Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

These rules apply to new submissions and editorial work. They describe how ethical issues are handled and do not imply that the journal is indexed in Scopus.

Authorship and contributions

Authors disclose their contributions, approve the final manuscript and take responsibility for its accuracy. Changes to authorship require a reason and agreement from all authors. Gift authorship, undisclosed duplicate publication and simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals are unacceptable.

Independence and competing interests

Authors disclose funding and financial, professional or personal interests that may influence the work. Editors and reviewers disclose conflicts before assessment. An editor with a conflict does not decide on the manuscript; manuscripts authored by editors are assigned to an independent editor. Payment for editorial services does not determine the scientific decision.

Ethical oversight

Human research reports applicable ethics approval or a justified exemption and participant consent information. Identifying information is protected; publication of identifiable information requires appropriate consent. Animal studies report applicable permissions and welfare measures.

Data and reproducibility

Authors describe methods, data sources and limitations and provide a data availability statement. If open sharing is not possible, they explain the reason and any permitted access procedure. Confidential medical information must not be disclosed publicly.

Allegations of misconduct

Concerns about plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation or other misconduct should be sent to the editorial office with specific evidence. Editors record the concern, assess the evidence, request an author response and cooperate with relevant institutions when necessary. A similarity score alone does not establish plagiarism. Assessment may be paused while concerns are investigated.

Complaints and appeals

Authors and readers may submit a reasoned complaint or appeal through the editorial contact details. An editor independent of the disputed decision or an independent committee considers it. The outcome and reasons are communicated to the complainant. An appeal does not guarantee publication.

Post-publication discussion and corrections

Editors consider substantiated comments after publication. Errors are addressed through corrections; serious unresolved concerns may warrant an expression of concern. Unreliable findings or serious misconduct may warrant retraction. Notices explain the reason and are linked to the original article; published articles are not silently replaced. Authors have an opportunity to respond.

Intellectual property

Authors are responsible for rights to the material they submit. Copyright and licensing terms are stated in the submission guidelines and on the article page. Use of third-party material requires attribution and any necessary permissions.

Generative artificial intelligence

AI cannot be credited as an author. Authors disclose substantive AI use in content preparation, identify the tool and purpose and verify text, data and references. Editors and reviewers do not send confidential manuscripts to external AI services without appropriate protection and permission.

Contact the editorial office. See also the author guidelines.

Editors’ responsibilities

Editors assess scientific content, the reliability of methods, fit with the journal’s scope and ethical requirements. An author’s nationality, gender, religion or personal views must not influence the decision. Access to manuscripts and reviews is restricted to authorised participants in the editorial process. Substantiated reports of misconduct are considered after publication as well.

Reviewers’ responsibilities

Reviewers accept assignments within their expertise, disclose conflicts of interest and provide reasoned, respectful and specific comments within the agreed deadline. Unpublished information from a manuscript must not be used for personal benefit. Requests to cite a reviewer’s own work require a scientific justification.

Submitting an ethics concern

Provide the article title and link, the suspected issue, the relevant passage or data and verifiable evidence. Do not include personal medical information in a public report. Send concerns to the address listed on the editorial contact page.