Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The European Journal for Person Centered Healthcare (EJPCH) is dedicated to the development of the theory and practice of Person-centered Healthcare (PCH).  All aspects of PCH are of interest to the Journal, including: (i) healthcare epistemology and the nature of knowledge for clinical practice in the context of the immediate experience of the individual patient; (ii) complexity and reductionism in healthcare; (iii) person-centered integrative diagnosis; (iv) narrative-based/informed  healthcare; (v) values-based/informed healthcare; (vi) preferences-based/informed healthcare; (vii) scientific evidence-based/informed healthcare; (viii) psychosocial healthcare; (ix) psychosexual healthcare; (x) culturally-sensitive healthcare; (xi) spiritual and religious care; (xii) social and environmental healthcare; (xiii) translational and genomic medicine; (xiv) sociological aspects of PCH; (xv) medical informatics, information technology and person-centered healthcare records; (xvi) shared decision-making and PCH; (xvii) the role and importance of family and friends for PCH; (xviii) the medical humanities and PCH; (xix) the evaluation and audit of PCH; (xx) the ethics of PCH; (xxi) the medico-legal implications of PCH; (xxii) person-centered healthcare facility design; (xxiii) person-centered healthcare policy-making; (xxiv) the politics and political environment of PCH; (xxv) person-centered undergraduate and postgraduate clinical education; (xxvi) methodologies for the development of person-centered models of care for long term chronic illness; (xxvii) methodologies for the development of person-centered models of care for acute medical and surgical presentations; (xxviii) approaches to the individualisation of public health and population science.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Essay Reviews

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letters to the Editor

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Unchecked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Research Letter

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Conference Abstracts

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Manuscripts are initially screened by the Editor for conformity with aims and scope, then sent to 2 experts in the subject of the article.  If reviewers conflict, an additional expert is recruited and an editorial decision for acceptance/rejection made on the basis of the complete advice received. Manuscripts are either accepted, accepted conditionally upon minor revision, rejected with an invitation for extensive revision or rejected.


Author Self-Archiving

This journal permits and encourages authors to post items submitted to the journal on personal websites or institutional repositories both prior to and after publication, while providing bibliographic details that credit, if applicable, its publication in this journal.


Publication Ethics and Malpractice statement

The ethics statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Publication decisions

The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.

The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.


Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Statement on Informed Consent and Observation of Human and Animal Rights

All authors of research reports involving human or animal subjects should provide for publication a statement  on Informed Consent and institutionally approved observation of human and animal rights

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.