Something went wrong, or you think a decision was unfair. Here is what to do.
First: which is it?
An appeal contests a decision — your manuscript was rejected, your protocol was refused, and you think the reasoning was wrong.
A complaint concerns conduct — an editor behaved improperly, a process was not followed, a fee was mishandled, or you allege research misconduct.
Different routes, different people. Both go to someone who was not involved the first time.
Appealing an editorial decision
Write to the journal’s editorial office within 30 days, addressing specific points in the decision letter. Your appeal is heard by an editor who took no part in the original decision. No panellist may hear an appeal on a journal whose editorial board they sit on. No one decides an appeal against their own decision. We aim to resolve appeals within two to four weeks.
A rejected paper that was properly reviewed will usually stay rejected, and we would rather say that than pretend otherwise. What an appeal gets you is a fresh pair of eyes and a real answer.
Appealing a decision of the Institutional Review Board
Write to ethics@lmi.education within 30 days. Your appeal is considered by Board members who took no part in the original decision.
Making a complaint
Tell us what happened, when, who was involved, and what you would like done.
This mailbox is read by the Chair of the Complaints and Research Integrity Committee, who is external to Link Medical Interface and holds no employment, contract, or shareholding with it. Complaints reach him directly. No director of this company reads this mailbox.
We are a small organisation. We do not have a compliance department and we will not pretend to. What we have is one person, independent of us, who reads what you send and is not answerable to the people you may be complaining about.
We acknowledge within 5 working days and aim to resolve within 30 days. Where it will take longer, we tell you why and when.
Allegations of misconduct
Plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts, duplicate publication. We investigate evidence-based, confidentially, and fairly to all parties. Outcomes may include rejection, correction, an expression of concern, retraction, notification of an institution or funder, or restriction on future submissions.
We correct the record. Where a published paper is wrong, we say so publicly, permanently, and linked to the article. A publisher that quietly deletes an article rather than retracting it has failed everyone who cited it.
If we do not resolve it
Ask us to escalate. And if that fails, you are entitled to take it further — to an author’s institution, to a professional body, to an indexing service, or to a regulator, as applicable. We are not the last word on our own conduct, and we will not pretend to be.
Complaints about clinical care
info@lmi.education, or complaints@lmi.education if you would rather it did not come to the practice. Serious concerns about a practitioner’s fitness to practise may be raised directly with their regulator — the PMDC, the HCPC, or the AHPC — and you do not need our permission to do so.