•  
  •  
 

Policies and Guidelines

Contents

Philosophy of Journal of Shock and Hemodynamics

For more information, please see Journal of Shock and Hemodynamics Aims and Scope page.

Who Can Submit?

Anyone may submit an original article to be considered for publication in Journal of Shock and Hemodynamics provided he or she owns the copyright to the work being submitted or is authorized by the copyright owner or owners to submit the article. Authors are the initial owners of the copyrights to their works (an exception in the non-academic world to this might exist if the authors have, as a condition of employment, agreed to transfer copyright to their employer).

{ top }

General Submission Rules

Submitted articles cannot have been previously published, nor be forthcoming in an archival journal or book (print or electronic). Please note: "publication" in a working-paper series does not constitute prior publication. In addition, by submitting material to Journal of Shock and Hemodynamics, the author is stipulating that the material is not currently under review at another journal (electronic or print) and that he or she will not submit the material to another journal (electronic or print) until the completion of the editorial decision process at Journal of Shock and Hemodynamics. If you have concerns about the submission terms for Journal of Shock and Hemodynamics, please contact the editors.

Editorial Oversight and Quality Assurance

JoSH maintains rigorous editorial oversight to ensure the scientific integrity of published content. All articles are evaluated for methodological soundness, clarity, reproducibility, and adherence to relevant reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, CARE). The editorial board regularly reviews published content and may issue corrections or editorial notes to uphold quality standards.

Data Availability and Transparency

Authors must include a Data Availability Statement in their manuscript, specifying where the data supporting the findings can be accessed. If data are not publicly available, authors must explain the reason (e.g., privacy concerns, proprietary restrictions). JoSH encourages the use of public repositories for datasets, code, and supplementary materials to promote transparency and reproducibility.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

All authors are required to disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that could influence the research or its interpretation. A Conflict of Interest Statement must be included in the manuscript. If no conflicts exist, authors should state: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

Authorship Criteria and Contributions

JoSH follows the CMJE guidelines for authorship. Each author must have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. Authors are encouraged to include an Author Contributions section in the manuscript, specifying each author's role (e.g., data analysis, manuscript writing, supervision).

Ethical Approval and Informed Consent

For studies involving human participants or animals, authors must provide a statement confirming that ethical approval was obtained from an appropriate review board and that informed consent was obtained. The name of the approving institution and reference number should be included. Manuscripts without this information will not be considered for review.

Retraction and Correction Policy

JoSH reserves the right to retract or correct published articles if significant errors, ethical breaches, or instances of misconduct are discovered post-publication. Authors will be notified and given an opportunity to respond before any action is taken. Retractions and corrections will be clearly marked and linked to the original article.

Open Access and Licensing

JoSH is an open-access journal. Articles are published under a Creative Commons license (e.g., CC BY 4.0), allowing free access and reuse with proper attribution. Authors retain copyright and grant JoSH the right to publish and distribute the work.

{ top }

Peer Review Policy

JoSH adheres to the guidelines and best practices that are published by professional organizations, including Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (PDF) from ICMJE and Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (joint statement by COPE, DOAJ, WAME, and OASPA). The Peer Review policy adheres to the recommendations outlined in the Council of Science Editors’ White Paper on Publication Ethics.

All manuscript submissions must be received electronically and are initially reviewed for novelty, compliance, and alignment with the scope of the Journal. Submissions that do not adhere to ethical principles or are beyond the scope of JoSH will be returned without external review. All submissions, including invited articles, undergo peer review, and acceptance is not guaranteed.

JoSH uses peer review for all articles except Houston Shock Symposium Proceeding Papers and any editorials. For these articles, an editorial board member and/or the Editor-in-Chief may provide a review of the document. If accepted, the article will be copyedited by the editorial office. Such manuscripts are NOT marked as “peer reviewed.” However, these manuscripts present opinions and information that are of value.

Peer Review Transparency

For submissions from editorial board members or journal editors, JoSH enforces a strict conflict-of-interest policy. These manuscripts are reviewed by external, independent reviewers with no affiliation to the journal or the authors. Editors involved in the submission recuse themselves from the review and decision-making process.

For all other submissions, a double-blind review process is utilized. The reviewers’ identities are not revealed to the authors. To the fullest extent possible, reviewers are blinded to authors’ names, institutions, and countries of origin, to ensure fair and unbiased reviews. Each manuscript (after being initially screened by the Journal’s staff) will be sent to at least two independent reviewers. The independent reviewers must have expertise that matches the manuscript topic. Reviewers’ comments are collected via the website or through a Review Form and sent to the Editor-in-Chief or a member of the editorial board for a final decision. An article may be rejected, accepted or revised. The decision is relayed to the authors alongside anonymized reviewer comments. The final decision on publication lies solely with the Editor-in-Chief.

If a revision is requested, authors must submit both a revised manuscript and a Response to Reviewers document. The Response to Reviewers file must provide a response to each of the reviewers’ comments in a point- by-point style. Revisions that do not include a point-by-point response to reviewers will be returned to the authors with a request for the missing item(s). Both documents are then forwarded to the original reviewers whenever possible. If only administrative revisions were requested, the revised manuscript will be processed by the editorial office. We know that reviewing a manuscript can be time-consuming, and we appreciate those who agree to serve as reviewers.

Reviewer Incentive Policy

JoSH follows a traditional, unpaid peer-review model while remaining committed to recognizing the valuable contributions of peer reviewers who uphold the quality, integrity, and rigor of its scholarly publications. To acknowledge the time and expertise of its reviewers, the journal offers small incentives ($20–$50 gift cards) as a token of appreciation.

Reviewer Incentives

  • • Incentives: The journal provides modest gift-card incentives for complete, constructive, insightful, and useful reviews that are submitted via email or uploaded to the journal’s website by the scheduled deadline.
  • • Inclusion in academic CV: As the official journal of the Houston Shock Symposium—one of the largest and most comprehensive shock events in the United States—JoSH offers reviewers a meaningful professional service opportunity. Including this role on a CV or resume is especially valuable for early‑ and mid‑career professionals, as it demonstrates subject‑matter expertise, scholarly engagement, and commitment to the field.

Guidelines

Because JoSH is an open‑access publication with no submission fees, reviewer incentives are intended solely to recognize professional service, expand the reviewer pool, and help reduce turnaround times. The incentives comply with ethical guidelines for editorial independence and transparency and do not influence editorial decisions, manuscript outcomes, or reviewer selection. Reviewers may decline incentives at any time. In offering the incentives, the journal carefully considers the following:

  • • Potential for bias: Awareness that financial incentives must not compromise the integrity or objectivity of the peer‑review process.
  • • ICMJE/COPE compliance: The journal adheres to guidelines established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
  • • Editorial independence: Editors evaluate potential conflicts of interest on a case-by-case basis to ensure the integrity and independence of the peer-review process.

{ top }

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)–Assisted Technologies

JoSH adheres to the publication ethics principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the authorship standards of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authors remain fully responsible and accountable for all aspects of their work, including any content produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI)–based technologies.

Scope and Acceptable Use

In accordance with COPE guidance on AI use, AI-assisted tools may be used only as supportive technologies. The use of AI tools is accepted for, but not limited to:

  • • Language editing, grammar correction, and improvement of clarity or readability;
  • • Formatting references, tables, or figures;
  • • Coding assistance or data visualization, provided these methods are fully described and independently verified by the authors.

AI tools must not replace core scholarly activities such as study conception, methodological decision making, interpretation of results, or clinical judgment. Authors must critically review and validate any AI- assisted output before submission.

Unacceptable Use

Consistent with COPE standards on research integrity, AI-assisted technologies must not be used to:

  • • Generate, fabricate, falsify, or manipulate data, images, or results;
  • • Produce misleading, unverifiable, or non-reproducible scientific content;
  • • Create original scientific interpretations, conclusions, or clinical recommendations without full human authorship and oversight.

Authorship and Accountability

AI-assisted tools cannot be listed as authors and do not qualify for authorship because they cannot take responsibility for the work. All listed authors are fully responsible for:

  • • The accuracy and validity of the entire manuscript;
  • • Ensuring that AI-assisted content does not compromise scientific integrity;
  • • Compliance with ethical, legal, and professional standards.

Disclosure and Transparency

To uphold COPE principles of transparency, authors must disclose any use of AI-assisted technologies. The disclosure should include:

  • • The name and version of the AI tool(s) used;
  • • The specific purpose of use (e.g., language editing, code assistance);
  • • Placement of the disclosure in the Methods section, Acknowledgments, or a dedicated AI Disclosure statement, as appropriate.

Editorial Review and Ethical Oversight

JoSH reserves the right to assess manuscripts for inappropriate or undisclosed use of AI-assisted technologies. Suspected violations will be handled in accordance with COPE guidance and flowcharts on publication ethics, which may include requests for clarification, correction, or retraction.

{ top }