A way to progress science in pediatric and adolescent gynecology: Update of author guidelines and double-blind peer review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpag.2022.04.004Get rights and content

Section snippets

What has been done to improve scientific reporting?

The most common study designs published in JPAG are case reports, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, and (systematic) reviews. Rarer are prediction models, qualitative studies, and randomized controlled trials. The Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) network is an international collaboration to improve reliability, promote responsible reporting, and improve the value of the science published.2,3 Over the last few years, many transparent reporting guidelines

Time for update of author guidelines and peer review process

The level of evidence in the PAG scientific field is progressing, as shown by the newer research designs such as multicenter studies, systematic reviews, and clinical trials, but the level of reporting needs to be improved as well. Therefore, a task force of the JPAG's Editorial Board with Prof Keith Allen Hanssen, Prof Susan Coupey, and Prof Alla Vash-Margita, together with the editor-in-chief and associate editors, updated the author guidelines (//www.elsevier.com/journals/journal-of-pediatric-and-adolescent-gynecology/1083-3188/guide-for-authors

Declaration of Competing Interest

The author has no financial disclosures. She currently serves as vice president of the International Federation of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology and president-elect of the European Association of Pediatric and Adolescent gynecology.

References (9)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (1)

View full text