Publication Ethics

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

This journal follows guidelines from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Initiative for Open Citations I4OC and the International Committee for Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) in facing all aspects of publication ethics and, in particular, how to handle cases of research and publication misconduct.

All studies must be conducted to a high ethical standard and must adhere to local regulations and standards for gaining scrutiny and approval. The work described in your article must have been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans; EC Directive 86/609/EEC for animal experiments. 

Critical Medical and Surgical Nursing Journal adapts COPE to meet a high-quality standard of ethics for publisher, editors, authors, and reviewers. As an essential issue, publication ethics needs to be explained clearly to improve the quality of the research worldwide. In this part, we explain the standard for editors, authors, and reviewers. In addition, the publisher doesn't have right to interfere with the integrity of the contents and only support to publish in a timely manner.

 

Duties for Editors

  1. Editors should be responsible for every article published in Critical Medical and Surgical Nursing Journal.
  2. Editors should help authors to follow the instruction for the author that we adopt from ICMJE.
  3. The editors may communicate with other editors or reviewers in making the final decision.
  4. An editor has to evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without looking to nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. He/she should decline his/her assignment when there is a potential for conflict of interest.
  5. Editors need to ensure the document sent to the reviewer does not contain the information of the author, vice versa.
  6. Editors' decision should be informed to authors accompanied by reviewers' comments unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks.
  7. Editors should respect requests from authors that an individual should not review the submission if these are well-reasoned and practicable.
  8. Editors and all staffs should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
  9. Editors will be guided by COPE flowcharts if there is a suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.

Duties for Reviewers

  1. Reviewers need to comment on ethical questions and possible research and publication misconduct.
  2. Reviewers will do the work in a timely manner and should notify the editor if they can not complete the work.
  3. Reviewers need to keep the confidentiality of the manuscript.
  4. Reviewers should not accept to review the manuscripts in which there is a potential conflict of interest between them and any of the authors.

Duties for Authors

  1. Author(s) affirm that the material has not been previously published and that they have not trans­ferred elsewhere any rights to the article.
  2. Author(s) should ensure the originality of the work and they have properly cited others' work in accordance with the references format.
  3. Author(s) should not engage in plagiarism nor self-plagiarism.
  4. ‘Salami' publication is strictly prohibited in Critical Medical and Surgical Nursing Journal.
  5. Author(s) should ensure that they follow the authorship criteria that are taken from ICMJE that is explained in instruction for the author of Critical Medical and Surgical Nursing Journal.
  6. The author(s) haven't suggested any personal information that may make the identity of the patient recognizable in any forms of description part, photograph or pedigree. When the photographs of the patient were essential and indispensable as scientific information, the author(s) have received the consent in written form and have clearly stated it.
  7. In case of experimenting on human, the authors have certified that the process of the research is in accordance with ethical standards of Helsinki declaration, domestic and foreign committees that preside over human experi­ment. If any doubts are raised whether the research was proceeded in accordance with the declaration, the authors should explain it. In case of experimenting on animals, the authors have certified that the authors had followed the domestic and foreign guideline related to the experiment of animals in a laboratory.
  8. Author(s) should give the editor the data and details of the work if there are suspicions of data falsification or fabrication.
  9. Authors of the journal should clarify everything that may cause a conflict of interests such as work, research expenses, consul­tant expenses, and intellectual property on the document of ICMJE form disclosure.

 

The Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technologies

Authors must disclose at the time of submission whether any AI-assisted tools (such as Large Language Models (LLMs), chatbots, or image generators) were used in preparing their manuscript. This information should be included in both the cover letter and the manuscript itself. Technologies like ChatGPT should not be credited as authors, as they cannot take responsibility for the content’s accuracy, originality, or integrity—essential criteria for authorship. Thus, authors bear full responsibility for all content, even if it was created with the help of AI tools. Due to the risk of AI generating inaccurate, incomplete, or biased information, authors are expected to critically assess and thoroughly revise any AI-generated material. Additionally, AI tools should not be listed or cited as authors. Authors must ensure that their submission is free from plagiarism, including any content—text or images—produced with AI, and they must provide proper citations for all quoted sources.

 

Procedures for Handling Allegations of Research Misconduct

Upholding research integrity is central to the mission of this journal. To maintain high ethical standards, the journal has established the following steps for managing reports of research misconduct:

  1. Reporting Misconduct
    Any individual—authors, reviewers, or readers—can submit written reports of suspected misconduct to the editorial office, including a detailed description and supporting evidence.
  2. Initial Evaluation
    The editorial team will review the complaint to determine if it meets the criteria for research misconduct, which includes but is not limited to falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, or other unethical conduct.
  3. Notification of Involved Parties
    If the concern appears valid, the relevant authors will be informed and given the opportunity to respond and present documentation.
  4. Formal Investigation
    A comprehensive investigation will follow, potentially involving independent experts, review boards, or the authors’ institutions. The goal is to collect sufficient information for a fair outcome.
  5. Editorial Decision
    Based on the investigation’s results, the editorial board will determine whether misconduct occurred. If confirmed, the journal may issue a correction, retraction, or expression of concern, notify the authors’ institutions, or prohibit future submissions from the involved authors.
  6. Confidentiality
    All proceedings will be handled confidentially, and the identity of the whistleblower will be protected unless disclosure is necessary for the investigation.
  7. Right to Appeal
    Authors have the right to appeal any decision. Appeals must be submitted in writing within 30 days and will be reviewed by an independent panel.
  8. Policy Review
    The journal will regularly assess and update its misconduct policy to ensure it reflects current best practices in academic publishing.