Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics Policy

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY AND PUBLICATION ETHICS POLICY

The Editorial Board of the Journal follows the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. Our policy is based on the guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA).

1. Ethical Obligations of Authors

By submitting a manuscript, authors attest that:

• Originality: The work is entirely original. Any use of others' work or words is appropriately cited or quoted.
• Data Accuracy: No data has been fabricated, falsified, or manipulated.
• Authorship: All individuals listed as authors have made a significant scientific contribution to the research.
• Conflict of Interest: All financial or personal relationships that could influence the work are disclosed.
• Redundant Publication: The manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal.

2. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

In accordance with the latest COPE recommendations:

• AI as Author: AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude) cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.
• Disclosure: If AI tools were used in the research process or manuscript preparation (e.g., for data analysis or language editing), authors must clearly state this in the "Methods" or "Acknowledgements" section.
• Responsibility: Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the content produced by AI tools.

3. Peer Review Ethics (Reviewers' Duties)

Our journal employs a Double-Blind Peer Review process.

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents.
• AI Prohibition: Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading manuscripts into AI tools for generation of reviews or evaluation. This is a violation of the author’s intellectual property rights.
• Objectivity: Reviews must be conducted objectively, focusing on scientific merit rather than personal criticism.

4. Ethical Control and Misconduct Management

The Editorial Board monitors for the following violations:

• Plagiarism: Checked via specialized software.
• Self-plagiarism: Excessive reuse of the author's own previous work without justification.
• Citation Manipulation: Excessive self-citation or coordinated citations between authors.

Action Plan: If misconduct is suspected, the Editorial Board follows COPE Flowcharts. We reserve the right to contact the author's institution or funding body.

5. Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal an editorial decision (e.g., a rejection).

• Submission: An appeal must be sent to the Editor-in-Chief via email within 14 days of the decision, providing a detailed point-by-point rebuttal.
• Process: The appeal will be reviewed by an independent member of the Editorial Board or an external expert who was not involved in the original review.
• Finality: The Editor-in-Chief’s decision following an appeal is final.

6. Corrections and Retractions

• Corrections: If a minor error is found after publication, an Erratum or Corrigendum will be published.
• Retractions: If a significant violation (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication) is discovered, the article will be retracted according to COPE Retraction Guidelines. The retracted article will remain on the website but will be clearly marked as "RETRACTED" with an explanation.

7. 7. Adherence to DORA

The Journal supports the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). We evaluate the quality of research based on its intrinsic merit and scientific contribution, rather than the Journal Impact Factor or the author's h-index.