Editorial Policies
JLCE follows ethical publishing practices to ensure trust in lung cancer epidemiology research.
Policies guide editors, reviewers, and authors through transparent decision making.
How peer review works at JLCE
Editorial screening
Editors confirm scope fit and technical completeness.
Single blind review
Reviewer identities are concealed while reviewers see author details.
Reviewer selection
At least two expert reviewers are invited.
Decision letters
Editors provide clear rationale and next steps.
Revision oversight
Revisions are checked for completeness and transparency.
Final checks
Production review verifies metadata and files.
Conflict checks
Editors and reviewers disclose conflicts and recuse when needed.
Ethics verification
Ethical compliance is verified before acceptance.
Integrity expectations
Originality
Manuscripts must be original and not under review elsewhere.
Data integrity
Fabrication or falsification results in rejection.
Authorship approval
All authors must approve the submission.
Ethics compliance
Approvals and consent must be documented.
Conflict disclosure
Financial and professional conflicts must be disclosed.
AI disclosure
AI assisted tools must be disclosed if used.
Plagiarism checks
Similarity screening is performed before review.
Image integrity
Image manipulation is not permitted.
Corrections, complaints, and appeals
Corrections
Errors are corrected with transparent notices.
Retractions
Serious issues result in retraction notices.
Expressions of concern
Issued when investigations are ongoing.
Appeals
Authors may appeal decisions with evidence based rationale.
Complaints
Concerns are reviewed by the editorial office.
Sanctions
Repeated misconduct may lead to publication bans.
Documentation
All decisions are recorded for accountability.
Timely response
We aim to address concerns promptly.
Confidentiality and reviewer expectations
Confidentiality
Reviewers must keep manuscripts confidential.
Conflict disclosure
Reviewers must declare conflicts promptly.
Professional tone
Feedback should be respectful and evidence based.
Objective evaluation
Reviews focus on methods and validity.
Data concerns
Integrity issues must be flagged to editors.
Timeliness
Reviewers should meet agreed deadlines.
Data and authorship transparency
JLCE requires data availability statements and clear description of access conditions. Transparent data policies strengthen reproducibility and trust.
Authorship changes after submission must be approved by all authors and documented by the editorial office.
Protecting author and reviewer trust
Editors and reviewers must keep manuscripts confidential and use submitted data only for review.
JLCE requires data availability statements and expects authors to describe access conditions clearly.
Authorship changes after submission must be approved by all authors and documented by the editorial office.
Reminders for authors and reviewers
Duplicate submission
Do not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals.
Image integrity
Maintain original image files for verification if requested.
Conflict disclosures
Update disclosures if funding or relationships change.
Ethics approvals
Include registry approvals and consent documentation.
Appeals process
Provide evidence based rationale if appealing a decision.
Corrections
Notify the journal promptly if errors are discovered.
How concerns are handled
Concerns about integrity, authorship, or conflicts are reviewed by the editorial office and documented for transparency.
If a complaint involves potential misconduct, the journal may contact relevant institutions for clarification.
Preparing an evidence based appeal
Provide evidence
Include data or methodological clarification supporting your appeal.
Address reviews
Respond directly to the key reviewer concerns.
Clarify changes
Explain any new analyses or corrections submitted.
Respect timelines
Submit appeals promptly after the decision.
Single blind review at JLCE
JLCE uses single blind review: reviewers see author details, while authors do not see reviewer identities.
Editors select reviewers based on methodological fit and absence of conflicts of interest.
We ask reviewers to focus on study design, data integrity, and public health relevance.
Checks applied during evaluation
Authorship verification
Author contributions and affiliations are reviewed for accuracy.
Conflict declarations
Funding and competing interests must be disclosed and updated.
Ethics documentation
IRB or registry approvals are verified when required.
Data transparency
Data availability statements are required and reviewed.
Decision integrity
Editorial decisions are based on methodological quality and relevance, not ability to pay.
Policy changes are communicated on the journal site to keep expectations transparent.
Need Support From JLCE?
For policy, submission, or editorial questions, contact [email protected].
