About the Journal

1. Aim and Scope

Current Problems of Psychiatry is a continuation of the annual journal “Badania nad schizofrenią/Research on Schizophrenia” and is intended for psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, psychotherapists, mental health researchers, and other specialists involved in diagnosing, treating, preventing, and researching mental disorders. The journal focuses on presenting articles that offer broad, multidisciplinary, scientific, and clinical perspectives on mental health disorders. Articles emphasize the biological, neural, and psychosocial determinants of these disorders, as well as their diagnosis and treatment.
The expected topics include basic research, clinical analyses, and reviews of the current literature that allow for the generation of original conclusions and the identification of new research directions. The Editorial Board is also interested in manuscripts that expand current knowledge of the pathomechanisms of mental health disorders, taking into account, above all, genetic and molecular factors, somatic status, neuroimaging and neurophysiological findings, cognitive functioning, the psychosocial environment of patients, and new cultural factors related to the digitization of everyday life and online media. The journal is also interested in works concerning new methods of diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders, as well as those developing methods of prevention and psychoprophylaxis.

The aim of Current Problems of Psychiatry is to facilitate integration and the exchange of experiences and clinical knowledge among specialists representing various aspects of research and clinical practice.

Currently, the average turnaround time for publication is 10 weeks.

2. Open Access Policy

The journal Current Problems of Psychiatry is published under an open access model (Budapest Open Access Initiative - BOAI: https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read/), providing immediate, unrestricted, and free access to all published content. Access to full-text articles dating back to 2010 does not require registration or login.
This policy aims to promote the free flow of scientific knowledge and increase the visibility of research findings in the health sciences.
Users have the right to use the materials, including viewing, downloading, copying, and distributing them, provided they follow the rules for proper citation of the source. This is consistent with the DOAJ definition of open access.

3. Copyright and License

Authors retain the copyright to their works while granting the publisher the right to publish and distribute them.

Since 2016, articles published in Current Problems of Psychiatry have been made available under Creative Commons licenses. Articles published from 2016 to 2019 were licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 license (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Since 2020, all newly published articles have been licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0).

The CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 license permits users to copy and redistribute the material for non-commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given and the material is not modified. The CC BY 4.0 license permits copying, distribution, adaptation, and reuse for any purpose, including commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given, a link to the license is provided, and any changes are indicated.

The license applicable to each article is indicated on the article landing page and in the full-text PDF.

Authorship Criteria

Authorship is based on the four criteria recommended by the ICMJE. Each author must:

  1. make a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;
  2. draft the manuscript or revise it critically for important intellectual content;
  3. approve the final version to be published; and
  4. agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work and to ensure that questions related to its accuracy or integrity are appropriately investigated and resolved.

All individuals who meet all four criteria must be listed as authors. Contributors who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged, with their permission.

4. Review Procedure

4.1. Peer review process

The journal employs a double-blind peer review process. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers with a documented track record of scholarly achievement in a field relevant to the manuscript’s subject matter.

In the event of significant discrepancies between the reviews, the Handling Editor (The Section Editor assigned to oversee a manuscript acts as the Handling Editor) conducts a comprehensive evaluation of the manuscript and the opinions received. In justified cases, an additional independent reviewer may be appointed. The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

4.2. Preliminary screening

Each manuscript submitted to the journal undergoes an initial review conducted by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Section Editor, covering:

a) alignment of the topic with the journal’s scope,
b) completeness of the submission (abstract, keywords, affiliations, author declarations),
c) compliance with the ICMJE authorship criteria,
d) the presence of ethical statements required for medical sciences:

  • approval from the relevant bioethics committee (for studies involving humans or animals),
  • clinical trial registration number (if applicable – in accordance with ICMJE requirements for interventional studies),
  • informed consent from study participants/patients,
  • conflict of interest statement,
  • statement on funding sources,

e) verification of the text’s originality using the Crossref Similarity Check/iThenticate anti-plagiarism system,
f) formal compliance with the guidelines for authors.

Manuscripts that do not meet the above requirements will be rejected by the editorial board without being sent for external review. The initial editorial review is typically conducted within 2–4 weeks of submission.

4.3. Anonymization of the manuscript

Before forwarding the manuscript to reviewers, the editorial office verifies that the draft manuscript has been properly anonymized:

  • author information, affiliations, and contact details have been removed,
  • acknowledgments and grant information that could reveal the identity of the research team have been removed or modified,
  • file metadata has been verified,
  • and references to the authors’ previous works have been rephrased so as not to reveal their identities.

4.4. Selection of Reviewers

The Handling Editor selects reviewers based on:

  • subject-matter expertise relevant to the manuscript’s topic and methodology,
  • the absence of conflicts of interest,
  • geographic and institutional diversity within the reviewer pool. 

4.5. Review process

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript using a review form that includes:

Criterion Scope of evaluation

Originality and scientific/clinical significance

 Novelty of the findings and relevance to medical practice
Methodological rigor Study design, sample selection, and statistical analysis
Ethical compliance Institutional review board approval and study registration
Reliability of results and conclusions Consistency of the data with the conclusions
Quality of presentation IMRaD structure, clarity of language, and quality of tables and figures
Appropriateness of the references Currency and relevance of the cited sources

The review concludes with one of the following recommendations:

  • acceptance without revisions,
  • acceptance after minor revisions,
  • acceptance after major revisions,
  • rejection.

4.6. Editorial decision

The Handling Editor reviews the reviewers’ reports and prepares a recommendation for the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision to accept the manuscript, request minor or major revisions, or reject the manuscript.
The Handling Editor communicates the decision to the authors and provides them with the anonymized reviewers’ comments.
If the reviewers’ recommendations differ substantially, the Handling Editor may recommend that the manuscript be evaluated by an additional independent reviewer. The Editor-in-Chief considers all reviewers’ reports, the Handling Editor’s recommendation, and the manuscript’s scientific and methodological quality before making the final decision.
The final editorial decision rests exclusively with the Editor-in-Chief.

4.7. Manuscript revision

When submitting a revised manuscript, authors must mark all changes made in response to reviewers’ comments in red. This requirement also applies to newly added text. Authors must also upload a separate document entitled 'Response to Reviewers' Comments', providing a point-by-point response and clearly identifying all changes and additions made to the manuscript.

In the event of a conditional decision, the authors are required to submit:

  • a revised version of the manuscript,
  • a detailed response to each reviewer’s comment,
  • additional data or supplementary analyses (if applicable).

The revised version is resubmitted to the same reviewers (for significant methodological revisions) or evaluated directly by the Handling Editor (for minor revisions).

4.8. Final decision and publication

Upon final acceptance, the manuscript is forwarded to the technical editorial office (for language editing and typesetting) and then published.

4.9. Ethical standards and compliance with COPE guidelines

The journal adheres to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding:

  • procedures for handling suspected scientific misconduct, plagiarism, or duplicate publication,
  • retraction policy,
  • procedures for reporting and resolving conflicts of interest,
  • and the protection of patient privacy in accordance with ICMJE requirements.

5. Publication ethics and malpractice statement

The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity in scholarly publishing. The editorial policy complies with internationally recognized ethical guidelines, including those of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Editors, reviewers, and authors are expected to adhere to ethical standards, including:

  • the originality of the submitted work,
  • proper citation of sources,
  • avoidance of plagiarism and duplicate publication,
  • disclosure of conflicts of interest,
  • and responsible research practices.

Any suspected cases of research misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or unethical experiments, will be investigated in accordance with established ethical guidelines.
In cases of suspected scientific misconduct, the Editorial Board reviews the matter in accordance with COPE guidelines. Depending on the nature of the report, the Editorial Board may request clarification from the authors, consult with reviewers or members of the Editorial Board, reject the manuscript, publish a correction, retract the article, or notify the relevant institution. All cases are handled with confidentiality, impartiality, and integrity.

Civil Liability

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, reliability, originality, and legality of their articles. The editors and the publisher are responsible for reviewing credible reports, correcting scientific statements as necessary, and applying the journal’s publication ethics in accordance with COPE guidelines. Neither the publisher nor the Scientific Board bears responsibility for the consequences of any potential misconduct.

6. Guidelines for checking manuscripts for plagiarism

Each manuscript is checked using the anti-plagiarism systems “Crossref Similarity Check / iThenticate”.
The similarity score is analyzed qualitatively; a high level of similarity, especially above 30%, particularly involving unattributed borrowings, may result in the rejection of the manuscript or its return for revision. The Editorial Board reserves the right to request clarification from authors in cases of doubt regarding the originality of the text.

7. Statement on respect for human and animal rights (Statement of Human and Animal Rights)

All experimental research involving humans or animals requires approval from ethics and bioethics committees (with regard to medical research involving humans, authors are bound by the principles contained in the Declaration of Helsinki, and with regard to animal experiments – the guidelines Interdisciplinary Principles and Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research, Testing, and Education, published by the New York Academy of Sciences – Ad Hoc Committee on Animal Research). A statement regarding approval by the bioethics committee and its reference number should be included in the “Materials and Methods” section.

8. Informed consent to participate in the study (Statement of Informed Consent)

In the case of studies involving human participants, their written informed consent to participate in the study is required. A statement confirming that patients have provided written consent to participate in the study should be included in the “Materials and Methods” section, in accordance with the principles of the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki. The text of the paper and any illustrative material (figures, tables) must not include names, initials, medical record numbers, or any other data that could identify a patient.

9. Scientific integrity

The Editorial Board of Current Problems of Psychiatry emphasizes that transparency regarding the entities contributing to the publication (substantive, material, financial contributions, etc.) is evidence of a researcher’s ethical conduct and the highest editorial standards; this reflects not only good practice but also social responsibility. We remind authors that they are required to present the results of their work in a transparent, reliable, and honest manner. Specific examples of dishonesty include so-called ghostwriting and guest authorship:

  • ghostwriting occurs when the authors of a work have not disclosed the person who made a significant contribution to the publication – that person was not listed as one of the authors or in the acknowledgments included in the publication;
  • The unethical practice of guest authorship refers to a situation where an author’s contribution is negligible or nonexistent, yet they are listed as a co-author of the publication.
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI) is not an author. Authors of submitted manuscripts are required to disclose whether and to what extent AI was used in the manuscript preparation process. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject manuscripts whose authors fail to disclose the use of AI or where the extent of AI’s involvement remains unclear. 
    Using AI tools exclusively to correct spelling or grammar mistakes and in a broader context of text editing does not require a specific disclosure in the article.

The Editorial Board declares that the authors of the publication bear full responsibility for it, and any detected cases of misconduct will be disclosed. The authors are asked to disclose their contributions to the publication, with the author submitting the manuscript bearing primary responsibility.

10. Self-Archiving policy for authors

Authors may deposit the submitted version, the Author Accepted Manuscript, and the published version of their work in an institutional repository or any other repository of their choice. The versions deposited should include a full citation to the published article and a DOI link to the Version of Record.
Self-archiving of all specified versions is permitted without an embargo.

11. Information on funding sources

If funding was obtained for a research project, information indicating the funding source must be included below the bibliography.

12. Article Processing Charges (APC)

The journal is funded by institutional funds from the Medical University of Lublin and by article processing charges (APC).

Current Problems of Psychiatry is an open-access journal. The article processing charge (APC) is 600 PLN/135 EUR (including VAT). This fee is charged only after the manuscript is accepted for publication. The journal does not charge fees for manuscript submission, peer review, editing, or retraction.

Sources of revenue do not influence the peer review process or editorial decisions.

The journal does not offer waivers or discounts on the publication fee.

13. Digital Archiving Policy

The journal’s Editorial Board attaches the utmost importance to the long-term preservation of published scholarly content. To ensure permanent access to scholarly output for future generations of researchers, the journal implements a multi-tiered digital archiving strategy.

Currently, the journal uses the following platforms to ensure the long-term availability of content:

  • PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN): The journal uses the PKP PN plugin within the OJS system. This network provides a decentralized archiving system based on LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) technology, which ensures that backup copies are distributed across the servers of academic institutions worldwide.
  • National Library Digital Repository: In accordance with legal deposit regulations, the full texts of all articles are deposited and permanently archived in the National Library Digital Repository.
  • Biblioteka Nauki/Library of Science: Articles are archived on the Biblioteka Nauki platform (ICM UW), which ensures long-term preservation and open access to Polish scientific resources.

14. Long-Term Research Data Preservation Policy

The Editorial Board of Current Problems of Psychiatry does not maintain its own research data repository. Authors are encouraged to preserve their research data long-term in trusted institutional or disciplinary repositories in accordance with the principles of open science and the requirements of research funding agencies.
The journal does not require mandatory sharing of research data. However, authors are encouraged to store raw data and make it available upon a justified request from the editorial board, reviewers, or readers, taking into account applicable laws, ethical principles, and personal data protection.

15. Complaints and Appeals Policy

The Editorial Board accepts complaints and comments regarding the editorial, peer review, and publication processes. Complaints and appeals should be submitted via the editorial panel’s messaging system or to the editorial office’s email address: cpop@umlub.edu.pl

All submissions are reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated member of the Editorial Board. The journal does not maintain a separate formal appeals procedure for editorial decisions; however, in justified cases, authors may request that the Editorial Board reconsider the matter. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

16. Advertising Policy

Current Problems of Psychiatry does not accept or display commercial advertising.