INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS

PJMDS invites manuscripts that comply with the guidelines established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). These guidelines are accessible at https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html
All submissions for publication should be exclusively directed to the journal via the online link provided at https://pjmds.online/index.php/ojs/login?source=%2Findex.php%2Fojs. It is imperative that material submitted has not been previously published or is under consideration for publication elsewhere. Engaging in multiple or duplicate submissions to different journals constitutes publication misconduct and may result in disciplinary actions, including reporting to the Pakistan Medical & Dental Council and the Higher Education Commission. However, complete reports following the publication of preliminary findings, such as abstracts, or papers presented at scientific meetings but not fully published, may be considered for submission. In such cases, a copy of the published material must be provided alongside the manuscript for the editors' evaluation.
The revised text for the "Material for Publication" section of PJMDS is as follows, ensuring clarity and coherence in the description:
MATERIAL FOR PUBLICATION
The material submitted for publication may include Original Research (such as Randomized Controlled Trials - RCTs, Meta-analysis of RCTs, Quasi-Experimental Studies, Case Control Studies, Cohort Studies, and Observational Studies with statistical support), Systematic Review Articles, Commentaries, Articles on Recent Advances, New Techniques, Debates, Adverse Drug Reports, Current Practices, Clinical Practice Articles, Short Articles, Audit Reports, Evidence-Based Reports, Short Communications, and Letters to the Editor. Ideas and Innovations can be reported as modifications to existing techniques or the development of new techniques or instruments. A mere description of a technique without any practical application or innovation will be considered an update and not an original article. The current scenario section includes contextual opinion pieces and literature review-based critical write-ups pertaining to debatable topics in postgraduate education, research, or practice, formatted similarly to commentaries.
The journal discourages the submission of multiple articles dealing with related aspects of the same study.
PJMDS does not accept non-English language articles, and citing such articles is also discouraged.
ARTICLE CATEGORIES
Original Articles: These should normally report original research relevant to clinical medicine. A manuscript will be considered an original article if it is a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) or an Observational Study. RCTs should be registered with an International RCT Registry (Trial Registration Number mandatory). Retrospective Studies with adequate sample sizes supported by appropriate advanced statistical analysis may also be considered in this category.
Authors must clearly state under a separate heading the name of the approval committee, confirming that legal and ethical approvals were obtained prior to initiating the research work carried out on subjects. They must ensure that the experiments were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Additionally, it is mandatory to provide approval or exemption from the institutional ethical review board/committee for all research articles at the time of article submission. A dissertation/thesis approval letter from the relevant authority is also acceptable.
Original papers should contain 2000-2500 words excluding the abstract and references. They should include a structured abstract of about 250 words and three to 10 keywords as per MeSH (Medical Subject Headings). There should be no more than three tables or illustrations, and the data should be supported by 20 to 25 references, which should include both local and international sources. More than 50% of the references should be from the last five years from the date of submission.
Clinical Practice Articles: This category includes all simple observational case series. A manuscript will be considered under this category if it is a Descriptive Case Series or a Retrospective Study. The length of such articles should be around 1500-1600 words with 15-20 references. The rest of the format should follow that of an original article.
Evidence-Based Reports: Must include at least 10 cases and have a word count of 1000-1200 words with 10-12 references. No more than 2 tables or illustrations should be included. It should contain a non-structured abstract of about 150 words.
Short Communications: Should be about 1000-1200 words, including a non-structured abstract of about 150 words, with two tables or illustrations, and not more than 6 references.
Systematic Review Articles: Should consist of a critical overview/analysis of a relatively narrow topic, providing background and recent developments with reference to the original literature. It should incorporate the author's original work on the same subject. The length of the review article should be 2500 to 3000 words. It should have a non-structured abstract of 150 words with a minimum of 3 keywords. An author can write a review article only if he/she has written a minimum of three original research articles and some case reports on the same topic.
Letters: Should normally not exceed 400 words, with no more than 5 references and must be signed by all authors—maximum of 3 are allowed. Preference is given to those that contribute to recently published articles in the journal. Letters may be published with a response from the author of the article being discussed. Further discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be entertained for publication. Letters to the editor may be sent for peer review if they report scientific data. Editorials are written by invitation only.
GUIDELINES FOR ABSTRACT
The abstract must adhere to a structured format as defined by PJMDS. It should be organized into the following sections: Objectives, Methodology, Results, and Conclusion. Additionally, authors are required to include 3 to 10 keywords relevant to the content of their research, selected from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH).
Main body of the manuscript: Introduction, Objectives, Methodology, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. (Detailed descriptions of these sections follow.)
For Original articles: Structured abstract up to 250 words
For Reviews: Unstructured abstract up to 150 words
For Case Reports: Structured abstract as Background, Case Presentation, and Conclusion up to 300 words
WORD LIMIT:
The word limit of each section must be within the given limits

  • Editorial: Up to 2000 words
  • Original article: No more than 3000 words (excluding abstract and references)
  • Short Review: Up to 1500 words
  • Systematic Review: Up to 4000 words
  • Case Report: Up to 2500 words
  • Letter to the Editor: Up to 1500 words

REFERENCES

  • All the references must be in Vancouver style (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine).
  • Original articles: Up to 25 references
  • Short and Systematic Review: Up to 50 references
  • References should not be older than 10 years, with at least two references from the last five years. One or two maximum historical references may be used.
  • Figures and tables: Up to 6 in total
  • Illustrations: Jpeg format (resolution 300 dpi)

INTRODUCTION
This section should include the purpose of the article after giving a brief literature review strictly related to the objective of the study. The rationale for the study or observation should be summarized. Only strictly pertinent references should be cited, and the subject should not be extensively reviewed. It is preferable not to cite more than 10 references in this segment. Pertinent use of reference to augment support from literature is warranted which means, not more than 2 to 3 references are used for an observation. Data, methodology or conclusion from the work being reported should not be presented in this section. It should end with a statement of the study objective.
METHODOLOGY
Study design and sampling methods should be mentioned. Obsolete terms such as retrospective studies should not be used. The selection of the observational or experimental subjects (patients or experimental animals, including controls) should be described clearly. The methods and the apparatus used should be identified (with the manufacturer's name and address in parentheses), and procedures must be described in sufficient detail to allow other workers to reproduce the results. References to established methods should be given, including statistical methods. References and brief descriptions for methods that have been published but are not well-known should be provided; only new or substantially modified methods should be described in detail, giving reasons for using them, and evaluating their limitations. All drugs and chemicals used should be identified precisely, including generic name (s), dose(s), and route(s) of administration.
For statistical analysis, the specific test used should be named, preferably with reference for an uncommon test. Exact p-values and 95% confidence interval (CI) limits must be mentioned instead of only stating greater or less than the level of significance. All percentages must be accompanied by actual numbers. The SPSS output sheet must be attached with manuscript to clarify results (p-values).
RESULTS
These should be presented in a logical sequence in the text, tables, and illustrations. All the data in the tables or illustrations should not be repeated in the text; only important observations should be emphasized or summarized with due statement of demographic details. No opinion should be given in this part of the text. Statistics should be given in an ascending or descending order.
DISCUSSION
This section should include author's comment on the results, supported with contemporary references, including arguments and analysis of identical work done by other workers. Study limitations should also be mentioned. A summary is not required.
CONCLUSION
Conclusion should be provided under a separate heading and highlight new aspects arising from the study. It should be in accordance with the objectives. No recommendations are needed under this heading.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Any conflict of interest should be declared by all authors. This may include grants or honorarium, credits and promotions, memberships or any personal or professional relationships which may appear to influence the manuscript. Such competing interests are not unethical but should be declared.
If there are no conflicts of interest, authors should still include this heading and write “none to declare.” or “authors declared no conflict of interest.”
FUNDING
Any company or institution that has financially contributed to the study must be acknowledged.
PATIENT CONSENT
Authors must state that the consent of the patient/guardian was taken prior to the writing of the manuscript if applicable.
TABLES AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Legends to illustrations should be typed on the same sheet. Tables should be simple, and should supplement rather than duplicate information in the text; tables repeating information will be omitted. Each table should have a title and be typed in double space without horizontal and vertical lines. Tables should be numbered consecutively with Roman numerals in the order mentioned in the text. Page number should be in the upper right corner. If abbreviations are used, they should be explained in footnotes. When submitting graphs, scatter plots, or histograms, the numerical data used to create them must also be provided. All graphs should be made using MS Excel, SPSS, or other Windows/Mac-compatible software, such as SAS, and must be sent as a separate Excel or SPSS file, even if they are included in the manuscript.
AUTHORSHIP CRITERIA
Authors must provide a complete list of all contributors, including their affiliations, contact numbers, and email addresses, at the time of submission. The order of authorship should be finalised before submission, as changes—such as additions, deletions, or reordering—will not be permitted after submission. Additionally, each author's specific contribution to the manuscript must be clearly outlined in accordance with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria, as stated in the ICMJE recommendations.

ICMJE Authorship Criteria
To qualify as an author, individuals must meet all four of the following criteria:

  1. Substantial Contribution – Significant involvement in the conception or design of the study or the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data.
  2. Manuscript Development – Active participation in drafting the manuscript or making substantial revisions to enhance its intellectual content.
  3. Final Approval – Granting final approval of the manuscript version submitted for publication.
  4. Accountability – Taking full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and reliability of the work, including addressing any concerns that may arise.

PUBLICATION FEE 
Currently, no fees are charged for article submission, processing, or publication.
SOURCE OF FUNDING 
The Scientific Consultancy of Research Methodology (SCORM) fully funds the publication process.
ABOUT PJMDS
The Pakistan Journal of Medical and Dental Sciences (PJMDS) is a biannual, peer-reviewed journal published by SCORM, Karachi, Pakistan. Covering a broad spectrum of topics in medical and dental sciences, PJMDS is committed to maintaining high academic standards. While the journal is in its early stages, efforts are underway to achieve indexing in major academic databases. As an open-access journal, PJMDS ensures that all published content is freely accessible, facilitating the global dissemination of research to both professionals and the public.

PEER REVIEW POLICY
The Pakistan Journal of Medical and Dental Sciences (PJMDS) adheres to a rigorous peer review process, following the guidelines set forth by the Higher Education Commission, Pakistan, -HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION JOURNALS AND PUBLICATIONS POLICY, page 6 ‘Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing’:

MANUSCRIPT REVIEW PROCESS

  • "Initial Screening: Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation for similarity index, statistical accuracy (where required), and compliance with journal requirements before being sent for peer review."
  • Expert Review: Manuscripts are reviewed by two subject experts, carefully selected by the editorial board based on their expertise and academic credentials.

Review Criteria for Specific Article Types

  • Case Studies, Letters to the Editor, and Short Communications – Reviewed by at least one peer reviewer.
  • Invited Editorials – Undergo internal review by the editorial team or relevant advisory board members, depending on the subject matter.

Double-Blind Review Process

  • The journal employs a double-blind review system, ensuring that both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the process.
  • Review reports are systematically archived on the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform for future reference and quality assurance.

Reviewer Access and Communication Protocol

  • Reviewers are provided access to all relevant manuscript sections, including the abstract, introduction, methodology, results, discussion, conclusion, and supplementary materials.
  • Strict confidentiality is maintained, and all communications occur exclusively through the editor’s office to prevent direct contact between authors and reviewers.

Editorial Authority

  • The final decision regarding manuscript acceptance, revision, or rejection rests with the editor-in-chief.
  • The editorial team ensures that all published articles adhere to the journal’s quality standards, ethical guidelines, and suitability criteria.

SIMILARITY REPORT GUIDELINES
Plagiarism is a serious ethical violation that undermines academic and professional integrity. Authors are expected to maintain high standards of originality and ethical conduct in their writing. The similarity index in the report reflects the percentage of matched text in a document compared to existing sources. However, a high similarity index does not automatically indicate plagiarism and must be carefully assessed.

EVALUATION OF SIMILARITY INDEX

  • Faculty members or instructors must review each similarity report to determine whether the identified matches indicate potential plagiarism.
  • If significant similarities are found, the student or author should be guided accordingly, or the case may be reported based on the evidence.
  • A similarity index of ≤19% is generally acceptable. However, if any single source contributes ≥5% similarity without proper citation, revisions are required.
  • Similarities from an author’s previously published work may be disregarded if the material is properly cited.

Exclusions and Considerations

  • As documents checked through this service are unpublished and do not provide any immediate benefit, no direct penalties are imposed. However, necessary revisions should be made in line with HEC plagiarism policy.
  • Bibliographies and properly quoted material may be excluded after verification, though excessive quotations are discouraged.
  • Common phrases and proper nouns may appear as matches in the report and should not be considered plagiarism.
  • The similarity report identifies matches from three primary sources:
    1. Internet content
    2. Published periodicals and journals
    3. Student repositories (self-matching from the same author’s previous work may be disregarded).
  • Tables, graphs, formulas, and other visual elements are not analyzed for similarity, as the tool evaluates text only.

Plagiarism Consequences

  • Instructors and faculty members are responsible for interpreting the report and determining whether plagiarism has occurred. The similarity report serves as supporting evidence.
  • If plagiarism is confirmed, the author’s affiliated institution may be notified, the manuscript may be withdrawn, and the submission may be rejected.
  • Repeated offenses may result in disciplinary actions.
  • Editors and reviewers are committed to ensuring the integrity of the publication process. Any suspicion or evidence of plagiarism will prompt a formal investigation.

Ethical Compliance
Authors must adhere to ethical standards for data collection, analysis, and reporting. Any form of academic dishonesty, including fabrication or falsification of data, is strictly prohibited. Additionally, authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest to ensure transparency. Failure to comply may result in manuscript rejection, retraction, or reputational consequences.