FAQ
Can the peer review process be expedited?
The editors cannot speed up the peer review process. It would be at the expense of its quality, which is unacceptable for us. In most cases, papers are improved in response to peer review, even those that are rejected and ultimately published in another journal. Therefore, shortening and hasting this stage would be detrimental also for the quality of the manuscripts. Moreover, if the peer review process seems unnecessarily prolonged, the causes are usually beyond the control of editors. There is no guarantee that the suggested editors will agree to assess the manuscript, nor that reviewers will be found promptly following initial verification of the paper.
Why Adv Clin Exp Med does not permit any changes in the number or order of authors following the acceptance of the manuscript for publication?
The restrictions on changing the composition of the author’s team are intended to limit the possibility of unethical manipulation in this area. The practice of adding authors who had nothing to do with the creation of a given article had anything to do with it (or had, but to an extent that did not qualify them for co-authorship) is well known. Of course, it could also be that someone was actually forgotten about (especially in large teams spread over several centers) or that the team member of the team responsible for submitting the article to the journal registered the authors in a different order (e.g., alphabetical), assuming that modifications would be possible at the galley proof stage. However, not every error can be corrected at every stage of the manuscript assessment and editing. It may seem unfair that someone innocent suffers the consequences of someone else’s transgressions, but (unfortunately) it’s also wrong to leave wickets to people who lack both principles and inhibitions.
It is also worth mentioning that the corresponding author cannot be changed following the acceptance of the paper – there cannot be one corresponding author for contacts with editors and another one for contacts with readers following publication since it is not a honorary but a practical role.
Why should tables and figures be submitted as separate files and not pasted into the main body of the text?
We cannot guarantee that they will be placed exactly in the places in the paper you planned them – they will appear on the same page they are first referred to, but not necessarily below a given sentence.
Why the similarity index must be lower than 30%?
Our experience shows that high similarity index cannot be a result of simply using terms, acronyms and definitions accepted in this field of medicine, but of overuse of direct citations from other works. Please note that re-using fragments of one or more publications of one or more authors of the paper is also considered plagiarism (and is called self-plagiarism).
Why Adv Clin Exp Med does not accept a separate list of corrections a proper authors’ response to the galley proof?
Such way of conveying what corrections is markedly more to error than comments on the galley proof PDF – the editor has to transfer every single correction from one file to another.
Why aren't the authors allowed to change the galley proof files themselves, but can only make comments on the galley proof file?
Changing anything in the PDF itself renders it distorted and unusable for the editors (this includes both changes to the text and tables/figures, as well as adding watermarks). It is also unethical because the editors need to be able to track each correction the authors make.
Why are the authors allowed to correct published papers only in the form of published correction (erratum) and not by simply altering the version on the website?
First, as a rule, an article is not only posted on the journal's website, but also sent for indexing to a number of databases, and it is not possible to correct material once deposited in all of them. Thus, the editors could correct the version on their site, but in the databases the original version will already be circulating. Second, too frequent such corrections without a valid reason could end up with the journal losing credibility and being removed from the database in question. Finally, and most importantly, some databases explicitly make it a condition that once published as ahead of print an article can no longer be modified later – publication means that the material has taken its final form and cannot be changed without explicitly stating that a correction has been made.
Can the authors obtain the DOI of the paper before its publication as ahead of print?
No. An active DOI is the DOI of the published article. A DOI before publication is only a proposed one and does not allow for finding the article in the internet (and is therefore useless).
Why are there restrictions regarding number and size of panels in one figure?
All elements of each figure must be legible when viewed on an A4 page in a PDF file in full-screen mode, without zooming. Overtly complex figures with multiple charts/graphs combined into one panel cannot fulfill this requirement.
Why are there restrictions regarding references mentioned in tables?
References in tables should fit into the consecutive numeration of the references in place where a given table is first mentioned, and should be in the order they appear on the reference list. Randomness in the sequence of reference citing may confuse the readers and make the paper appear unprofessionally written and edited.
Why cannot be the graphical abstract a compilation of figures from the manuscript?
A graphical abstract should be comprehensible without the context of the text (self-explanatory), while the meaning of figures is usually unclear out of the context of the whole paper.
Can I send a manuscript by e-mail and ask whether the journal is interested in it?
No. We perform no pre-assessment of papers sent by e-mail regarding their scope or publication possibility. All manuscripts should be submitted to Editorial Office via electronic Editorial System. We do not assess manuscripts sent by post or e-mail.
Is there a possibility of rapid publication or rapid peer review for an extra fee?
No. We offer neither fast-track nor priority publication in any form.
Can there be 2 co-first or 2 co-corresponding authors of 1 paper?
No. There can be only 1 first author and 1 corresponding author for each manuscript (both functions can be also held by a single person). Adv Clin Exp Med does not permit co-first authorship and co-corresponding authors for any reasons. However, we offer to mark the names of 2 chosen Authors on the first page of the paper with asterisks [*] and to place a disclaimer [X and Y contributed equally to this work] on the same page.
Do all authors of a paper need to have ORCID?
No. Authors submitting their manuscripts to Wroclaw University Press journals are advised to use a unique ORCID number (Open Researcher and Contributor ID). However, it is not mandatory.
Why are the checklists mandatory for original papers, meta-analyses and reviews?
These tools are sometimes perceived by authors as an additional impediment to submitting an article to a journal, but choosing the right document of this type and adapting the manuscript to the requirements included in it are also important from the point of view of precisely the researchers responsible for the work in question. They reflect the increasingly widely accepted standards in scientific medical journals to which different types of articles should conform. If a paper is brought into compliance with the requirements appropriate to it, the chances of being published (and then cited) increase.
Checklists play an important role in the preparation of carefully written scientific papers – for authors, they serve as a tool to ensure the correct structure and content of the manuscript, which in turn increases the chances that a paper will be published in a journal with a high rejection rate. They serve this purpose only if authors not only select and complete an appropriate checklist, but also modify the manuscript to meet the requirements of a particular checklist. Therefore, it is advisable to select a checklist not when submitting the paper, but already when deciding on the type and form of the paper – changes (e.g., restructuring the Materials and Methods section) are then not necessary during the initial assessment by the editorial office following submission.
Why is data sharing mandatory for original papers, meta-analyses and reviews?
The first reason is to let reviewers check more deeply the findings presented. The second – to allow replication of given procedures or experiments by other researchers. The third – to provide access to the data to researchers who can conduct other research using them.
Why is it mandatory to provide DOI/PMID/ISBN for each reference (when such identifier is available)?
If the items do not contain DOI, PMID or (for books) ISBN identifiers, their entry into a reference manager will be much more time-consuming. Following publication, it will be much easier for the reader to find a given item in the Internet since the DOI or other number identifies its location directly and unambiguously.