The aim of the journal is to critically (without ideological bias) evaluate the current achievements in every field of neuropsychiatry, particularly illness course and treatment effectiveness. It is very important to know how a patient could be defined as improved or recovered, how long treatment has to last when therapy works, and for whom. These are fundamental issues for Clinical Neuropsychiatry.
The main goal of the journal is to collect original papers that directly or indirectly influence the effectiveness of a treatment, particularly focused on Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Practice.
This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. Distribution and reproduction are permitted in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Indexed in EMBASE, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science.
It is the Giovanni Fioriti Editore’s policy to allow authors to re-use their own work as they see fit. Authors do not need seek permission from Giovanni Fioriti Editore to photocopy their own work or include it in whole or in part in other publications. Giovanni Fioriti Editore would only request that all copies and republications of the work carry a notice of copyright and reference to the original publication source.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions. Where permission is sought for quotation in whole or in part in a third party’s publication, this will be contingent upon that party seeking the Giovanni Fioriti Editore’s written consent (where Giovanni Fioriti Editore holds the copyright); permission will not be unreasonably withold.
All papers in this journal are peer-reviewed. No person is permitted to take any role in the review of a paper in which they have an interest, e.g., fees or grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in, any close relationship with, an organisation whose interests, financial or otherwise, may be affected by the publication of the paper.
Giovanni Fioriti Editore’s policy is to publish clinical issue done by experts in their field. All work published is rigorously checked – blind evaluation by at least one reviewer and two editors – whether it is an editorial, review, perspective article, letter to the editors.
Advertising is published in CN but it is clearly distinct and does not interfere with the contents of the journal. CN supplements are not evaluated along the same lines as articles sent in for publication but are published under personal responsibility of the guest editor.
It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher.
The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
An editor will at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
As Publishers, we have a duty to maintain the integrity of the scientific record. The corrections are published as soon as possible, for minor corrections that do not affect the scientific understanding of the paper we prefer to reject requests.
For the online publications we consider to replace the version which corrects the error and notes the changes that have been made and the date(s) on which the changes were made (in a correction notice at the end of the article). The correction notice will be retained in the print version. If an article is already printed, a correction notice will be printed in the next available print issue. The online version of the article will be replaced with the version with the correction notice.
Retractions are considered by journal editors in cases of evidence of unreliable data or findings, plagiarism, duplicate publication, and unethical research. All retraction notices explain why the article was retracted: the retraction notice will be replace the original text and will be published in the next available print issue. The original text will remain accessible.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. All reviewers should agree and accept the conditions based on the Committee on Publication Ethics Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and exclude himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors are expected to comply with standard reporting guidelines for study designs. To improve the quality of the articles we suggest the authors to comply with the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses; the CARE case report guidelines for case reports; CONSORT for clinical trials.
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2013. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.
We uphold the right to anonymity and take all necessary steps to protect the privacy of those who participate in research.
Patients have a right to privacy that should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information, including patients’ names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and 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. Authors should identify Individuals who provide writing assistance and disclose the funding source for this assistance. Identifying details should be omitted if they are not essential. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve, however, an informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning and editors should so note. The requirement for informed consent should be included in the journal’s instructions for authors. When informed consent has been obtained it should be indicated in the published article.
When reporting experiments on animals, authors should be asked to indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.
All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines.