate each original image, corresponding to the figure in the main article or supplementary materials, and label each lane or loading order. All experimental samples and controls used for one comparative analysis should be run on the same blot/gel image. Different images should not be spliced together to illustrate the results.
Additional data and files can be uploaded as "Supplementary Files" during the manuscript submission process. The supplementary files will also be available to the referees as part of the peer-review process. Any file format is acceptable, however, we recommend that common, non-proprietary formats are used where possible.
Landmark follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.
5.1. Publication Ethics Statement
Publication of a scientific article represents the means through which the contribution of the scientists is recognized. Along with this recognition, the authors of a scientific article bear the responsibility to make certain that their contribution is original, reproducible, and clearly and honestly represented. It is not always possible to detect erroneous nature of a set of data during the peer-review process. Therefore, it is vital that all authors carefully review the accuracy of the data that they present.
Authors of the manuscript are obligated to:
• Refrain from plagiarism (total or partial submission of the work of others).
• Refrain from fabricating (falsifying) data.
• Refrain from dishonesty (altering or suppressing information).
• Refrain from submitting information previously published or under consideration for publication in another journal.
• Describe the work accurately.
• Provide the details necessary for the duplication of the data by other investigators.
• Include all the data even if they do not support a given hypothesis.
• Cite all the relevant contribution of other investigators and references that allow interpretation of the results.
• Include the source of all materials used.
• Make available all products that they generate such as protein, DNA, clone, cell or other types of material that they describe to other investigators. This should be done with the spirit that the data that are published can be duplicated and that other ideas can be tested.
• Abide by the rules set in the Declaration of Helsinki and Recommendation for Conduct of Clinical Research.
• Use laboratory animals for the research according to the rules and regulations of NIH and their institution.
• Use recombinant DNA for the research according to the rules and regulations of NIH and the institution.
• If errors and inaccuracies are found by the authors after publication of their paper, these issues need to be promptly communicated to the editors of this journal so that appropriate actions can be taken. Please refer to our policy regarding publication of publishing addenda and corrections.
Potential disputes over borders and territories may have particular relevance for authors in describing their research or in an author or editor correspondence address, and such issues should be respected. Content decisions are an editorial matter and where there is a potential or perceived dispute or complaint, the editorial team will attempt to come to a resolution that satisfies all parties involved.
Landmark stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Articles (e.g. Opinion, Review and Commentary articles) must cite appropriate and relevant literature in support of the claims made. Authors should consider the following guidelines when preparing their manuscript:
• Any statement in the manuscript that relies on external sources of information (i.e. not the authors’ own new ideas or findings) should use a citation.
• Authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
• Authors should ensure that their citations are accurate (i.e. they should ensure the citation supports the statement made in their manuscript and should not misrepresent another work by citing it if it does not support the point the authors wish to make).
• Authors should not cite sources that they have not read.
• Landmark discourages citation manipulations to inappropriately increase the number of citations of themselves, their Friends, etc.
• Authors should cite sources that have undergone peer-review where possible.
• Authors should not cite advertisements or advertorial material.
8.1. Author Contributions
An 'author' is generally considered to be someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study. According to the ICMJE guidelines, to qualify as an author one should have i) made substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; AND ii) been involved in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND iii) given final approval of the version to be published. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content; AND iv) agreed 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. Acquisition of funding, collection of data or general supervision of the research group alone; does not usually justify authorship.
The individual contributions of authors to the manuscript should be specified, and initials should be used to refer to each author's contribution (e.g. FC analyzed and interpreted the patient data regarding the hematological disease and the transplant. RH performed the histological examination of the kidney, and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript).If any changes to the list of authors of a manuscript are necessary after the initial submission but before publication, the corresponding author must contact the journal staff and provide a clear reason for the change.
If the change to the authorship list is appropriate and in keeping with the guidelines given above, the corresponding author will be asked to provide written confirmation that all other authors listed on the manuscript at that time give their consent. BRI will individually inform anyone who is added or removed from the author list.
All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the ‘Acknowledgment’ section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help or writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support. The involvement of scientific (medical) writers or anyone else who assisted with the preparation of the manuscript content should be acknowledged, along with their source of funding, as described in the European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) guidelines. The role of medical writers should be acknowledged explicitly in the ‘Acknowledgment’ section as appropriate.
8.3. Authorship Change
It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure that the list of authors is correct upon first submission. Requests to change authors (for example, adding or removing authors, author names, or contributing changes) must be accompanied by a letter signed by all authors stating that they agree to the changes. New authors must also confirm that they fully meet the journal authorship requirements.
Starting from 2021, all Landmark's content is available online, and is fully browsable and searchable. All Landmark papers are published as Open Access articles under the unrestrictive CC-BY license. The copyright is retained by the author(s).
BRI will insert the following note in the footer of the first page of the published text:
This is an open access article under the CC BY 4.0 license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
© 2021 The Authors. Published by BRI.
Authors can recommend two peers who could potentially be called upon to review the submitted manuscript. Recommended reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Please be aware of any conflicts of interest when recommending reviewers. Examples of conflicts of interest include (but are not limited to):
• The reviewer having prior knowledge of your submission.
• The reviewer has recently collaborated with any of the authors.
• Nominees from the same institution as any of the authors are not permitted.
• Please nominate peers who you do not wish to review your manuscript (i.e., opposed reviewers).
Please note that the Editors are not obliged to invite/reject any recommended/opposed reviewers to assess your manuscript.
Journal editors will check to make sure there are no conflicts of interest before contacting reviewers, and will not consider those with competing interests. Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest. The editorial team will respect opposed reviewer requests as long as this does not interfere with the objective and thorough assessment of the submission.
Authors, reviewers and editors must declare whether there are any competing interests with regard to the publication of a study. A competing interest exists when the authors’ interpretation of data or presentation of information may be influenced by, or may be perceived to be influenced by, their personal, political, academic relationships or financial relationship with other people or organizations, such as reimbursement for salaries, equipment or supplies, or a personal belief that may influence their objectivity and motivation, and consequently affect the data interpretation. This can include competing patents, grants, funding, employment, personal relationships and strong ethical beliefs, among other factors. Such conflicts must be declared, as they may affect the integrity or reliability of the science in the study, as well as that of otherwise unassociated studies in the same journal. The statements of competing interests for public funding sources, including government agencies, charitable or academic institutions, is best to be included.
Full disclosure of the competing interests is to be made in the cover letter and manuscript at the time of submission, even if the author judges that it has not influenced the work. If no conflict exists, this must also be stated clearly in the manuscript as follows: ‘Competing interests’: the authors declare that they have no competing interests’. And all authors should confirm its accuracy. If there is a conflict, please include it in a ‘Competing interest’ section. Examples of conflict of interest statements include ‘The present study was supported by Jones Women’s University, grant no. 12345’, 'XY University provided a graduate scholarship to Dr Jones’, ‘The compound xyz was kindly provided by ABC Company, city, country’. Authors may be asked to confirm or update, or provide further details regarding such disclosure statements following acceptance of the manuscript. Further details regarding requirements for conflict of interest statements are provided in http://www.icmje.org.
External peer-reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and they should disqualify themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if they believe it appropriate. Should any such competing interest be declared, the journal editor will judge whether the reviewer’s comments should be recognised or will interpret the reviewer’s comments in the context of any such declaration.
National Institute of Health (NIH) requires all manuscripts accepted for publication on or after April 7, 2008 which report research, that is funded in whole or in part by the NIH, to be submitted into PubMed Central (PMC). If you are funded by NIH, we are happy to assist you in depositing the author's published version of your article in the repository PubMed Central.
13.1. Preliminary Check:
All submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by the journal’s editorial office for compliance with guidelines for preparation of articles. Articles that do not comply with the guidelines will be sent back to the authors.
13.2. Plagiarism Check
Plagiarism is a serious issue in the world of academic publishing. Plagiarism is not only taking someone else’s work and using it as your own: there are different circumstances under which reproduced content can be considered “plagiarized”. We use a tool called iThenticate to scan every submission before peer-review.
Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review. Landmark operates double-blind peer-review.
13.4. Editor Decision and Revision
In cases where only minor revisions are recommended, the author is usually requested to revise the paper before referring to the external editor. Articles may or may not be sent to reviewers after author revision, dependent on whether the reviewer requested to see the revised version and the wishes of the Academic editor. Apart from in exceptional circumstances, we allow a maximum of two rounds of major revision per manuscript. The in-house editor will communicate the decision of the academic editor, which will be one of the following:
• Accept after Minor Revisions:
The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given seven days for minor revisions.
• Reconsider after Major Revisions:
The acceptance of the manuscript will depend on the revisions made to the manuscript. Authors need to provide a point by point response or a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within a suitable time frame, and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comments.
• Reject and Encourage Resubmission:
If additional experiments are needed to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected and the authors will be encouraged to re-submit the paper once further experiments have been conducted.
The article has serious flaws, and/or makes no original significant contribution. No offer of resubmission to the journal will be provided.
All reviewer comments should be responded to in a point-by-point fashion. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response.
13.5. Author Appeals
Authors may appeal a rejection judgement by sending an e-mail to the journal’s Editorial Office. The appeal must provide a detailed justification, including point-by-point responses to the reviewers' and/or Editor's comments. The Managing Editor of the journal will forward the manuscript and related information (including the identities of the referees) to the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, or Editorial Board member. The Editor being consulted will subsequently be asked to provide an advisory recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer-review, or uphold the original rejection decision. A reject decision at this stage is final and cannot be reversed.
Landmark carries out production on all manuscripts, including language editing, copy editing, and conversion to XML. Language editing is carried out by professional English editing editors.
The submitted, accepted and published dates will be shown in the PDF and HTML files of the published articles, a digital object identifier (DOI) number will also be assigned for each published article. The submitted date is the date on which the editors received the original (or if previously rejected, the resubmitted) manuscript. The accepted date is when the editor sends the acceptance letter. The published date is the earliest date that the final version-of-record is made available on the publisher's website.
Editorial independence dictates that decision to accept or reject a manuscript is based on the scientific merit of the article but not to any other relations for example pressure from the publisher to the journal editor. This means that Editor is independent in his/her decision and will not be under pressure of any influential body or organization.
Our editorial policy is consistent with the principles of editorial independence presented by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
Landmark requires that editorial staff or editors not be involved in processing their own academic work. The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in the journal. In these cases, the peer-review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board. Submissions will be assigned to at least two independent outside reviewers. The submitting Editor/Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process. Decisions will be made by other Editorial Board Members who do not have a conflict of interest with the author.
Guest Editors should not hold conflicts of interest with authors whose work they are assessing (e.g., from the same institution or collaborate closely). In this case, the Editor-in-Chief or a suitable Editorial Board member will make final acceptance decisions for submitted papers.
This section is required for all papers. If there are no interests to declare, please use the following wording: "Given his/her role as [Guest] Editor [in Chief], <NAME of Editor> had no involvement in the peer-review of this article and has no access to information regarding its peer-review. Full responsibility for the editorial process for this article was delegated to <NAME of delegated editor>".
Our Managing Editors encourage the Editors-in-Chief and Associate Editors to appoint diverse and expert Editorial Boards. We are proud to create equal opportunities without regard to gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, religion, or socio-economic status. There is no place for discrimination in our workplace, and editors of Landmark are to uphold these principles in high regard.