According to ICMJE, public trust in the scientific process and the credibility of published articles depend in part on how transparently an author’s relationships and activities, directly or topically related to a work, are handled during the planning, implementation, writing, peer review, editing, and publication of scientific work.

The potential for conflict of interest and bias exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients' welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Perceptions of conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest.

Individuals may disagree on whether an author’s relationships or activities represent conflicts. Although the presence of a relationship or activity does not always indicate a problematic influence on a paper’s content, perceptions of conflict may erode trust in science as much as actual conflicts of interest. Ultimately, readers must be able to make their own judgments regarding whether an author’s relationships and activities are pertinent to a paper’s content. These judgments require transparent disclosures. An author’s complete disclosure demonstrates a commitment to transparency and helps to maintain trust in the scientific process.

Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership or options, honoraria, patents, and paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable, the ones most often judged to represent potential conflicts of interest and thus the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and of science itself. Other interests may also represent or be perceived as conflicts, such as personal relationships or rivalries, academic competition, and intellectual beliefs.

Authors should avoid entering into agreements with study sponsors, both for-profit and non-profit, that interfere with authors’ access to all of the study’s data or that interfere with their ability to analyze and interpret the data and to prepare and publish manuscripts independently when and where they choose. Policies that dictate where authors may publish their work violate this principle of academic freedom. Authors may be required to provide the journal with the agreements in confidence.

Purposeful failure to report those relationships or activities specified on the journal’s disclosure form is a form of misconduct.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is distinct and extends beyond direct support for this work. Within a manuscript, the funding statement should include only direct support of the work described. Support for an individual's contribution for the work should be reported as such.

The journal adheres to the recommendations of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) regarding potential conflicts of interest in peer-reviewed publications. Materials submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, Executive Secretary, or individuals associated with them will undergo peer review like any other submissions and will be evaluated in the same manner as all other manuscripts submitted to the journal. When manuscripts are submitted by members of the Editorial Board (whether as sole authors or co-authors), the review process will be initiated and overseen by an editor without a potential conflict of interest. The editorial team will take all necessary measures to ensure unbiased double-blind peer review. Other members of the Editorial Board are not involved in making the final decision regarding the acceptance of the article.