Journal information

(Revised June 2022)

Aims and Scope of the Journal

Established in 1982, the Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine is dedicated to acting as an international forum for the publication of research on the science and practice of psychiatry. Its main aim is to disseminate original scientific research to a national and international readership with the objective of improving clinical practice and service development in mental health. The journal advocates for delivering high quality clinical care and improvement in mental health services, and is committed to keeping the field of mental health vibrant and relevant by publishing research on novel topics. Particular strengths and unique features of the Journal include a focus on Clinical Psychiatry, Youth Mental Health and the History of Psychiatry, with regular features and special issues devoted to these topics.

The Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine publishes research papers, short reports, review papers, editorials, case reports, historical papers, perspective pieces and book reviews. There are four editions published per year, for which rapid peer review process and publication is considered a priority. The journal regularly publishes special themed editions guest edited by internationally respected academics in a particular research field. With a progressive focus, the journal provides important reading for clinicians, researchers, policymakers and all professionals with an interest in mental health.

Submission Process

All manuscripts, including book reviews, should be submitted online via our manuscript submission and tracking site: https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ipm

Full instructions for electronic submission are available directly from this site. To facilitate rapid reviewing, communications for peer review will be electronic and authors will need to supply a current e-mail address when registering to use the system. Please submit your manuscript in Microsoft Word format and not in an un-editable format such as PDF.

Note: It is the author's responsibility to ensure that they have read the copyright form terms and conditions so that they are familiar with where and when they may post the various versions of their article.

Editorial Standards

The Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine complies with the "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" of the Committee on Publication Ethics (https://publicationethics.org) and the "Editorial Policy Statements" of the Council of Science Editors (https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/resource-library/editorial-policies/). The journal also follows Cambridge's own Publishing Ethics policies.

Submission Guidelines

The Journal will accept for consideration original papers, short reports, review articles, audits, historical papers, case reports, perspective articles, editorials, letters to the Editor, and book reviews. Original data papers and review articles receive top priority for speedy publication.

Manuscripts should be prepared in accordance with the "Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals" of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.

Title Page

The title page should include the paper title along with the following for each author: name, qualifications, job title, affiliations and affiliation addresses. The name, address, email address and telephone number of the corresponding author should be clearly indicated separately on the title page. The journal operates a double-blind peer review policy, so please ensure that identifying information is only included in the title page file, and that the separate 'Main Document' file is anonymised. Please also include the 'required statements' listed below on the title page.

Main Document

Text

The manuscript should be typed, double-spaced, in 12-point Times New Roman font.
Pages should be numbered but do not use any other automated features (such as endnotes, headers or footers), or any mechanism to track changes to various drafts of a manuscript.
Numbers one to ten should be written as words in the text, unless used as a unit of measurement; all numbers should be written in digits in tables and figures.
All numbers which start sentences should be written in words, not digits.
Bold type-face should be used for headings of sections and sub-sections within the paper.
Do not use tabs or indents within the text of the paper.
SI units are required for all measurements.
Means should be accompanied by standard deviations.
Exact p values should be provided, unless p<0.001
Recommended non-proprietary drug names should be used.
Writing should be clear, simple and direct.
Short sentences are preferred.

Abstract and Key-Words

The page following the title page should carry an abstract followed by a list of three to ten key-words drawn, if possible, from the medical subject headings (MeSH) list of the United States National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh). The title and key-words should be chosen to help future literature searchers.

Whether a structured abstract (Haynes et al, 1990) or an unstructured abstract is required depends on the submission type. Original papers, short reports, review articles, audits and historical papers require a structured abstract, up to 250 words, using the headings Objectives, Methods, Results and Conclusions.

Under the Abstract heading of 'Methods' include, where applicable, the study design, setting, patients/participants (selection criteria, description), interventions, observational and analytical methods and main outcome measures. (For review articles specify the methods of literature search and selection). Under the Abstract heading of 'Results', give the most important specific data together with their statistical significance where possible.

Editorials, case reports and perspective articles require an unstructured abstract of one paragraph, up to 150 words. Book reviews and letters to the Editor do not require an abstract.

Original Papers

Original papers should be divided into sections as follows: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. A Conclusions section is not mandatory but may be included if the author wishes, or may be requested at a later stage by peer-reviewers or editors. The Results section should present a summary of main results and should not simply refer to tables.

Generally papers should not have text more than 4,000 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract, tables/figures and references). In exceptional circumstances longer papers may be considered for publication. Papers shorter than these limits are encouraged. For papers of unusual importance the editors may waive these requirements.

Short Reports

These papers should be no longer than 2,000 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract, tables/figures and references) and should be divided into sections using guidance above for original papers. There is a limit of two tables/figures for short reports.

Review Papers

Review papers should be up to 4,000 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract, tables/figures and references). In exceptional circumstances longer papers may be considered for publication. Systematic reviews will be prioritised for publication. Where appropriate review papers should have introduction, methods, results and discussion sections, with the methods section outlining the search strategy in detail. A flow diagram outlining the flow of information through different phases of the review should also be included. An example of a flow diagram can be found at the PRISMA statement website (www.prisma-statement.org). Narrative reviews will also be considered for publication, particularly by authors with expertise on a particular topic.

Audit Papers

Audit papers may be up to 4,000 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract, tables/figures and references). Audit papers will only be considered for publication if they are of high quality and contain original content of interest. It is preferable that audit papers present the full cycle of audit, including initial audit data, intervention and re-audit data. In exceptional circumstances, papers presenting one element of the audit cycle may be published, but priority will be given to papers presenting full audit cycles. The format for audit papers may differ from that outlined for original papers, and may include, for example, Introduction, Methods, Audit, Intervention, Re-Audit and Discussion.

Historical Papers

Historical papers may be up to 4,000 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract, tables/figures and references). The journal has a strong history for publication of historical papers and such papers remain of interest to the journal. The format is usually similar to that of an original paper or review paper.

Editorials

Editorials include submissions with an opinion piece or viewpoint on topics such as a current issue in mental health, or on an article published in the journal. Editorials should be no longer than 1,500 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract and references). They may be commissioned by the Editorials Editor or Editorial Board members. Commissioned editorials will be subject to editorial review and specialist peer review if necessary. Uncommissioned editorials will go through the normal peer review process.

Case Reports

Case reports may be up to 4,000 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract, tables/figures and references), although will often be substantially shorter, and shorter submissions are encouraged. All case reports must have the patient's written, informed consent before the paper is submitted.

Perspective Articles

Perspective articles are welcome for submission and can give a unique perspective on an aspect of mental health or service delivery. They typically have one or two authors and may be up to 4,000 words in length (excluding title, authors, abstract, tables/figures and references), but will often be substantially shorter.

Book Reviews and Letters to the Editor

No abstract is required for a book review or letter to the Editor. They have a limit of 1,000 words (excluding title, authors and references). They should include a conflict of interest statement (other statements are not required). Book review submissions should be submitted through the peer review system for consideration by the Book Review Editor. Letters to the Editor should also be submitted using the ScholarOne system. Letters to the Editor in the Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine will be published online only. A selection of Letters to the Editor will be published in the hard copy of the journal.

International Reporting Standards

Papers published in Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine should adhere to the relevant reporting standards. Examples of reporting standards include: CONSORT for randomised controlled trials; PRISMA for systematic reviews of evaluation studies; MOOSE for meta-analysis of observational studies; STROBE for observational / epidemiological studies; CHEERS for economic evaluations.

References

Please note that the referencing style for all submissions to the Journal is the Harvard style, as outlined below. This style is the same as that currently used by Psychological Medicine (except for point 4 listed below). All software packages for references, e.g., EndNote, Reference Manager, etc. list this style.

References included should highlight the paper's relevance to current research or clinical practice.

The Harvard (author-date) system should be used in the text and a complete list of References cited given at the end of the article. In a text citation of a work by more than two authors cite the first author's name followed by et al. (but the names of all of the authors should be given in the References section). Where several references are cited together they should be listed in rising date order.
The References section should be in alphabetical order. Examples follow:
- Brown GW (1974). Meaning, measurement and stress of life events. In Stressful Life Events: Their Nature and Effects (ed. B. S. Dohrenwend and B. P. Dohrenwend), pp. 217-244. John Wiley: New York.
- Brown J (1970). Psychiatric Research. Smith: Glasgow.
- Brown J, Williams E, Wright H (1970). Treatment of heroin addiction. Psychological Medicine 1, 134-136.
Note: authors' names should be in bold font; journal titles should always be given in full.
References to material published online should follow a similar style, with the URL included at the end of the reference, with the accession date, if known. Authors are requested to print out and keep a copy of any online-only information, in case the URL changes or is no longer maintained. Examples follow:
- Acute Health Care, Rehabilitation and Disability Prevention Research - National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (https://www.cdc.gov/injury/FundedPrograms/index.html). Accessed 7 June 2004.
- British Psychological Society Research Digest, Issue 12. (http://lists.bps.org.uk/read/messages?id=1423). Accessed 17 February 2004.
In the reference list, when citing papers with more than 20 listed authors, only the first six names plus et al. should be included, plus the names of any groups or consortia involved.

Please see this sample paper for further examples of referencing.

Tables and Figures

In general up to five tables/figures may be included in each paper, except for short reports where the limit is two. These limits may be waived if deemed appropriate by the editorial team. Figures and graphs should be clear and of good quality, and should be accompanied by relevant data to facilitate redrawing where necessary. Clear and informative headings and captions should be provided. Only essential figures and tables should be included and should be provided in black and white except in exceptional circumstances, e.g. PET scan images etc. (Please note that print publication will be in black and white). Further tables, figures, photographs and appendices, may be included in colour with the online version on the journal website.

To ensure that your figures are reproduced to the highest possible standards and your article is published as quickly and efficiently as possible, Cambridge Journals recommends the following formats and resolutions for supplying electronic figures. Please note that submitting low quality figures may result in a delay in publishing your valuable research.

Please ensure that your figures are saved at final publication size (please see the latest issue of the journal for column widths) and are in our recommended file formats. Following these guidelines will result in high quality images being reproduced in both the print and the online versions of the journal.

Line artwork
Format: tif or eps
Colour mode: black and white (also known as 1-bit)
Size: please size to final publication size
Resolution: 1200 dpi

Combination artwork (line/tone)
Format: tif or eps
Colour mode: grayscale (also known as 8-bit)
Size: please size to final publication size
Resolution: 800 dpi

Black and white halftone artwork
Format: tif
Colour mode: grayscale (also known as 8-bit)
Size: please size to final publication size
Resolution: 300 dpi

Colour halftone artwork
Format: tif
Colour mode: CMYK colour
Size: please size to final publication size
Resolution: 300 dpi

All graphs and diagrams should be referred to as figures and should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals. Captions for figures should be typed double-spaced on separate sheets. Tables should be numbered consecutively in the text in Arabic numerals and each typed on a separate sheet after the References section. Titles should be typed above the table.

Required statements

Please note that there is a set of required statements for the Journal. Please follow the instructions below and ensure that you have included the necessary statements in the 'Title Page' of your submission.

All submitted manuscripts must have:
(i) A conflict of interest statement
(ii) An ethical standards statement
(iii) A financial support statement
The acknowledgements statement is optional for authors.

Conflict of Interest statement

Authors should include a Conflicts of Interest declaration in their manuscript. Conflicts of Interest are situations that could be perceived to exert an undue influence on an author’s presentation of their work. They may include, but are not limited to, financial, professional, contractual or personal relationships or situations. Conflicts of Interest do not necessarily mean that an author’s work has been compromised. Authors should declare any real or perceived Conflicts of Interest in order to be transparent about the context of their work. If the manuscript has multiple authors, the author submitting the manuscript must include Conflicts of Interest declarations relevant to all contributing authors.

Example wording for your Conflicts of Interest declaration is as follows: “Conflicts of Interest: Author A is employed at company B. Author C owns shares in company D, is on the Board of company E and is a member of organisation F. Author G has received grants from company H.” If no Conflicts of Interest exist, your declaration should state “Conflicts of Interest: None”.

For articles with more than one author each author must declare any conflict of interest individually and clearly, in accordance with the guidance of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org/), even if there are none.

If you require guidance preparing a Conflict of Interest statement, the ICMJE provide an online form that you may use.Please click here to use the downloadable form to generate a Conflict of Interest Statement for each individual author.

Ethical Standards statement

The following Ethical Standards statement should be included at the end of all submissions, regardless of type of article, under the heading 'Ethical standards':

'The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committee on human experimentation with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008.'

A sentence relating to ethics committee approval should be included in the 'Ethical standards' section if appropriate. For example the following sentence could be included:

'The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of [INSTITUTION NAME].'

All research involving human or animal experimentation require ethics committee approval. Written informed consent should be obtained from all study participants if deemed necessary to adhere to ethical standards, and this should be documented in the 'Ethical standards' section. Informed consent for publication is required for case reports. In some exceptional circumstances the editors may accept case reports where informed consent is impossible.

Different statements may apply for other article types such as clinical audit, service evaluation, case reports and perspective pieces:

Where ethical approval for publication is required and has been granted by the local Ethics Committee, please include the following Ethical Standards statement at the end of the article:

The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committee on human experimentation with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. The authors assert that ethical approval for publication of this [audit / service evaluation / case report / perspective piece]* has been provided by their local Ethics Committee.

Where the local Ethics Committee has determined that ethical approval for publication is not required, please include the following Ethical Standards statement at the end of your article:

The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committee on human experimentation with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. The authors assert that the local ethics committee has determined that ethical approval for publication of this [audit / service evaluation / case report / perspective piece]* was not required by their local Ethics Committee.

*delete as appropriate; please write only article type that has been submitted here

Where an Audit Committee has determined that ethical approval for publication from the local Ethics Committee is not required, please provide the following documentation at submission:

Confirmation in writing from the Audit Committee that Ethics Committee approval for this audit/service evaluation is not required, with the audit committee recognising the intent to publish;
Confirmation in writing from the local Clinical Director that the audit/service evaluation adheres to local ethical protocols and principles, with the Clinical Director recognising the intent to publish.

Additionally, please include the following ethical standards statement at the end of your article:

The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant national and institutional committee on human experimentation with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. The authors assert that [SPECIFY LOCATION] Audit Committee determined that ethical approval from the local Ethics Committee was not required for publication of this [audit / service evaluation]*. The authors have provided written confirmation of this from the Audit Committee and local clinical director.

*delete as appropriate; please write only article type that has been submitted here

Where an ethics committee has not been involved in ethical approval for a study it is of high importance that the study methodology is outlined in detail in the paper. The editors also reserve the right to reject submissions on the basis that they deem that ethical approval for publication is required from a Research Ethics Committee.

The corresponding author should be prepared to collect documentation of relevant approval and send if requested during peer review or after publication.

Financial Support statement

Please provide details of the sources of financial support for all authors in the manuscript, including grant numbers. For example:

"This work was supported by the Medical Research Council (grant number XXXXXXX)".

Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma and space, and where research was funded by more than one agency the different agencies should be separated by a semi-colon, with "and" before the final funder. Grants held by different authors should be identified as belonging to individual authors by the authors' initials. For example:

"This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust (A.B., grant numbers XXXX, YYYY), (C.D., grant number ZZZZ); the Natural Environment Research Council (E.F., grant number FFFF); and the National Institutes of Health (A.B., grant number GGGG), (E.F., grant number HHHH)."

Where no specific funding has been provided for research, please provide the following statement: "This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors."

Acknowledgements

You may acknowledge individuals or organisations that provided advice, support (non-financial). Formal financial support and funding should be listed in the Financial Support section (see above). Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge individuals named in any Acknowledgments section, since readers may infer endorsement.

Informed Consent

IJPM follows ICMJE guidelines regarding informed consent: Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that a patient who is identifiable be shown the manuscript to be published. Identifying details should be omitted if they are not essential. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve, however, and informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt.

As mentioned above, written informed consent should be obtained from all study participants if deemed necessary to adhere to ethical standards, and this should be documented in the required 'Ethical standards' section.

Authorship and Licence to Publish Forms

Papers with multiple authors are reviewed with the assumption that all authors have contributed materially to the research reported, have approved the submitted manuscript and concur with its submission to Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine. Guidance on eligibility for authorship may be found in recommendations by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf).

The policy of the journal is that authors (or in some cases their employers) retain copyright and grant the College of Psychiatrists of Ireland a licence to publish their work. In the case of gold open access articles this is a non-exclusive licence. Authors must complete and return an author publishing agreement form as soon as their article has been accepted for publication; the journal is unable to publish without this. Please download the appropriate publishing agreement on this page of the journal website.

For open access articles, the form also sets out the Creative Commons licence under which the article is made available to end users: a fundamental principle of open access is that content should not simply be accessible but should also be freely re-usable. Articles will be published under a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC-BY) by default. This means that the article is freely available to read, copy and redistribute, and can also be adapted (users can “remix, transform, and build upon” the work) for any commercial or non-commercial purpose, as long as proper attribution is given. Authors can, in the publishing agreement form, choose a different kind of Creative Commons license (including those prohibiting non-commercial and derivative use) if they prefer.

Please read the licence to publish form carefully, as it outlines where and when certain versions of your paper may be deposited on your website or your institutional website.

Open Access

Upon acceptance of your paper, you may choose to publish your article via Gold Open Access (following payment of an Article Processing Charge - APC). Current APC rates for IPM can be found at the following page: https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/open-access-policies, along with further information regarding Open Access. Please note: APC collection is managed by Rightslink, who will contact authors who have elected to publish via Open Access.

If you opt to publish your article via Open Access, you will be required to fill in and return the alternative copyright form, to be found on the Journal website here.

Suggested Peer-Reviewers

Each submission must be accompanied by the names, professional titles, professional addresses and email addresses of three suggested peer-reviewers. Authors should select these suggested peer-reviewers to include individuals, in any part of the world, who are recognized experts in the area to which the submission refers, and whom the author believes would provide useful, objective peer-reviews of the manuscript. The editors will give consideration to sending the manuscript to some or all of these peer-reviewers, but are not under any obligation to do so. Authors should consider that the suggested reviewers will need to provide an objective unbiased peer review. Hence suggesting peer reviewers who work in the author's own academic faculty or department should be avoided.

Description of the Peer-Review Process

All submissions are acknowledged by email. Submissions are initially considered by the Editor-In-Chief or Deputy Editor for suitability for peer-review. Submissions selected for peer-review are sent to three anonymous outside peer-reviewers. Where one or more peer-reviewers recommend acceptance or acceptance after revision, all peer-reviews are sent to the corresponding author, with an invitation to revise the paper.

If the author chooses to revise the paper, the revised paper should be accompanied by a detailed cover letter responding to each comment made by each peer-reviewer, indicating precisely how the revision deals with each comment, or why the author disagrees with or cannot incorporate specific comments.

Each peer-reviewer will then receive the revised paper, cover letter and comments of the other peer-reviewers. After the peer-reviewers' further comments have been received, a final decision about publication will be made.

The editorial process may vary from the above under certain circumstances, at the discretion of the Editor-In-Chief or Deputy Editor.

Conflicts of Interest in Peer Review

The journal follows COPE guidance on peer review, and Cambridge’s own ethics in peer review policies. No person is permitted to take any role in the peer-review of a paper in which they have a real or perceived interest. Competing interests may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious in nature, and should be raised with the Editors in case of any uncertainty.

The editorial assessment of papers authored and submitted by the journal Editor or Editorial Board members will be handled by Editors unaffiliated with the author or institution, and monitored carefully to ensure there is no peer review bias.

Other Modes of Review

Some guidance on statistical matters for authors is provided by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2006; 2010) and Bailar & Mosteller (1998). Notwithstanding this guidance, statistical review may be required for certain papers, and this will be arranged by the Journal editors where indicated. Other, more specialist forms of peer-review may also be required on occasion, and these, too, will be arranged by the Journal editors where indicated.

Fast-Track Publication

Papers which the editors feel warrant fast-track publication will be expedited through the publication process. A fast track publication process may be requested by submitting authors in their cover letter if it is believed that the paper could immediately improve clinical practice or public policy. The decision to "fast-track" papers lies with the Editors.

Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication

Manuscripts are considered with the understanding that they have not been published previously, either in print or electronic format. In the event that plagiarism or duplicate publication is suspected, the author will be invited to comment on the matter and a decision will be taken by the editors.

Appeals

In the event that an author wishes to appeal an editorial decision, the author can send a letter of appeal to the Editor-In-Chief. The Editor-In-Chief will pass the relevant materials to the Consulting Editor who may seek external opinion. The Consulting Editor will advise the Editor-In-Chief in relation to the appeal but the final decision on the matter rests with the Editor-In- Chief.

Author Language Services

Cambridge recommends that authors have their manuscripts checked by an English language native speaker before submission; this will ensure that submissions are judged at peer review exclusively on academic merit. Information is available on a Cambridge partner service that specialises in language editing and / or translation here, and suggest that authors contact as appropriate. Use of any such service is voluntary, and at the author's own expense.

References used in this document

American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association.
Bailar JC, Mosteller F (1988). Guidelines for statistical reporting in articles for medical journals. Annals of Internal Medicine 108, 266-273.
Committee on Publication Ethics (2011). Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. London: Committee on Publication Ethics. http://publicationethics.org/f...
Council of Science Editors (2009). Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications. Wheat Ridge, CO: Council of Science Editors. http://www.councilscienceedito...
Daly LE, Bourke GJ, McGilvray J (1991). Interpretation and Uses of Medical Statistics (4th Edition). Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB, Flanagin A (2001). Reporting financial conflicts of interest and relationships between investigators and research sponsors. JAMA 286, 89-91.
Davidoff F, DeAngelis CD, Drazen JM, Hoey J, Højgaard L, Horton R, Kotzin S, Nicholls MG, Nylenna M, Overbeke AJ, Sox HC, Van Der Weyden MB, Wilkes MS (2001). Sponsorship, authorship, and accountability. JAMA 286, 1232-1234.
Gardner MJ, Altman DG (editors) (1989). Statistics with Confidence: Confidence Intervals and Statistical Guidelines. London: British Medical Journal.
Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, Altman DG, Gardner MJ (1990). More information abstracts revisited. Annals of Internal Medicine 113, 69-76.
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2014). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals. Vancouver: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. http://www.icmje.org/icmje-rec...