Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The mission of Audiology Research is to publish contemporary, ethical, clinically relevant scientific researches related to the basic science and clinical aspects of the auditory and vestibular system and diseases of the ear that can be used by clinicians, scientists and specialists to improve understanding and treatment of patients with audiological and neurotological disorders.

Journal topics and article categories

Audiology Research welcomes submission of manuscripts in the following topics and areas of interest:

1. Audiology
2. Neurotology
3. Speech and Language

Audiology Research publishes the types of articles defined below.


Section Policies

Original Articles

Original Articles should normally be divided into an abstract, introduction, design and methods, results, discussion and references. The abstract should contain about 250 words and must be structured as follows: background, design and methods, results, conclusions. A maximum of 20 authors is permitted, and additional authors should be listed in an ad hoc appendix.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


No particular format is required for reviews. However, they should have an informative, unstructured abstract of about 250 words. Reviews may also include meta-analyses, guidelines and consensus papers by scientific societies or working groups. These studies must be conducted following proper, widely accepted ad hoc procedures.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Brief Reports

Short reports of results from original researches. Brief reports must provide conclusive findings: preliminary observations or incomplete findings cannot be considered for publication. Brief reports should have a short abstract of no more than 150 words, a text of a maximum of about 2000 words, a maximum of 3 tables and/or figures (total), and up to 20 references.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Case Reports

Reports describing observations on clinical cases that can be educational, including adverse effects of drugs or outcomes of a specific treatment. Case reports should have a short abstract of no more than 150 words, a text of a maximum of about 2000 words, a maximum of 3 tables and/or figures (total), and up to 20 references.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Protocol Descriptions

Short articles describing new protocols that will be used in new or ongoing researches. Authors are requested to provide a detailed description of the hypothesis, rationale, and methodology of the proposed protocol. Protocol descriptions should have a short abstract of no more than 150 words, a text of a maximum of about 2000 words, a maximum of 3 tables and/or figures (total), and up to 20 references.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Clinical Techniques and Technology

A short report on innovative solutions to clinical problems by unique methods: a) diagnostic and rehabilitative techniques or medical management; b) new devices or technology. The manuscripts cannot be only theoretical but must include clinical data on 3 or more subjects. Submissions must have a title page, an unstructured abstract and key words. Manuscript length: no more than 15,000 characters including spaces, from 5 up to 10 references, and a total of 5 original and quality illustrations (figures and/or tables). Manuscript should conform to the following format: a) Introduction b) Description of the clinical techniques or technology c) Discussion that should clearly indicate how the reported work fits with the current body of world literature.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letters to the Editor

Authors may respond to published manuscripts in our journal or express a personal opinion or deliver information or news regarding an issue related to the Journal scope. If the letter is in relation to a published manuscript, the authors of the original manuscript will be given the opportunity to provide a rebuttal. Letters to the editor should be from 250 to 1000 words in length. Authors of Letters to the Editor should provide a short title for their letter. Letters to the Editor will be published in a section separate from papers which have undergone peer review.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Survey Reports

Summary and critical discussion of data collected during national/international surveys on topics relevant to the Journal scope. Survey Reports will follow the usual peer review process. The format of Survey Reports is the same as of Original Articles.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Issue devoted to the publication of the proceedings/abstracts of Conferences/Workshops/Meetings in the field of audiology. The publication of the Supplement has to be approved, on a case-by-case basis, by the Editor-in-Chief together with the Editorial Board and the Publisher, which will check whether it fulfills the scientific standards of the Journal. Peer review of the contributions in the Supplement issue will be performed by the Editorial Board.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Conference Reports

Short description of the key concepts presented and discussed at a Conference/Workshop/Meeting. As for Supplements, the publication of a Conference Report is subject to approval by the Editor-in-Chief together with the Editorial Board and the Publisher. Conference Reports will underwent a formal review by members from the Editorial Board.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book Reviews

Short (500 words) critical analysis and evaluation of the quality, meaning, and significance of a book which addressed at least one of main topics of the Journal. The publication of Book Reviews is subject to approval by the Editor-in-Chief together with the Editorial Board and the Publisher.

Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Special Articles

Each published issue of the Journal will host an Editorial, written by the Editor-in-Chief of by Editorial Board members or an Invited Paper or a Commentaire expressing opinions on current topics of interest. They are nearly always solicited by the Editor or by the members of editorial board, although unsolicited editorials may occasionally be considered. Editorial may provide commentary on an article in the issue of the Journal in which they appear or published elsewhere. The Invited Paper is commissioned from opinion leaders to review the state-of-the-art and the challenges for the future in the field, whereas the Commentaire, commissioned to opinion leaders, is a short and critical article on any contemporary issue within the Journal focus. Special articles are conceived to be opinionated reviews by renowned opinion leaders, focusing on strengths and weaknesses of their main research field.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Special Issues

They will be devoted to key topics identified by the Editor-in-Chief. Special issues could also be proposed by readers: in such a case, the proposal will be evaluated, on a case by case basis, by the Editor-in-Chief.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

All of our journals follow the WAME Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals about peer review. The Editorial Board of each journal will immediately screen all articles submitted for publication in that journal. Those articles which fail to reach the scientific standards of the journal may be declined without further review. Those articles which satisfy the requirements of the Editorial Board will be sent to a maximum of three referees. These are experts in the field who have agreed to provide a rapid assessment of the article. Every effort will be made to provide an editorial decision as to acceptance for publication within 4-6 weeks of submission. Referees may request a revision of the article to be made. In this case, it is generally understood that only one revised version can be considered for a further appraisal under the peer review system. The Editorial Board of each journal is responsible for the final selection of referees to conduct the peer review process for that journal. The names of referees will not be made available to authors. However, referees will be informed as to the identity of the authors whose articles are subject to review. All members of the Editorial Board and referees are asked to declare any competing interests they may have in reviewing a manuscript. If on receiving the editorial decision concerning their manuscript authors are not satisfied they are invited to appeal to the Editorial Office. In cases in which this is considered appropriate a second opinion on the manuscript will be requested.


Publication Frequency

All papers are published as soon as they have been accepted, by adding them to the "current" volume's Table of Contents.



PAGEPress is currently working with the major databases and online resources, such as Pubmed/Medline, Pubmedcentral, Google Scholar, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), IndexCopernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, OpenJ-Gate, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, Sherpa/Romeo, Socolar, to track Audiology Research articles. PAGEPress also have agreements with EBSCO Host, Elsevier Scopus, Bibliosan to track this Journal. PAGEPress is also working closely with Thomson Reuters (ISI) to ensure that citation analysis of articles published in this Journal will be available as soon as possible.


Publication Ethics


PAGEPress strongly support the mission of the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors; all individuals collaborating with PAGEPress are strongly invited to comply with this mission.


All research articles published by PAGEPress journals are subject to a rigorous ethical standards. Our journals endorses the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as the COPE International Standards for Editors and Authors Guidelines. The Editorial Board of each journal is responsible for the form the peer review process will take; therefore, all authors in the biomedical field must adhere to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. PAGEPress endorses the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Policy Statement on Geopolitical Intrusion on Editorial Decisions, too.

The Editorial Board of our journals will immediately screen all articles submitted for publication in that journal. All submissions we receive are checked for plagiarism by using online available tools as eTBLASTor iThenticate®. Any suspected misconduct ends up with a quick rejection and is then reported to the European Science Foundation and to the US Office of Research Integrity.

The European Science Foundation released a Code of Conduct on Research Integrity, which is fully supported by our journals. All authors submitting papers to our journals are required to adopt these policies.

Below some online resource to help you in understanding plagiarism:

Roig, M. Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. St Johns University.

Long TC, Errami M, George AC, et al. Responding to Possible Plagiarism. Science 2009; 323:1293-1294.

Lewis J, Ossowski S, Hicks J, Errami M, and Garner HR. Text similarity: an alternative way to search MEDLINE. Bioinformatics 2006; 22:2298-2304.

Conflict of Interests

Conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author's institution), reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) his or her actions (such relationships are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties). These relationships vary from negligible to great potential for influencing judgment. Not all relationships represent true conflict of interest. On the other hand, the potential for conflict of interest can exist regardless of whether an individual believes that the relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, and paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and of science itself. However, conflicts can occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion.

All participants in the peer-review and publication process must disclose all relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest. Disclosure of such relationships is also important in connection with editorials and review articles, because it can be more difficult to detect bias in these types of publications than in reports of original research. Editors may use information disclosed in conflict-of-interest and financial-interest statements as a basis for editorial decisions.

When authors submit a manuscript, whether an article or a letter, they are responsible for disclosing all financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly whether potential conflicts do or do not exist. Authors should do so in the manuscript on a conflict-of-interest notification page, providing additional detail, if necessary, in a cover letter that accompanies the manuscript. Increasingly, individual studies receive funding from commercial firms, private foundations, and government. The conditions of this funding have the potential to bias and otherwise discredit the research.

Scientists have an ethical obligation to submit creditable research results for publication. Moreover, as the persons directly responsible for their work, researchers should not enter into agreements that interfere with their access to the data and their ability to analyze them independently, and to prepare and publish manuscripts. Authors should describe the role of the study sponsor, if any, in study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing the report; and the decision to submit the report for publication. If the supporting source had no such involvement, the authors should so state. Biases potentially introduced when sponsors are directly involved in research are analogous to methodological biases.

Editors may request that authors of a study funded by an agency with a proprietary or financial interest in the outcome sign a statement, such as "I had full access to all of the data in this study and I take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis." Editors should be encouraged to review copies of the protocol and/or contracts associated with project-specific studies before accepting such studies for publication. Editors may choose not to consider an article if a sponsor has asserted control over the authors' right to publish.

Reviewers must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and they should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. As in the case of authors, silence on the part of reviewers concerning potential conflicts may mean either that conflicts exist and the reviewer has failed to disclose them or conflicts do not exist. Reviewers must therefore also be asked to state explicitly whether conflicts do or do not exist. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work, before its publication, to further their own interests.

Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts must have no personal, professional, or financial involvement in any of the issues they might judge. Other members of the editorial staff, if they participate in editorial decisions, must provide editors with a current description of their financial interests (as they might relate to editorial judgments) and recuse themselves from any decisions in which a conflict of interest exists.

Informed Consent

PAGEPress journals strictly follows the ICMJE Protection of Research Participants policy detailed at http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/protection-of-research-participants.html

Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. When informed consent has been obtained, editors may request authors to provide a copy before making the editorial decision.

Manuscripts must be reviewed with due respect for authors' confidentiality. In submitting their manuscripts for review, authors entrust editors with the results of their scientific work and creative effort, on which their reputation and career may depend. Authors' rights may be violated by disclosure of the confidential details during review of their manuscript. Reviewers also have rights to confidentiality, which must be respected by the editor. Confidentiality may have to be breached if dishonesty or fraud is alleged but otherwise must be honored.

Editors must not disclose information about manuscripts (including their receipt, content, status in the reviewing process, criticism by reviewers, or ultimate fate) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. This includes requests to use the materials for legal proceedings.

Protection of Human Subjects and Animals in Research

When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.

See our policy about Peer Review

See our policy about Privacy

© PAGEPress 2008-2017     -     PAGEPress is a registered trademark property of PAGEPress srl, Italy.     -     VAT: IT02125780185