Any topic relevant to adolescent development and psychopathology is appropriate for submission to Adolescent Psychiatry. Its primary readership comprises of clinicians who work with adolescents. Authors are welcome to submit abstracts on-line which will be reviewed and authors given feedback regarding the appropriateness of the topic and advisability of submitting a manuscript. Please read the instructions for preparation and submission of manuscripts carefully. Manuscripts that do not conform to these guidelines will be returned to the author for correction before being considered for publication.
All manuscripts must be submitted electronically to https://bentham.manuscriptpoint.com/journals/aps. The editor is happy to provide preliminary feedback as to the appropriateness of a topic for the journal prior to formal submission of a manuscript and may be contacted at email@example.com. Submitted articles that have passed preliminary screening for topicality and readability will undergo blind peer review by at least 3 reviewers. The usual review period is 6 weeks. Papers accepted for publication are typeset and proofs are dispatched to authors for any corrections prior to final publication.
Authors who publish in Bentham Science print & online journals will transfer copyright to their work to Bentham Science Publishers. Submission of a manuscript to the respective journals implies that all authors have read and agreed to the content of the Copyright Letter or the Terms and Conditions. It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. Plagiarism is strictly forbidden, and by submitting the article for publication the authors agree that the publishers have the legal right to take appropriate action against the authors, if plagiarism or fabricated information is discovered. By submitting a manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright of their article is transferred to the publishers if and when the article is accepted for publication. Once submitted to the journal, the author will not withdraw their manuscript at any stage prior to publication.
It is mandatory that a signed copyright letter also be submitted along with the manuscript by the author to whom correspondence is to be addressed. The article should not contain any such material or information that may be unlawful, defamatory, fabricated, plagiarized, or which would, if published, in any way whatsoever, violate the terms and conditions as laid down in the copyright agreement. Copyright letter can be downloaded from the journal's Web site. Download the Copyright letter.
Permission to Reuse Bentham Content
Bentham Science has collaborated with the Copyright Clearance Center to meet our customer’s licensing, besides rights & permission needs.
The Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink® service makes it faster and easier to secure permission from Bentham Science’s journal titles. Visit Journals by Title and locate the desired content. Then go to the article’s abstract and click on “Rights and Permissions” to open the RightsLink’s page. If authors can't find the content they are looking for or can't get the rights they need, please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org
Authors are responsible for managing the inclusion of third-party content as an author/editor of a work. We refer to 'third party content' as any work that authors haven't developed themselves and have copied or adapted from other sources. Text, figures, photographs, tables, screenshots, and other items may be included.
Unless the figure is in the public domain (copyright-free) or permitted for use under Creative Commons or other open licences, the author must get permission from the copyright holder(s).
Published/reproduced material should not be included unless written permission has been obtained from the copyright holder, which should be forwarded to the Editorial Office in case of acceptance of the article for publication.
Articles are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode), which permits unrestricted distribution and reproduction in any medium, as long as the work is properly credited/attributed. For more details, please visit Open Access Policy
By signing the Copyright Letter, the authors retain the rights of self-archiving (subject to certain restrictions).
Following are the important features of the self-archiving policy of Bentham Science journals:
Authors can deposit the first draft of a submitted article on their personal websites or their institution's repositories for personal use, internal institutional use, or for permitted scholarly posting only.
Authors may deposit the ACCEPTED VERSION of the peer-reviewed article on their personal websites, their institution's repository or the non-commercial repositories, PMC and arXiv, after 12 MONTHS of publication on the journal website. For personal use, internal institutional use, or for permitted scholarly posting only.
In case of (b) above, an acknowledgement must be given to the original source of publication
and a link must be inserted to the published article on the journal's/publisher's website.
The link to the original source of publication should be provided by inserting the DOI
number of the article in the following sentence: "The published manuscript is available at
EurekaSelect via https://www.eurekaselect.com/openurl/content.php?genre=article&doi=
If the research is funded by NIH, Wellcome Trust or any other Open Access Mandate, authors are allowed the archiving of published versions of manuscripts in the nominated institutional repositories, after the mandatory embargo period. Authors should first contact the Editorial Office of the journal for information about depositing a copy of the manuscript to a repository. Consistent with the copyright agreement, Bentham Science does not allow archiving of FINAL PUBLISHED VERSION of manuscripts unless under an Open Access mandate as above. Archiving, under any of the above mentioned Open Access mandates, is done under the terms of the Creative Commons License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 - Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International.
There is no embargo on the archiving of articles published under the OPEN ACCESS PLUS category. Authors are allowed deposition of such articles on institutional, non-commercial repositories and personal websites immediately after publication on the journal website. This is done under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License CC-BY 4.0.
In case of any form of archiving, an acknowledgement must be given to the original source of
publication and a link must be inserted to the published article on the
journal's/publisher's website. The link to the original source of publication should be
provided by inserting the DOI number of the article in the following sentence: "The
published manuscript is available at EurekaSelect via https://www.eurekaselect.com/openurl/content.php?genre=article&doi=
To ensure permanent access to our publications, Bentham Science has an agreement with Portico to have a long-term preservation of the content published in its journals.
Research articles should present data not published elsewhere. Research can be qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods. Article length can be 4000-8000 words with 75 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables etc. Each manuscript should clearly state an objective or hypothesis; the design and methods (including the study setting and dates, patients or participants with inclusion and exclusion criteria, or data sources, and how these were selected for the study); the essential features of any interventions; the main outcome measures; the main results of the study; a comment section placing the results in context with the published literature and addressing study limitations; and the conclusions. Data included in research reports must be original.
Reviews of important topics in adolescent psychiatry are accepted as submissions or are solicited by the editor. They should be 8000-9000 words with 100 or more references, and for mini-review articles from 3000 to 6000 words with 100 or more references excluding figures, structures, photographs, schemes, tables etc. Authors should contact the editor prior to submitting a review article. It is important that the review article not duplicate existing reviews and also provide critical appraisal of the literature and identify gaps in knowledge and areas of controversy. Scholarly theoretical papers that address important areas of adolescent development and/or psychopathology are welcomed.
Clinical perspectives may involve case reports or case series, in which the case(s) is/are used to illustrate and discuss a clinical question, or aspect(s) of a disorder. These articles describe clinical manifestations, history, and differential diagnosis, and should include a review of the literature pertaining to the clinical problem, associated psychosocial contributing factors, prognosis, treatment and prevention.
400 words including references.
Case reports should describe new observations of findings or novel/unique outcomes relevant to the filed. The total number of words for a published case report is 1500 to 2500 words with 20 or more references.
These special issues are peer-reviewed and may contain invited or uninvited review/mini-review articles. A Single Topic Issue Editor will offer a short perspective and co-ordinate the solicitation of manuscripts between 3-5 (for a mini-thematic issue) to 6-10 (for full-length thematic issue) from leading scientists. Authors interested in editing a single topic issue in an emerging topic of Adolescent Psychiatry may submit their proposal to the Editor-in-Chief at email@example.com for consideration.
Editorials are short papers on important topics related to the journal. The total number of words in an editorial should not exceed 1000 to 1500, and it should contain only 10-15 references. An abstract is not required.
Commentaries present an analysis by scientists on different important issues related to the publications in the journal. Commentaries should contain less than 3000 words, including the abstract, main text, references, and figure legends. However, an abstract is not necessary.
A perspective provides a short overview of a research topic relevant to the field. The length of a
published perspective ranges from 1500 to 1800 words, with 20 or more references, excluding figures,
structures, photographs, schemes, tables,
Industry News should provide important developments in industries related to the scope of the Journal, that could be of interest to the readers. The length of the submission should be about 1000 words, and it should ideally have 10 or more references (abstract is not required).
Patent News may present important information about recent important patents that have been granted, relevant to the scope of this journal. The length should be about 1000 words, and it should ideally have 10 or more references (abstract is not required).
There is no restriction on the number of figures, tables or additional files e.g. video clips, animation and datasets, that can be included with each article online. Authors should include all relevant supporting data with each article (Refer to Supplementary Material section).
The manuscript should be written in English in a clear, direct and active style. Microsoft Word® is the preferred file format for submission of manuscript. Double-space the entire copy, including title page, abstract, list of references, tables, and figure captions in a 10 point font size using Times New Roman 12-point font. The manuscript style must be uniform throughout the text. After the title page, number pages consecutively throughout including the reference pages, tables, and figure legends. Other than for the title page and financial disclosure, blinding is the responsibility of the author. Files should be labeled with appropriate and descriptive file names (e.g. SmithText.doc, SmithFig1.pdf). There is no restriction on the number of figures, tables or additional files e.g. video clips, animation and datasets, that can be included with each article online. Authors should include all relevant supporting data with each article (Refer to Supplementary Material section).
The manuscript file should be uploaded in its native format, such as *.DOC.
Manuscripts with serious deficiencies in English may be returned without review. Our contracted service provider Eureka Science can provide assistance to authors for the preparation of manuscripts, including editing of manuscripts for non-English speaking authors.
Manuscripts submitted for research and review articles in the respective journal should be divided into the following sections:
List of Abbreviations (if any)
Consent for Publication
Conflict of Interest
Figures/Illustrations (if any)
Tables (if any)
Supportive/Supplementary Material (if any)
The title of the article should be precise and brief and must not be more than 120 characters. Authors should avoid the use of non-standard abbreviations and question marks in titles. The first letter of each word should be in capital letters except for articles, conjunctions and prepositions.
As recommended by the Reporting guidelines information about the study should be a part of the title (particularly for randomized or clinical trials, systematic reviews and meta analyses).
Authors should also provide a short 'running title with no more than 80 characters'. Title, running title, byline, correspondent footnote, and keywords should be written as presented in the original manuscript.
Title page should include paper title, each author(s) full name and institutional affiliation and location, For multiple authors, place a superscript after each author’s name and indicate the institutional affiliation below. Place an asterisk following the name of the principal/corresponding author, and include the statement.
*Address correspondence to this author at: address, along with phone, fax and email. Please see example.
The abstract of an article should be its clear, concise and accurate summary, having no more than 250 words, and including the explicit sub-headings (as in-line or run-in headings in bold). Use of abbreviations should be avoided and the references should not be cited in the abstract.
All the original research articles, systematic reviews and meta analyses must be accompanied with a structured abstract. Ideally, each abstract should include the following sub-headings, but these may vary according to requirements of the article.
The headings can vary, but must state the purpose of the study, details of the participants, measurements, methods, main findings and conclusion.
The clinical trial studies should have the registration number at the end of the study.
6 to 8 keywords must be provided. Choose important and relevant keywords that researchers in your field will be searching for so that your paper will appear in a database search. The keywords should be contained in the title and they should appear several times in the article. In biomedical fields, MeSH terms are a good ‘common vocabulary’ source to draw keywords from https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/meshhome.html.
Following the introduction, papers should be divided into appropriate sections with headings. For a typical research paper, main headings would be Method, Results and Discussion. For a review article, headings might include Literature Review, Case Examples, Discussion, and Summary. The Discussion section should include implications for clinical practice, recommendations or guidelines, and needs for further study
The sample consisted of adolescents who presented in our clinic with problem eating. All adolescents and their families who were identified at the time of the initial intake interview as having had problem eating were offered the opportunity to participate in this study. "Problem eating" was defined as a positive reply to the question, "Have you ever been concerned that you (your family member) might have an eating problem."
The full term for an abbreviation should precede its first appearance in the text unless it is a standard unit of measurement. For example, Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with significant functional impairment. BPD can be difficult to recognize in some patients.
Use the generic term for a drug. When it is necessary to refer to the proprietary name, list
it in parentheses after the generic term, followed by the register mark (®).Italics should
be used for Binomial names of organisms (Genus and Species), for emphasis and for unfamiliar
words or phrases. Non-assimilated words from Latin or other languages should also be
When material is quoted directly, the original material should be followed exactly, including all punctuation and italics. Quotations must be taken from the edition of the book that is listed in the references. All quoted passages must be followed by source page numbers.
(Fewer than 6 typewritten lines) should be incorporated into the text. The attribution, with the date in parentheses, should, whenever possible, precede the quote as part of the text; the page number, in parentheses, should follow the closing quotation marks, which are followed by the final period, e.g., Freud (1933) wrote, ". . ." (p. 5).
Longer passages should be indented and set off from the rest of the text in a separate paragraph.
Wherever possible and reasonable, sexist writing should be avoided by making sentences plural. When speaking of the therapeutic dyad, however, you will have to use singular pronouns. The therapist may always be a female and the patient always male, or vice versa; him or her can be used when doing so doesn't make for too awkward a sentence.
Greek symbols and special characters often undergo formatting changes and get corrupted or lost during preparation of manuscript for publication. To ensure that all special characters used are embedded in the text, these special characters should be inserted as a symbol but should not be a result of any format styling (Symbol font face) otherwise they will be lost during conversion to PDF/XML.
A small paragraph summarizing the contents of the article, presenting the final outcome of the research or proposing further study on the subject, may be given at the end of the article under the Conclusion section.
The authors need to declare the funding sources of their manuscripts clearly by providing the name of the funding agency or financial support along with allotted grant/award number in round brackets (if applied), for instance, “This work was financially supported by [Name of the funding agency] (Grant number XXX)".
Similarly, if a paper does not have any specific funding source, and is part of the employment of the authors, then the name of the employer will be required. Authors will have to clearly state that the funder was involved in writing, editing, approval, or decision to publish the article.
The Introduction section should include the background and aims of the research in a comprehensive manner.
Section headings should be numbered sequentially, left aligned and have the first letter capitalized, starting with the introduction. Sub-section headings however, should be in lower-case and italicized with their initials capitalized. They should be numbered as 1.1, 1.2, etc. A page break may be inserted to keep a heading along with its text.
This section provides details of the methodology used along with information on any previous efforts with corresponding references. Any details for further modifications and research should be included. Sufficient details should be provided to the reader about the original data source in order to enable the analysis, appropriateness and verification of the results reported in the study.
It is important for the Method Section should be sufficiently detailed in respect of the data presented, and the results produced from it. This section should include all the information and protocol gathered for the study at the time when it was being written. If the study is funded or financially supported by an organization to conduct the research, then it should be mentioned in the Method Section. Methods must be result-oriented. The statement regarding the approval by an independent local, regional or national review committee (e.g. name of ethic committee and institutional review board) should be part of the Methods Section.
Repeated information should not be reported in the text of an article. A calculation section must include experimental data, facts and practical development from a theoretical perspective.
The important and main findings of the study should come first in the Results Section. The tables, figures and references should be given in sequence to emphasize the important information or observations related to the research. The repetition of data in tables and figures should be avoided. Results should be precise.
This should explore the significance of the results of the work, present a reproducible procedure and emphasis the importance of the article in the light of recent developments in the field. Extensive citations and discussion of published literature should be avoided.
This section of research articles should discuss the implications of the findings in the context of existing research and highlight the study's limitations. The authors should justify the sample size according to the study purpose and methods.
The Results and Discussion may be presented together under one heading of "Results and Discussion". Alternatively, they may be presented under two separate sections ("Results" Section and "Discussion" Sections). Short sub-headings may be added in each section if required.
We do encourage authors to append supportive material, for example a PowerPoint file containing a talk about the study, a PowerPoint file containing additional screenshots, a Word, RTF, or PDF document showing the original instrument(s) used, a video, or the original data (SAS/SPSS files, Excel files, Access Db files etc.) provided it is endorsed by the journal's Editor. A bibliography of additional resources or recommended reading other than that included in the reference list may also be included with the approval of the Editor.
Supportive/Supplementary material intended for publication must be numbered and referred to in the manuscript but should not be a part of the submitted paper. In-text citations as well as a section with the heading "Supportive/Supplementary Material" before the "References" section should be provided. Here, list all Supportive/Supplementary Material and include a brief caption line for each file describing its contents.
Any additional files will be linked to the final published article in the form supplied by the author, but will not be displayed within the paper. They will be made available in exactly the same form as originally provided only on our Web site. Please also make sure that each additional file is a single table, figure or movie (please do not upload linked worksheets or PDF files larger than one sheet). Supportive/Supplementary material must be provided in a single zipped file not larger than 4 MB.
Authors must clearly indicate if these files are not for publication but meant for the reviewers'/editors' perusal only.
All potential conflicts of interest (competing interests) that could have a direct or indirect influence on the work must be disclosed by the authors. Even if an author does not have a conflict, disclosing affiliations and interests allows for a more comprehensive and open approach, which leads to a more accurate and objective evaluation of the work. Conflicts of interest, whether genuine or imagined, are a perspective to which the readers are entitled.
The publication of a conflict statement in the article itself, as well as the submission of the conflict disclosure form, is required for all types of papers. It is not necessarily the case that a monetary relationship with examination support or funding for counseling work is inappropriate. Even if the authors do not have any conflict of interest, they still need to provide a confirmation statement in their manuscripts, i.e., “The author(s) confirm(s) that there is no conflict of interest related to the manuscript.”
The following are some examples of potential conflicts of interest that are directly or indirectly related to the research:
Type of support/grant number
Institutional Conflicts of Interest
Funds received by the author
Funds received by the institution
Travel allowances for the research
Funds received for article preparation and reviewing
Funds for conducting review activities
Support provided for article writing assistance, for drugs, equipment, etc
Pending fund or grant
Financial conflicts of interest can be personal as well as institutional. Personal conflict of interest occurs when a contributor involved in the publication process either receives an amount of money or expects to receive some financial help (including any other financial benefits such as patents or stocks, gifts or services) that may impact the work related to a specific publication. More importantly, in academic research, such financial relationships can lead to institutional conflicts of interest (COIs) because the economic interests of the institution or institutional representatives may unsuitably affect the decision-making process.
An institutional conflict of interest arises in a situation when financial interests of an institution or any institutional official (e.g., investments held by the university in a company) have the potential to unduly influence the research conducted by its employees or students, or pose an unacceptable risk to human subjects. Such conflicts usually arise in a state of affairs where a research project directly offers assistance or a benefit to an external entity via evaluation, validation, trial or test of an invention, product, drug, service or technology, and the institution holds a financial interest with the external entity. Such financial interests incorporate, but are not limited to, receipt of licensing payments or royalties from the external entity, or ownership interest with the external entity. When human subjects are involved in any research project, and the institution supports such a financial interest, the conflict of interest is speculated to be unreasonable.
In addition, interests other than monetary and any funding (non-financial interests) should be declared if they are relevant to readers. Personal relationships or conflicting interests directly or indirectly related to research, as well as professional interests or personal opinions that may impact your research, are examples of these.
Intellectual property, in basic terms, refers to any intangible property that is the result of creativity, such as patents, copyrights, etc. Similarly, this section seeks to know about copyright and patent (licensed patent, pending or issued) and any payment received for intellectual property, such as:
All conflict of interest disclosure forms are collected by the corresponding author. It is sufficient for the corresponding author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors in author collaborations when legal agreements for representation allow it. The templates of the form can be found here.
Before the reference list, the corresponding author will include a summary statement in the text of the article that reflects what is reported in the potential conflict of interest disclosure form (s). Author(s) may declare(s) names of reviewers who they think might have a potential conflict of interest; therefore, Editorial Office could avoid inviting such reviewers for an unbiased opinion.
Undisclosed conflict of interest cases before or after the publication of an article are dealt with as per the guidelines of COPE.
Undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted article (View COPE guidelines)
Undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article (View COPE guidelines)
For more information on COIs, see the guidance from the ICMJE.
Bentham Science tries to conduct a transparent peer-review process with the help of the reviewers who do not have any conflict of interest with the authors. In this connection, reviewers who belong to the same institute or countries as authors are not invited to review manuscripts. However, it is not possible for the Editorial Office to be aware of all competing interests; therefore, it is expected from authors to submit:
List of reviewers who they think have a conflict of interest to ensure a transparent and unbiased review process.
The Editorial Office expects reviewers:
Not to accept manuscript review requests if they have any potential conflict of interest and inform the Editorial Office accordingly.
To decline review requests if they have recently published or submitted an article with any of the authors listed in the manuscript.
To inform the Editorial Office if they have any personal relationship with the authors or work in the same institutes as of authors, which could affect the review transparency.
To abstain from reviewing and informing the Editorial Office/Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editors about any scientific misconduct or fraud, plagiarism, conflict of interest, or any other unethical behavior related to the manuscript, which they found while reviewing it.
During the submission of review comments, reviewers are asked to reconfirm that they do not have any conflict of interest related to the article. After confirming the below statement, they can submit their comments.
“I hereby confirm that I don’t have any conflict of interest related to the manuscript.”
If, however, there are still any remaining interests, then reviewers must mention those in the ‘Confidential’ section of the review form.
Reviewers are not encouraged to contact authors directly regarding any of their conflicts of interest. Peer reviewers should follow journals’ policies in situations they consider to represent a conflict to reviewing.
If reviewers intentionally undisclosed any conflict of interest, then they will be blacklisted for any future peer reviewing activity of the journal.
The Editorial Office always ensures that an author, if added after peer review activity of a manuscript, is not part of the reviewers’ list who have conducted a peer review of the same manuscript.
Editors must not review submitted manuscripts if they have any personal, professional or financial involvement/conflict of interest with the authors of the manuscript. Every participant involved in the peer review process, including editorial board members, reviewers, and editors, must declare any potential conflicts of interest to ensure a transparent and unbiased review activity.
Editors-in-Chief or Editors who are responsible for the initial and final decision should recuse themselves to review or take decisions on any manuscript that is written by authors affiliated to the same institute as of editor, or if they have been a family member, competitor, collaborator, or have published any manuscript in last 3 years with the authors associated with the manuscript. They can however nominate someone else on the Board who could provide a neutral opinion on the manuscript.
The initial and final decision on the manuscripts submitted by an Editor/Editor-in-Chief will be taken by any other member of the Board. The Editorial Office will identify members who do not have any potential conflict of interest with the Editor or Editor-in-Chief.
Any research assistants or other individuals who assisted with the research but are not listed as authors, such as those who carried out the literature review, produced, computerized, and analyzed the data, or helped with the language, writing, or proofreading of the article, or offered any comments or suggestions, should be acknowledged. Briefly, everyone who has contributed significantly to the improvement of the paper should be acknowledged. It is recommended to mention the "Declared None" if there is no acknowledgement for the study.
Guest or honorary authorship based solely on position (e.g. research supervisor, departmental head) is discouraged.
The specific requirements for authorship have been defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors www.icmje.org Examples of authors' contributions are: 'designed research/study', 'performed research/study', 'contributed important reagents', 'collected data', 'analyzed data', 'wrote paper' etc. This information must be included in the submitted manuscript as a separate paragraph under the heading 'Authors' Contribution'. The corresponding author is responsible for obtaining permission from all co-authors for the submission of any version of the manuscript and for any changes in the authorship.
Standard Protocol on Approvals, Registrations, Patient Consents & Animal Protection: All clinical investigations must be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki principles. Authors must comply with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (www.icmje.org/) with regard to the patient's consent for research or participation in a study. Patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers must not be mentioned anywhere in the manuscript (including figures). Editors may request that authors provide documentation of the formal review and recommendation from the institutional review board or ethics committee responsible for oversight of the study.
In addition to the standard patient consent for participation in research, authors are responsible for obtaining patient consent-to-disclose forms for all recognizable patients in photographs, videos, or other information that may be published in the Journal, in derivative works, or on the journal's web site and providing the manuscript to the recognizable patient for review before submission. The consent-to-disclose form should indicate specific use (publication in the medical literature in print and online, with the understanding that patients and the public will have access) of the patient's information and any images in figures or videos, and must contain the patient's signature or that of a legal guardian along with a statement that the patient or legal guardian has been offered the opportunity to review the identifying materials and the accompanying manuscript.
A specific declaration of such approval and consent-to-disclose form must be made in the Copyright Letter and in a stand-alone paragraph at the end of the Methods section especially in the case of human studies where inclusion of a statement regarding obtaining the written informed consent from each subject or subject's guardian is a must. The original should be retained by the guarantor or corresponding author. Editors may request to provide the original forms by fax or email.
Post-publication discussions are well-timed and engaging scientific remarks and justifications on research articles published in "Adolescent Psychiatry". These remarks must be based on the information concurrent with the original study and not on the scientific advancements being made subsequently.
Manuscript Preparation, Submission & Editorial Process:
- Post-publication discussion should commence with a short paragraph that outlines the summary of the article.
- Authors are advised to avoid using inciting tone in the comments and keep the message clear and concise.
- The main text should not exceed 1200 words with up to 15 references and may include one or two figures and/or tables.
- References should be submitted in the ACS or Vancouver style.
- The correspondents are recommended to contact the original authors first prior to submitting their comments to the journal as this may resolve the issues that may have arisen due to some misunderstanding.
- The correspondence that has been done with the authors should also be submitted as an attachment with the manuscript.
Any queries therein should be addressed to firstname.lastname@example.org
Randomized drug clinical trial studies are biomedical or health-related interventional and/or observational research studies conducted in phases in human beings who are randomly allocated to receive or not receive a preventive, therapeutic, or diagnostic intervention that follows a pre-defined protocol. The study is intended to determine the safety and efficacy of approaches to disease prevention, diagnosis and treatment.
Authors of randomized controlled trials are encouraged to submit trial protocols along with their manuscripts. All clinical trials must be registered (before recruitment of the first participant) at an appropriate online public trial registry that must be independent of for-profit interest (e.g., (www.clinicaltrials.gov/). If you wish the editor(s) to consider an unregistered trial, please explain briefly why the trial has not been registered.
All randomized clinical trials should include a flow diagram and authors should provide a completed randomized trial checklist (see CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist; www.consort-statement.org) and a trial protocol. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html
Studies of diagnostic accuracy must be reported according to STARD guidelines; (www.stard-statement.org)
Observational studies (cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional designs) must be reported according to the STROBE statement, and should be submitted with their protocols; (www.strobe-statement.org).
Genetic association studies must be reported according to STREGA guidelines; (www.medicine.uottawa.ca)
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must be reported according to PRISMA guidelines; (www.prisma-statement.org)
To find the reporting guidelines see (www.equator-network.org)
Important points to remember while submitting clinical trials:
Trial registry name, registration identification number, and the URL for the registry should be included at the end of the abstract and also in the space provided on the online manuscript submission form. If your research article reports the results of a controlled health care intervention, list the trial registry, along with the unique identifying number (Please note that there should be no space between the letters and numbers of your trial registration number). Studies designed for other purposes, such as to study pharmacokinetics or major toxicity (e.g., phase 1 trials), are exempted.
All reports of randomized trials should include a section entitled “Randomization and Masking”, within the Methods section.
The manuscript must include a statement identifying the institutional and/or licensing committee that has approved the experiments, including any relevant details.
The SI system of units and the recommended international non-proprietary name (rINN) for drug names must be used. Kindly ensure that the dose, route, and frequency of administration of any drug you mention are correct.
Please ensure that the clinical trials sponsored by pharmaceutical companies follow the guidelines on good publication practice: (https://www.ismpp.org/gpp2)
The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements.
All references must be complete and accurate. Use the American Psychological Association style, 6th Edition (London and Washington, DC, 2009, American Psychological Association) as a guide for formatting citations and references. This is a (name, date) system for citations. References are listed alphabetically at the end. A few examples are given below; more examples of the APA style and helpful suggestions for writing may be found on the website of Purdue University (owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/).
Include the authors' last names and year of publication. For a work with two authors, include both
authors' names each time the work is cited. For 3-6 authors, cite all authors the first time the
reference occurs; thereafter include only the first author's surname followed by "
Citations should list authors in alphabetical order, for example, (Tang et al. 1987; Tozman &
Kamal, 1987). Where two or more references would have the same text citation, add a, b, c, etc. to
the year (Smith
Use an ampersand (&) to join the final name in a citation in parentheses for more than two authors, e.g., (Smith, Labelle & Tang, 2009). However, if the authors are listed in the text as part of a sentence, use "and" as in the following example: "Smith, Labelle and Tang (2009) found …."
When using direct quotations, cite the page number for the quotation along with the source.
References should be double-spaced, in alphabetical order and include the names of all authors for up to 7 authors. For more than seven, list the first 6 authors followed by an ellipsis, then the last author.
The first line of the entry is flush with the left margin, and all subsequent lines are indented (5 spaces or ½") to form a "hanging indent".
For articles accepted for publication, the words "in press" should be substituted for the year.
Personal communications may be cited in the text but are not listed in the references unless they are recoverable as archival materials.
Hutson, H., Anglin, D., Kyriacou, D., Hart, J. & Spears, K. (1995). The epidemic of
gang-related homicides in Los Angeles County from 1979 through 1994.
Curry, G. & Decker, S. (1998).
Gibbs, J.T., & Huang, L.N. (Eds.). (2001).
Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary (11th ed.). (2003). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster.
Hammond, K.R., & Adelman, L. (1986). Science, values, and human judgment. In H.R. Arkes
& K.R. Hammond (Eds.),
Meeks, J. (1975). Group delinquent reaction. In Freedman A., Kaplan H. & Sadock B.S.
Levine, S. (1999), Wraparound programs: a review of clinical roles, responsibilities, constraints, and possibilities, a report for the County of San Diego Health and Human Services Agency. Unpublished manuscript.
Usually these supply a preferred citation
U.S. General Accounting Office. (1995) School safety: Promising initiatives for addressing school
National Institute of Mental Health. (1990).
Fredrickson, B.L. (2000, March 7). Cultivating positive emotions to optimize health and
Goldberg, I. (2000).
Give complete web address
Halsall, P. (1997), Modern history sourcebook: Maximilien Robespierre: Justification of the use of terror. Retrieved from www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/robespierre-terror.html
Some important points to remember
Use References as level one header (capitalize, bold center).
List references in alphabetical order
Put spaces after all commas and periods.
Do not use
Give starting and ending pages for chapters and journal articles.
Capitalize only the first word and all proper nouns in titles of works, except for journal names
The source of data and materials should be mentioned in the manuscript, in support of the findings. Sharing research data is integral to its transparency and reproducibility. Data sharing involves the citation and availability of data that support the findings of the research.
Bentham Science encourages authors to share the source of data and materials in the manuscript, in support of the findings.
The four types of research data policies are mentioned below.
Wherever appropriate and possible, the journal encourages authors to publish data to support their research findings in a public repository. Any datasets mentioned in the article that are available in external repositories should be cited.
How to Cite the Data?
Whether the data was developed by the author(s) or researcher(s), all publicly available data referenced in the preparation of an article should be cited in the text and reference list. The references relating to the data availability should be presented in the following format:
Example: Name of author(s), the title of data set, data repository, document version (e.g., most recent updated version), Digital Object Identifier (DOI), and Bentham Science reference style should be included in data citations.
When authors submit a paper to a journal, the authors agree that the data provided in the publication, including the relevant raw data, will be freely available to any researcher who wants to use these for non-commercial reasons without jeopardising participant anonymity.
Data availability declarations are required under Bentham Science research data policy types.
The statement relating to the data availability should be presented in the following format under a separate section for ‘Availability of Data and Materials’ in the manuscript:
"The data supporting the findings of the article is available in the [repository name] at [URL], reference number [reference number]”.
Authors can add or change the statement(s) above, to fit their work the best. Depending on the nature of the research, several assertions may need to be merged.
All datasets on which the paper's conclusions are based must be made accessible to reviewers and readers, according to the journal's rules. Prior to peer review, authors must either deposit their datasets in publicly accessible repositories or provide them as supplementary materials with their submission. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html
Authors may provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data. if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
The Authors are encouraged to use industry-recognized reporting guidelines for biomedical and biological research, if applicable, to explain that all requirements for reporting have been adopted.
All authors must strictly follow the reporting guidelines below for preparing the study for publication.
CONSORT: All randomized clinical trials must include a flow diagram and authors should provide a completed randomized trial checklist (see CONSORT Flow Diagram and Checklist; www.consort-statement.org) and a trial protocol. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html
MOOSE: Meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology must be reported according to MOOSE guideline (http://www.ijo.in/documents/14MOOSE_SS.pdf)
Place the word
All authors must strictly follow the guidelines below for preparing illustrations for publication in
The authors are expected to submit good quality figure(s) in PDF, PPT, MS Word, TIFF or JPEG versions, which, if required, should be improved yourself or by professional graphic designers of your organization/country. You may even consider approaching our contracted service providers Eureka Science for Graphics Enhancement Services.
The Graphics Designing team at Eureka Science can assist in improving the quality of your images at affordable rates. Eureka Science has contracted special rates with us of US $150 for the improvement of up to five figures, with any additional figures being charged at US $25 each.
The quality of Graphic Enhancement Services offered by Eureka Science can be viewed at http://www.eureka-science.com/images/Binder1.pdf, along with valuable feedback on their services at http://www.eureka-science.com/testimonials.php. You may contact Eureka Science at email@example.com
Illustrations must be provided according to the following guideline:
Illustrations should be embedded in the text file, and must be numbered consecutively in the order of their appearance. Each figure should include only a single illustration which should be cropped to minimize the amount of space occupied by the illustration.
If a figure is in separate parts, all parts of the figure must be provided in a single composite illustration file.
Photographs should be provided with a scale bar if appropriate, as well as high-resolution component files.
All the numbers, symbols and letters in figures should be consistent and clear throughout and large enough to remain readable when the size is reduced for publication.
It must be ensured to cite each figure in the text in sequence.
Line Art image type is normally an image based on lines and text. It does not contain tonal or shaded areas. The preferred file format should be TIFF or EPS, with the color mode being Monochrome 1-bit or RGB, in a resolution of 900-1200 dpi.
Halftone image type is a continuous tone photograph containing no text. It should have the preferred file format TIFF, with color mode being RGB or Grayscale, in a resolution of 300 dpi.
Combination image type is an image containing halftone, text or line art elements. It should have the preferred file format TIFF, with color mode being RGB or Grayscale, in a resolution of 500-900 dpi.
Illustrations may be submitted in the following file formats
Bentham Science does not process figures submitted in GIF format.
For TIFF or EPS figures with considerably large file size restricting the file size in online submissions is advisable. Authors may therefore convert to JPEG format before submission as this results in significantly reduced file size and upload time, while retaining acceptable quality. JPEG is a ‘lossy’ format. However, in order to maintain acceptable image quality, it is recommended that JPEG files are saved at High or Maximum quality.
Zipit or Stuffit tools should not be used to compress files prior to submission as the resulting compression through these tools is always negligible.
Please refrain from supplying:
Graphics embedded in word processor (spreadsheet, presentation) document.
Optimized files optimized for screen use (like GIF, BMP, PICT, WPG) because of the low resolution.
Files with too low a resolution.
Graphics that are disproportionately large for the content.
Width = 8.5 inches (In-between the required size)
Height = 11 inches (In-between the required size)
Pixels/Inches = 300 (minimum dpi)
All figures should be in vector scale (except half tone, photograph.)
There are many software packages, many of them freeware or shareware, capable of converting to and from different graphics formats, including PNG.
General tools for image conversion include Graphic Converter on the Macintosh, Paint Shop Pro, for Windows, and ImageMagick, available on Macintosh, Windows and UNIX platforms.
Bitmap images (e.g. screenshots) should not be converted to EPS as they result in a much larger file size than the equivalent JPEG, TIFF, PNG or BMP, and poor quality. EPS should only be used for images produced by vector-drawing applications such as Adobe Illustrator or CorelDraw. Most vector-drawing applications can be saved in, or exported as, EPS format. If the images were originally prepared in an Office application, such as Word or PowerPoint, original Office files should be directly uploaded to the site, instead of being converted to JPEG or another format of low quality.
The cost for color figures/plates/illustrations is
Color figures should be supplied in CMYK and not RGB colors.
Data Tables should be submitted in Microsoft Word ® table format and should be on separate pages at the end of the manuscript. Each table should be on a separate page. Use decimal tabs to align numbers in tables.
Place the word
Each table should include an explanatory title/caption with respect to the details discussed in the table. Detailed legends may then follow.
Table number in bold font i.e. Table 1, should precede a title. The title should be in bold and title case.. A full stop should be placed at the end of the title.
In the text, refer to the table by its number. Include a notation in the text about where the table or figure should be inserted, for example, <Insert Table 1 about here>.
Columns and rows of data should be made visibly distinct by ensuring that the borders of each cell are displayed as black lines.
Tables should be numbered in Arabic numerals sequentially in order of their citation in the body of the text.
If a reference is cited in both the table and text, please insert a footnote in the table to refer to the reference in the text.
Tabular data provided as additional files can be submitted as an Excel spreadsheet.
It is adequate to present data in Tables to avoid unnecessary repetition and reduce the length of the text.
The citation of each table in the text must be ensured.
Symbols and nonstandard abbreviations should be explained in the end of the text.
All references should be numbered sequentially [in square brackets] in the table and listed in the same numerical order in the reference section.
Bentham Science Publishers requires that all individuals listed as authors must have made a substantial contribution to the design, performance, analysis, or reporting of the work. The role of authors is judged on the basis of ICMJE and COPE guidelines.
All contributing authors are required to sign a copyright letter, mentioning complete details, including full name, affiliation, email address, ORCID ID and their role in the article. After successful electronic submission of a manuscript, a system-generated acknowledgement will be sent to all authors on their provided email addresses.
The Corresponding Author must provide a final list of authors at the time of submission, ensuring the correct sequence of the names of authors, which will not be considered for any addition, deletion or rearrangement after final submission of the manuscript. The email address of the principal author should be provided with an asterisk. However, the complete address, business telephone numbers, fax numbers and e-mail address of the corresponding author must be stated to receive correspondence and galley proofs. Bentham Science Publishers recommends that all contributors regularly update their profiles on SCOPUS/ORCID and other databases.
The corresponding author must have the approval of all other listed authors for the submission and publication of all versions of the manuscript.
Authors are strongly recommended to use their ORCID ID when submitting an article for consideration. Alternatively, they can acquire an ORCID ID via the submission process. For more information about ORCID IDs, visit here.
At the time of initial submission, the finalized list of authors in the correct sequence should be provided, which will not be changed once the publication process starts.
In exceptional cases, requests for the addition/deletion of an author may be considered by the publisher subject to a) written approval from all co-authors and b) a strong justification (which may or may not be accepted by the Publisher).
Here is some advice from COPE on authorship issues. Bentham strives to follow these guidelines.
Bentham Science Publishers recognizes that authors use a variety of tools for preparing articles related to their scientific works, ranging from simple ones to very sophisticated ones.
According to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, "AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. As non-legal entities, they cannot assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest nor manage copyright and license agreements".
The pertinence of such tools may vary and evolve with public opinion, due to which the use of AI-powered language tools has led to a significant debate. These tools may generate useful results, but they can also lead to errors or misleading results; therefore, it is important to know which tools were used for evaluating and interpreting a particular scientific work.
Considering the above we require that:
- The authors to report any significant use of such tools in their works, such as instruments and software along with text-to-text generative AI consistent with subject standards for methodology.
- All co-authors should sign a declaration that they take full responsibility for all of its contents, regardless of how the contents were generated. Inappropriate language, plagiarized and biased contents, errors, mistakes, incorrect references, or misleading content generated by AI language tools and the relevant results reported in scientific works are the full and shared responsibility of all the authors, including co-authors.
- AI language tools should not be listed as an author; instead, authors should follow clause (1) above.
Activities such as the acquisition of funding, general supervision of a research group or general administrative support, writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading alone do not qualify any contributor for authorship. Such contributors may be acknowledged individually or together as a group in the acknowledgement section. Further details for writing acknowledgements are available here. Persons not meeting authorship criteria can be acknowledged in the acknowledgement section of the article rather than being enlisted as authors.
All contributing authors should contribute substantially to the article and sign the copyright letter. Bentham Science Publishers discourages authorship based solely on position (e.g., a research supervisor or a departmental head). We use COPE guidelines for identifying any suspected ghost, guest or gift authorship.
Authors should seek professional assistance for the correction of grammatical, scientific, and typographical errors before submission of the revised version of the article for publication.
Please note that we accept a language certificate, only from one of the above two language editing organizations.
Authors will receive page proofs of their accepted paper before publications. To avoid delays in
publication, proofs should be checked immediately for typographical errors and returned within
The corresponding author will be solely responsible for ensuring that the revised version of the manuscript incorporating all the submitted corrections receives the approval of all the co-authors of the manuscript.
Bentham Science offers a 50% discount off the Quick Track Publication Fee for manuscripts of all corresponding authors who reside in countries which are categorized as low-income economies by the World Bank. To see if you qualify to the discount, please refer to the complete list of these countries click here.
No page charges will be levied to authors for the publication of their article. However, the authors may decide for some paid-for editorial services such as open access publication and/or a faster overall publication for their article(s).
For this journal, an optional fast publication fee-based service called QUICK TRACK is available to authors for their submitted manuscripts.
QUICK TRACK allows online publication within 2 weeks of receipt of the final approved galley proofs from the authors. Similarly, the manuscript can be published in the next forthcoming PRINT issue of the journal. The total publication time, from date of the first receipt of manuscript to its online publication, is 12 weeks, subject to its acceptance by the referees and modification (if any) by the authors within one week.
The author will be initially charged a small fee on receipt of the agreement form for Quick Track publication to partially cover the initial costs incurred for expedited processing of the submitted manuscript. Later, the full Quick Track publication fee (US$ 730 per article charges) will be payable in advance, after acceptance of the manuscript, before online publication of the article. However, if the article is rejected at the peer-review stage, then the US$ 730 per article charges will not be charged.
Please note that whether the author opts for the QUICK TRACK facility or not, standard reviewing practices will be followed, which will not in any way affect the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript by the reviewers.
Authors who have availed QUICK TRACK service in a BSP journal will be entitled for an exclusive
For more information please contact the Editorial Office by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Bentham Science offers a 50% discount off the Quick Track Publication Fee for manuscripts of all corresponding authors who reside in countries which are categorized as low-income economies by the World Bank. To see if you qualify to the discount, please refer to the complete list of these countries click here.
Bentham Science offers three major services related to its publications:
- Subscription services (to subscribers, institutes, libraries, customers, etc.): Involving access to published content based on certain charges for corporates, academic institutes, and individuals.
- Editorial/Author Pre-publication services (to editors, authors, etc.): Quick track processing, language editing, etc.
- Editorial/Author Post-publication Promotional Services (to authors, institutions and organizations): Open Access Plus, Animated Abstracts, Sharing PDF on KUDOS, reprints, etc.
Since these services are optional in nature and are offered for specific services rendered, hence refunds are not allowed against the availed and charged services, except under special cases.
Bentham Science also offers authors the choice of “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” publication
of articles at a fee of
Authors who select the “Quick Track” publication option and also wish to have their article made
available on an “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” basis will be entitled to a
For more information please contact us at e-mail: email@example.com
Bentham Science offers a 50% discount off the Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access) Fee for manuscripts of all corresponding authors who reside in countries which are categorized as low-income economies by the World Bank. To see if you qualify to the discount, please refer to the complete list of these countries click here.
Printed reprints and e-prints may be ordered from the Publisher prior to publication of the article. First named authors may also order a personal online subscription of the journal at 50% off the normal subscription rate by contacting the subscription department at e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Extend the scope and visibility of your research by creating an animated abstract. Bentham Science has collaborated with Focus Medica, one of the world’s largest publishers of expert animated atlases and videos in medicine and science.
An animated abstract will help summarise the essential discoveries/ key findings of your published research or review article. Each professionally produced full-coloured animated abstract in video format (length 3 – 5 minutes) is accompanied by an English spoken or foreign language commentary. The animated abstract will be published online along with the published article.
The payment for an animated abstract will be
Authors who opt for the “Animated Abstract” option and also wish to have their article made available on an “Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access)” basis will be entitled to a 50% discount only on the Animated Abstract fee and, in addition, pay the normal Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access) fee.
Authors will be asked whether they wish to opt-in for this paid animated abstract service, and if not, the article will be published as normal. Animated abstracts are available as open access (free viewing) for maximum visibility and awareness to readers at anytime, anywhere. The animated abstracts are licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
For a sample of an animated abstract please access here https://www.benthamscience.com/pages/animated-abstract-video
Bentham Science offers discounts to those corresponding authors who are based in low-income countries*.
The authors who wish to avail this offer should request for a discount at the time of submission of their manuscripts to Bentham Science.
Bentham Science offers 50% discount on the Open Access Plus (Gold Open Access) Fee, Quick Track Fee and Article Processing Charges (APC) for manuscripts of the corresponding authors based in countries categorized as low-income economies by World Bank (list given below).
For any query or suggestion, please contact us on email@example.com.
All papers submitted to Bentham Science for publication are immediately subjected to preliminary editorial scrutiny by the Editorial Staff and Editor-in-Chief in connection with their suitability. The Editor-in-Chief determines if the manuscript:
(a) falls within the scope of the journal and
(b) meets the editorial criteria of Bentham Science Publishers in terms of originality and quality.
Manuscripts that appear to be suitable are then subjected to double-blind peer review by, usually two to three, neutral eminent experts. The services of eminent international experts are sought through invitations to conduct the peer review of a submitted manuscript, keeping in view the scope of the manuscript and the expertise of the reviewers. The identities of both the reviewer and author are kept undisclosed to each other, ensuring anonymity and maintaining confidentiality throughout the entire review procedure. The anonymity of reviewers ensures an objective and unbiased assessment of the manuscript by the reviewers.
Before sending the manuscripts to reviewers, Bentham Science seeks consent from potential reviewers about their availability and willingness to review. Correspondence between the editorial office of the journal and the reviewers is kept confidential. The reviewers are expected to provide their reports in a timely fashion since a prompt review leads to the timely publication of a manuscript which is beneficial not only to the authors but to the scientific community as well.
The editorial process and peer-review workflow for each journal are taken care of by a team of Senior Editors, Editorial Board Members (EBMs) and dedicated Journal managers who have the required expertise in their specific fields.
Bentham Science Publishers carries out independent reviews of all articles. The reviewers are selected according to their expertise, from our, regularly updated, referee database.
On the basis of reviewer comments, the Editors may recommend acceptance, revision or rejection of a manuscript.
After a review of the manuscript by at least two or three independent experts, in addition to the views of the Editor, the decision is relayed to the authors, which may be categorized as:
Requires minor changes
Requires major changes
Rejected with no resubmission
If an article receives two contradictory reports, the Editor-in-Chief retains the right to request additional comments and the discretion to make the final decision without waiting for additional reports, taking into consideration the content and conclusions presented in all reports. This proactive approach ensures promptness in conveying the Editor's decision, thereby facilitating swift communication with the author.
Bentham Science requests not to have the manuscripts peer-reviewed by those experts who may have competing interest with the author(s) of a submitted manuscript. It is not possible for Editors to be aware of all competing interests; it is therefore expected that the reviewers would inform the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor if they notice any potential competing interest during the course of review of a manuscript. Moreover, the reviewers are expected to inform the Editors or editorial office of the journal if they have a conflict of interest in carrying out the review of a manuscript submitted by any author/contributor of the manuscript.
The authors are usually requested to resubmit the revised paper within 15 days and it will then be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation. The publishers normally allow one round of revision and, in exceptional cases, a second round of revision may be allowed. If further revision is needed, then the manuscript is rejected and the author is requested to resubmit the manuscript for fresh processing.
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is that of the Editor-in-Chief, depending on the quality of the revision and his assessment of the quality of the manuscript. In rare cases, manuscripts recommended for publication by the referees may be rejected in the final assessment by the Editor-in-Chief.
The time frame for revision of any article may vary from one to four weeks, depending on the nature of the revision required (minor or major). However, authors who need extra time for revision should consult the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor with valid reasons and the submission date of the revised manuscript may be extended if the request is genuine.
After the successful completion of the review and acceptance of the article, the articles are typeset and proofs are dispatched to authors for any corrections prior to final publication.
Plagiarism means copying or paraphrasing another writer's content, be it a text, a result or an observation, and stating it as one's own, without citing a reference to the original source. Therefore, authors should acknowledge and cite references to the work of other scientists in their manuscripts. The author should ensure that all the sources are authentic and that there is no discrepancy in the content of the manuscript.
Bentham Science is vigilant in checking and identifying the primary sources of the data within the content by using the iThenticate software to detect instances of overlapping and similarity of text in submitted manuscripts. iThenticate software verifies the content against a database of periodicals, materials on the Internet, and a comprehensive article database. The software generates a similarity report in percentage that matches the article in process and the published material. This similarity is further scrutinized for suspected plagiarism according to the publisher's Editorial Policies. The generated report comprises the overall percentage of the content reused.
The study of an author has to be original. If there are credible sources of the content referred to in the manuscript, the author needs to cite all of them. Authors are advised to use iThenticate before submitting a manuscript to ensure that there are no instances of plagiarism. Authors are required to provide proper consent from the individuals and contributions of other authors should be acknowledged.
Bentham Science has different editorial policies for authors who have more than one publication. Following those policies, the authors need to specify the sources of the submission in their recent work. For further details, please visit the following link of Editorial Policies for Concurrent Publication/Simultaneous Submission at https://benthamscience.com/pages/editorial-policies-main
Bentham Science strictly follows COPE guidelines to detect plagiarism. For clearer insight, authors may refer to the flowcharts provided by COPE by clicking here or visiting the COPE website.
To ensure the scholarly integrity of every article, Bentham Science will publish post-publication notices. The authors of the published articles, or those who have submitted the manuscripts with false information, or fabricated the supporting data or images, will be liable for sanctions, and their papers will be retracted. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: https://www.benthamscience.com/fabricating-stating-false-information
Bentham Science is a publishing partner of Kudos. All authors who publish in this journal will receive an
invitation to join the Kudos platform, an entirely free service for authors. Kudos enables authors to
help broaden their audience and readers, increase their professional profile and reputation, and
establish an impact for their publications. The website link is
Kudos provides a free platform to researchers to have their publications accessible, read and cited across multiple networks and channels available to researchers for the dissemination of their work. It takes on average 15 minutes and leads to 23% higher growth in full-text downloads.
Authors are encouraged to explain their work in clear English and to attract researchers of the relevant communities, share a trackable link that you can email to your existing network of contacts, or share on social media and academic websites, and track how well the articles are performing through the summary of views, downloads, citations, and altmetrics on the Kudos dashboard.
Authors may also use the new shareable PDF (S-PDF) service. The S-PDF provides researchers with the means to write and share a high-level overview for each of their publications. Kudos thereby provides researchers, and their publishers and institutions, with a rich understanding of which channels and activities are most effective for broadening the reach and impact of published science.
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is an advisory body that ensures the highest standards of editorial practice in scholarly publishing, by providing guidance to editors and publishers in all aspects of publication ethics.
Adolescent Psychiatry is committed to upholding ethical standards in scholarly publishing. This journal is affiliated with COPE and adheres to its guidelines. To learn more about COPE guidelines, visit COPE website.
Bentham Science Publishers is pleased to offer electronic publication of accepted papers prior to scheduled publication. These peer-reviewed papers can be cited using the date of access and the unique DOI number. Any final changes in manuscripts will be made at the time of print publication and will be reflected in the final electronic version of the issue. Articles ahead of schedule may be ordered by pay-per-view at the relevant links by each article stated via the E-Pub Ahead of Schedule.
Articles appearing in E-Pub Ahead-of-Schedule sections have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in this journal and posted online before scheduled publication. Articles appearing here may contain statements, opinions, and information that have errors in facts, figures, or interpretation. Accordingly, Bentham Science Publishers, the editors , authors and their respective employees are not responsible or liable for the use of any such inaccurate or misleading data, opinion or information contained of articles in the E-Pub Ahead-of-Schedule.