Development of eLearning content

All authors of RCPsych eLearning content are required to sign Author Agreements (in which their full authoring responsibilities are defined) and provide declarations of interest for their eLearning resource.

Once commissioned, as part of the module’s development, authors will be required to provide their draft to the eLearning team in the template provided, revise the draft in line with eLearning guidance and following peer review feedback as required, approve the final version once developed for publishing on the eLearning Hub and respond to any final editorial queries.

All named authors on an eLearning resource are regarded to have joint responsibility for the originality and integrity of the content, regardless of their individual contribution during the development process.

A ‘lead author’ may act as the key point of contact with the editorial team on behalf of their co-authors with their agreement around draft development, responding to queries on the content, coordinating updates and paperwork among the authoring team, in signing the author agreement for the team and signing a resource off for publication.

We require that authored content is original and is not copied wholly or substantially from any other work or material or any other source. Authors are the sole creators of their content and are accountable for its accuracy and integrity and must acknowledge, reference and ensure permission for use of any third-party material.

Any use of AI-generated content must comply with best practices regarding referencing and acknowledgment; AI-authored content is not considered to meet the required accountability of authorship. Authors are required to be transparent with use of AI if used to generate text, images or analysis of data.

Minimal use of AI tools in content preparation does not require declaration, such as spelling checks or minor formatting tasks. Authors have accountability for use of AI tools, including minimal and non-generative use; it is important to check for any unintended consequences, particularly regarding referencing. Where authors are unsure, they can seek advice from the editorial team.

We reserve the right to run all submitted module drafts through appropriate plagiarism checking tools during the development process and will highlight any areas of concern to the author/authoring team for addressing, including text recycling, or self-plagiarism, where content from an author’s previously published resource is reused without proper attribution or to an unacceptable level. Failure to address plagiarism issues during the development process may lead to a module not progressing further towards publication.

The editorial team work with the authors to develop the draft content ready to be submitted for peer review. Peer reviewers are asked to objectively and constructively evaluate the content's relevance, quality, accuracy and appeal for the eLearning environment, within an agreed timeframe for a timely response. We follow a single-blind peer review process, whereby the peer reviewer is anonymous to the authors. Our modules are peer reviewed by a subject matter expert, as well as our Editor, and the feedback is collated and shared with the authors.

Authors are required to respond to the points raised in the peer review process and, in the case of any disagreement, clearly explain the reasons behind not making any requested changes.

The Editor, or relevant Course Lead/Course Director, makes the final decision on eLearning content being ready to move forward towards publication.

For quality improvement purposes the modules are part of a Module Updates programme, and we ask our eLearning module authors to review and update their modules regularly, contacting them every 2 years to ensure material is updated and kept topical as per their Author Agreements.

Authors are also expected to send through any key updates (for example to legislation or guidance referenced in their module) as soon as possible, regardless of the scheduled revision date, as per the Author Agreement.

Feedback submitted on eLearning resources is collated and shared with the authors at the point of their revision, or more immediately depending on urgency for action, as may be the case with any questions received related to accuracy or integrity of any part of the content.

Authors are required to respond promptly and make alterations to their content in a timely manner if such a request is received; the updated content may go through the peer review process at the Editor’s request.

If authors are unable or unwilling to review and update their module, we may engage someone else to edit or revise the content, giving that person appropriate credit on the author page.

Modules will be archived from the site if not updated/reviewed within 5 years, at the Editor’s discretion, as per our Revisions and Archiving procedure.

Content is allocated a Warning box highlighting where it is currently being updated, or if out-of-date appealing for a new updater where authors can no longer update.

In the event we are made aware of concerns around content or out-of-date content that needs time to be investigated and updated, we reserve the right to temporarily remove it from access while we await the updates, as advised and decided by the Editor and Associate Dean for Advanced Learning, in line with our governance procedures.

We are pleased to offer a selection of free modules and podcasts for those without a paid subscription. If you are a member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, you can log into the free content straight away using the same username and password with which you access the members' area of the College website. Otherwise, all you need to do is register with the College.

Our selection of free CPD eLearning content comprises resources for which funding has been received to allow free access for a defined period outside of the subscription package; content that may be selected for promotion by our eLearning Advisory Board; and content that may be made freely accessible in line with a particular College need from time to time. RCPsych retains full editorial control, with content developed and managed in line with our standard processes.