脉冲Group aims to inform and help physicians, scientists, health care providers and those in related professions advance quality and innovation in patient care. Pulsus Group is committed to fostering edu-cation, and meaningful exchange of information and commentary to help create an environment for constructive criticism, free exchange of ideas, and earnest contribution to the field and the scientific literature. Pulsus Group expects authors to adhere to the highest standards of integrity in research, and the communication of research results and findings. Pulsus Group is committed to the protection of intel-lectual property. Reviewer team members will not use ideas from or show another individual(s) the manuscript or supplementary materials they have been asked to review without the explicit permission of the manuscript’s author, obtained through the Editors-in-Chief or Associate Editors. Pulsus Group expects all submissions to include data, analysis and commentary that are honestly and accurately reported according to the accepted best practices of scholarly publishing, and congruent with Pulsus’s mission statement to publish the work of medical/scientific researchers in a manner that exemplifies the highest standards in research integrity.
Conflicts of interest may arise in a variety of situations and, therefore, the author is required to inform the Editor-in-Chief of such conflict. A conflict of interest may exist when a manuscript under review puts forth a position contrary to the reviewer’s published work, or when a manuscript author or reviewer has a substantial direct or indirect financial interest in the subject matter of the article. All authors must disclose any commercial associations or other arrangements (eg, financial compensation received, pat-ent-licensing arrangements, potential to profit, consultancy, stock ownership, etc) that may pose a con-flict of interest in connection with the article. This information will be made available to the editor and reviewers, and may be included as a footnote at the editor’s discretion Because it is the Journal’s policy to engage in a double-blind review process, a conflict of interest may also exist when a reviewer knows the author of a manuscript. The reviewer should consult the appropriate Editor-in-Chief in such situations to decide whether to review the manuscript. A conflict of interest does not exist when an author disagrees with a reviewer’s assessment that a problem is unimportant or disagrees with an editorial outcome.
如果涉及人类受试者，文本必须表明根据赫尔辛基的宣言进行实验或测试。所有参与者均提供知情同意；该协议得到了该机构的道德审查委员会的批准。如果使用实验动物，请在文本中提供一份声明，以表明遵循的所有程序均符合机构政策。
PULSUS小组的成功是我们专yabo真人亚博棋牌官网门评估手稿提交的同伴审阅者团队的直接反映。这些评论有助于编辑委员会做出出版决策，并指导作者加强其专业写作。审阅者提供了对提交手稿的客观，有见地和严格的批评，增强了在PULSUS期刊上发表的文章的临床相关性和科学质量，并帮助医师，科学家，卫生保健专业人士以及相关专业的患者护理方面的质量和创新。
按照下面概述的协议，对所有手稿进行了同行评审。请注意，特殊问题和/或会议诉讼可能具有不同的同行评审协议，例如客人编辑，会议组织者或科学委员会。在这些情况下，这将传达给撰稿人。
The Editors-in-Chief evaluates all manuscripts on initial submission. Manuscripts rejected before being sent to review generally have serious scientific flaws, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are assigned to an Associate Editor, who will select two (or more) peer reviewers with expertise in the subject matter.
yabo真人亚博棋牌官网PULSUS小组通常使用“双盲”审查，其中裁判和作者在整个过程中仍然是匿名的。
脉冲Group attempts to prevent conflicts of interest by not inviting reviewers from the same institution(s) as the authors. However, previous relationships or places of employment may not be apparent. In our invitation to potential reviewers, we ask that they decline to review if they know or can reasonably guess the identity of the author.
要求裁判员评估手稿/研究是否：
Editorial decisions are not based on counting votes or performing numerical rank assessments. The strength of thearguments raised by each reviewer and by the authors are evaluated. Pulsus Group’s primary responsibilities are toits readers and to the scientific community at large and, in deciding how best to serve them, each journal must weigh the claims of each manuscript against the many others also under consideration. However, when reviewers agree toassess a manuscript, the journal considers this a commitment to review subsequent revisions; the journal endeavours to keep consultation to an absolute minimum to avoid drawing authors and reviewers into any protracted disputes.Reviewers will not be sent revised manuscripts unless the authors have made a serious attempt to address the criticisms.
裁判不会预期纠正或复制编辑手稿。语言校正/修订不是同行评审过程的一部分。
一旦确定了适当的审阅者，他们就会发出邀请，并要求在一周到10天内回复（此时将发送到替代方案）。要求接受邀请的审稿人在14天内完成审查。同意评估手稿但不会在到期日之前返回评论的审阅者可以用替代方案替换，以维持审查过程的时间表。如果裁判的报告相互矛盾或不必要地推迟报告，将寻求其他专家意见。
有几个可能的决定：直接接受或拒绝手稿；要求未成年人或重大修订；并在修订后接受或拒绝。裁判和/或副编辑可以要求手稿的多个修订。此决定除裁判员提出的任何建议外，还将发送给作者，并可能包括裁判的逐字评论。预计审稿人和编辑将以机密，建设性，迅速和无偏见的方式提供评论和批评，适合其职责。合作，尊重作者的尊严以及寻找提高手稿质量的方法，应表征审查过程。
理想的评论应该回答以下任务ions:
如果作者希望对同行评审的结果提出上诉，则应联系适当的主编并详细说明他/她的担忧。只有在审查不足或不公正的情况下，上诉才能成功。如果是这种情况，手稿将发送给替代审阅者进行重新审查。
审稿人通过各自的编辑跟踪系统发送邀请。有关通过PULSU（发布者）提交评论的问题可以直接向[email protected]
If you are not currently a referee for a Pulsus jounal but would like to be added to the list of referees, please contact the respective Editor-in-Chief.
如果作者在提交后的5天内要求提取手稿，则作者可以自由撤回手稿而无需支付任何提款费用。
如果作者要求撤回手稿，在同行审查过程或在线发布或在线发布；然后，撤回后，最低文章处理费用是可以收取的。
