For Editors

Conflicts and recusal

Decline the assignment if

You have collaborated with, supervised or been supervised by an author recently; you are at the same institution; you have a financial interest in the outcome; you are in direct competition on the same question; or you cannot read the work impartially for any other reason.

Your own submissions

Editors recuse themselves from decisions on their own submissions, and those manuscripts are handled independently. Editorial handling and decisions on the editor’s own work remain independent.

Declare rather than judge

If you are unsure whether a relationship counts, declare it to the editorial office and let someone else decide. The cost of declaring is minutes; the cost of not declaring is the journal's credibility.

Confidentiality

A manuscript under consideration is confidential. Do not discuss it outside the review process, do not use its content, and do not share it with a colleague without the editorial office's agreement.

Judgments this subject asks of you

Women-specific relevance

A manuscript that includes women but offers no substantive question, analysis or supported interpretation about their mental health does not establish scope fit. Explain this distinction clearly; it is a scope decision, not a quality judgment.

Sex and gender used loosely

Watch for manuscripts that use sex and gender interchangeably, or that attribute a social finding to biology or the reverse. Ask the authors to state which they examined and how it was ascertained.

Hormonal determinism

Be alert to a reproductive-stage finding explained entirely by endocrine change when the design cannot separate that from the social circumstances of the same period.

Claims beyond the design

Observational associations alone do not establish causation; causal analyses should state assumptions, address bias and report uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. Interpret findings within the design’s strengths and limitations, including the population and setting to which they apply. Unsupported claims require correction and may prevent publication. Assess evidence quality separately from subject fit.

Trauma and violence studies

Check the distress protocol, the referral route offered to participants, and whether disclosure could place a participant at risk. Absence of any safety consideration is a substantive problem, not an omission to fix in proof.

Suicide and self-harm

Check that method and means detail is not published and that the framing could not serve as instruction, before the manuscript goes to review as well as before it is accepted.

Perinatal populations

Check that reproductive stage and assessment timing are stated precisely, that clinical terms are defined, and that consent was genuinely separate from the participant's care.

Qualitative work

Assess it on its own terms — fit between question, sampling, analysis and claim — and correct a reviewer who applies quantitative criteria to it.

Small and negative studies

A small, well-reported study whose claims match its design is publishable here. Do not decline for size alone.

When something is wrong

Suspected misconduct

Do not confront the authors. Refer it to the editorial office with what you have observed, and let the process in the editorial policies run.

An ethics concern

Ask for the approval documentation and the consent procedure before the manuscript goes further.

An error after publication

Errors are corrected in the public record, through a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction linked to the original article.

An appeal

Appeals are considered by an editor who was not party to the original decision. If it was your decision, it is not yours to answer.

• Editorial PoliciesThe policies these guidelines apply.
• For ReviewersWhat reviewers are asked to assess.
• Aims and ScopeThe relevance test used at screening.
• Editorial BoardWho handles manuscripts for this journal.