Post Publication Discussion Policy

1. Purpose

LINK Journal welcomes constructive, evidence-based discussion of articles it has published. This policy sets out how readers may submit comments or critiques on a published article and how the authors may respond. It follows the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the ICMJE Recommendations on correspondence.

2. Relationship with the Retraction, Withdrawal, and Correction (R-W-C) Policy

This policy covers scholarly discussion only. It does not cover changes to the published record, which are governed by the journal’s R-W-C Policy [link].

Matter	Handled under
Scholarly disagreement over methods, analysis, interpretation, or conclusions	This policy (Letter to the Editor and Author Reply)
Request for clarification of methods or data	This policy
Additional data or analysis relevant to a published article	This policy
Errors, authorship corrections, Corrigendum, Erratum, Addendum	R-W-C Policy
Suspected misconduct (fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, redundant publication, unethical research)	R-W-C Policy (Retraction process, following COPE flowcharts)
Editorial Note or Expression of Concern	R-W-C Policy
Withdrawal or retraction requests	R-W-C Policy

 

If a letter submitted under this policy reveals a possible error or misconduct, the Editor-in-Chief will refer the matter to the R-W-C process. The letter may be held, published, or declined depending on the outcome, and the commenter will be informed of the referral.

3. Scope

This policy applies to all articles published in the journal. Accepted discussion topics are:

• comments, questions, or criticisms concerning the methods, data, analysis, interpretation, or conclusions of a published article;
• alternative interpretations supported by evidence;
• additional data or analyses that bear on a published article.

4. Channels

4.1 Letter to the Editor

The formal route for post-publication discussion. Accepted letters are published, indexed, and linked to the original article.

4.2 Author Reply

The authors of the discussed article are invited to reply. A letter and its reply are published together whenever possible.

4.3 External Platforms

Comments on third-party platforms (e.g., PubPeer, social media) are not part of the journal’s formal record. Anyone wishing a concern to be formally assessed should contact the editorial office or submit a letter.

5. Submission Requirements

Item	Requirement
Timing	Within 6 months of the article’s online publication. Later submissions may be considered at the Editor-in-Chief’s discretion
Length	Up to 600–1,000 words, excluding references
References	Maximum 10, including the article under discussion
Display items	Maximum 5 table or figure
Format	Title referring to the original article; full citation with DOI; author names, affiliations, ORCID iDs; corresponding author email
Submission	Through the OJS portal as article type “Letter to the Editor” [or via email]
Declarations	Competing interests, funding, and any relationship with the authors of the discussed article

 

Acceptable: respectful, specific, evidence-supported critique; relevant additional evidence; requests for clarification.

Not acceptable: personal attacks or defamatory statements; unsupported allegations; undisclosed competing interests; material published or under consideration elsewhere; commentary unrelated to a specific published article; anonymous submissions.

6. Editorial Handling

1. Acknowledgement within 5 working days.
2. Screening by the Editor-in-Chief for scope, relevance, civility, and sufficient substantiation.
3. Review by the Editor-in-Chief alone or with external reviewers, preferably including one independent of the original article.
4. Invitation to reply. If the letter is considered for publication, it is sent to the corresponding author of the original article, who is invited to reply within 30 days. Failure to reply does not prevent publication; the journal will state that the authors were invited to respond.
5. Decision: accept, request revision, or decline, based on scholarly merit rather than agreement with the journal’s or the authors’ position.
6. Accepted letters and replies are published together in the next available issue, cross-linked to the original article. Each exchange normally consists of one letter and one reply. Further exchanges are at the Editor-in-Chief’s discretion.

Editors, board members, or reviewers with a conflict of interest regarding the article or letter will not take part in its handling.

7. Conduct and Competing Interests

• All commenters, authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial competing interests.
• Discussion must remain professional and focused on the science. The Editor-in-Chief may edit letters for length, clarity, and tone, and will consult the commenter about substantial changes.

8. Appeals

A commenter or author who disagrees with a decision on a letter or reply may submit one written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days, stating specific reasons and any new evidence. Appeals concerning retractions or corrections follow the R-W-C Policy.

9. Timeline Summary

Step	Target time
Acknowledgement	5 working days
Initial editorial decision	2–3 weeks
Author reply window	30 days
Final decision after reply	4–6 weeks