Scope and Relevance
Manuscripts must align with journal focus and provide meaningful value for schizophrenia research practice or science.
Editorial Governance and Integrity
Editorial Policies
Editorial Policies
Journal of Schizophrenia Disorders And Therapy
Understand the policy framework that governs fair review, integrity controls, and publication reliability in JSDT.
45%APC Savings
ClinicalResearch Reach
FastEditorial Routing
Policy Foundation
Editorial Policies for Fair, Rigorous Publication
JSDT editorial policies are designed to protect scientific quality, ethical integrity, and decision transparency.
Journal of Schizophrenia Disorders And Therapy applies consistent policy standards across all manuscript categories to ensure fair treatment and defensible editorial outcomes.
Policy implementation emphasizes methodological rigor, reporting completeness, ethics compliance, and conflict transparency from submission through publication.
Authors and reviewers are expected to engage constructively within these standards to support reliable evidence dissemination.
Core Policy Areas
Governance Topics Applied During Review
Editorial decisions are informed by documented policy criteria rather than informal preference.
Research Integrity
Screening includes plagiarism checks, data consistency review, and image integrity vigilance.
Ethics and Consent
Human and animal research must document oversight approvals and consent compliance.
Conflict Disclosure
Financial and non-financial relationships must be declared for transparent editorial assessment.
Peer Review Conduct
Review quality, confidentiality, and evidence-based critique are required for valid recommendations.
Corrections and Retractions
Post-publication updates follow formal pathways to maintain record reliability.
Decision Transparency
How Editorial Judgments Are Communicated
Clear and proportionate decision messaging is central to policy-compliant editorial practice.
- Editorial decisions include concise rationale and prioritized revision expectations.
- Major methodological concerns are separated from formatting and presentation issues.
- Appeal requests are reviewed through evidence-based interventions and documented outcomes.
- Policy-based rejection decisions reference key scope or quality criteria where relevant.
- Revision rounds focus on verifiable improvements and unresolved scientific concerns.
- Final acceptance requires completion of ethics, disclosure, and production readiness checks.
Consistent decision communication improves author response quality, reviewer efficiency, and governance traceability.
Where disagreements occur, documented policy framing helps preserve fairness and professionalism in editorial interaction.
Post-Publication Governance
Maintaining the Integrity of the Published Record
Publication quality responsibilities continue after article release through correction and update controls.
If significant errors are identified, JSDT evaluates corrective actions proportionate to impact, from clarification notes to formal corrections or retractions when required.
Version control and record transparency help readers and citing authors interpret the most current article status reliably.
Policy adherence at post-publication stage protects clinical trust and supports responsible reuse of published schizophrenia research evidence.
Authors are expected to cooperate with post-publication inquiries when substantiated concerns are raised.
Policy objective: preserve scientific reliability while ensuring fair and transparent handling of all submissions and published articles.
Transparent policy application helps preserve fairness across article categories and author backgrounds.
Integrity checks at intake protect reviewer time and publication reliability.
Clear correction and retraction pathways maintain trust in the published record.
Appeal interventions should remain evidence-based, documented, and time-bounded.
Conflict disclosures are active governance inputs and must be managed consistently.
Transparent policy application helps preserve fairness across article categories and author backgrounds.
Integrity checks at intake protect reviewer time and publication reliability.
Clear correction and retraction pathways maintain trust in the published record.
Appeal interventions should remain evidence-based, documented, and time-bounded.
Conflict disclosures are active governance inputs and must be managed consistently.
Transparent policy application helps preserve fairness across article categories and author backgrounds.
Integrity checks at intake protect reviewer time and publication reliability.
Clear correction and retraction pathways maintain trust in the published record.
Appeal interventions should remain evidence-based, documented, and time-bounded.
Conflict disclosures are active governance inputs and must be managed consistently.
Transparent policy application helps preserve fairness across article categories and author backgrounds.
Integrity checks at intake protect reviewer time and publication reliability.
Clear correction and retraction pathways maintain trust in the published record.
Appeal interventions should remain evidence-based, documented, and time-bounded.
Conflict disclosures are active governance inputs and must be managed consistently.
Transparent policy application helps preserve fairness across article categories and author backgrounds.
Integrity checks at intake protect reviewer time and publication reliability.
Clear correction and retraction pathways maintain trust in the published record.
Submit Within Clear Editorial Policy Standards
Use the journals submission pathways with complete ethics, disclosure, and reporting documentation for smoother review.
Editorial office: [email protected]
