Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences

Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The ethical policies of the Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences are rooted in the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and align with the codes of conduct set by the International Committee of Journal Editorial Boards. Authors, reviewers, readers, and editors are required to adhere to these ethical standards while engaging with the journal. For further details on ethical publishing and guidelines, please refer to https://members.publicationethics.org/ 


Editorial Responsibilities

  • The editorial team has the full authority to either accept or reject manuscripts submitted to the journal. They are responsible for maintaining confidentiality regarding all submitted articles during the review process until their publication. Additionally, the team must ensure the anonymity of reviewers during the peer review process.
  • The editorial team should actively avoid conflicts of interest and disclose any such conflicts when they arise. Furthermore, they must be willing to investigate any cases of plagiarism or fraudulent data. If necessary, they should publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, or apologies.
  • The final decision to accept or reject an article rests with the editor, who will base the decision on feedback from the reviewers and the editorial board. The editorial team must consistently monitor ethical issues in publishing, such as plagiarism and scientific misconduct, and take corrective action when needed.
  • Editorial members are prohibited from disclosing any article content or information to individuals other than the lead author, the reviewers, and other necessary editorial staff.

 

Publisher Responsibilities

The publisher should ensure that all editorial decisions regarding submitted manuscripts are made based on professional judgment alone and are not influenced by commercial interests. The publisher should also supervise the ethical practices of the editor-in-chief, associate editors, editorial board members, reviewers, authors, and readers. The publisher is committed to issuing corrections, clarifications, and retractions when necessary.

 

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

  • Reviewers are required to respect the confidentiality of the information within the submitted article. The review process should be conducted anonymously.
  • Reviewers should evaluate articles impartially and at an appropriate time, assisting the editorial team in determining whether to accept or reject an article. Their feedback should be submitted in the appropriate format and include comments for both the author and editor.
  • Reviewers should refrain from reviewing articles where they have a conflict of interest and report any such conflicts immediately. All judgments regarding the article's quality and content should be based on objective and professional standards.

Authorship Criteria and Authors' Responsibilities

Criteria for Authorship

To qualify for authorship of a submitted manuscript, contributors must meet the following three criteria:

  1. The author must have contributed to the conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data.
  2. The author must have played a significant role in drafting the article or revising it critically for intellectual content.
  3. The author must have provided final approval of the article before publication.

Each contributor should have participated in the research to a degree that allows them to take public responsibility for the appropriate portions of the content.

 
Authorship and Authors' Duties
  • During the submission, peer review, and publication process, the corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal and ensuring that all administrative requirements, including authorship details, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration, and conflict of interest statements, are properly completed. The corresponding author must respond promptly to editorial queries and cooperate with any requests from the journal post-publication.
  • Once an article has been accepted for publication, no new authors or changes to the list of authors are allowed. If an author wishes to be removed from the byline, they must submit a letter signed by all authors, indicating the request. Changes in the order of authors require consent from all authors through a signed letter.
  • Authors must follow the journal's formatting guidelines when preparing articles for submission. All authors should read the journal's submission guidelines before submitting their work.
  • The corresponding author must confirm and submit the consent and knowledge of the other co-authors of the article through the authors' commitment form. All listed authors must have contributed to the article writing and compilation process.
  • Acknowledgments and organizational affiliations of the authors should be mentioned, and any conflicts of interest between authors or their institutions must be disclosed.
  • To ensure the sustainability and development of the peer review process, qualified authors may be invited to participate as reviewers for other articles in the journal.
  • Authors should clearly disclose the sponsor(s) of the research if applicable. They also have the responsibility to notify the editor promptly if any errors or inaccuracies are found in their published article and to request a correction or retraction if necessary.
  • All authors should be aware that articles submitted to this journal undergo similarity check software reviews to detect potential scientific misconduct. Furthermore, authors must ensure they cite all sources properly, both directly and indirectly.

Possible Misconducts

Data Fabrication and Falsification

Data fabrication refers to the creation of data or results that were never actually observed or collected during the research process. This involves inventing findings and reporting them as if they were real. Data falsification, on the other hand, occurs when a researcher manipulates, alters, or omits data or results that were actually obtained during the study, thereby misrepresenting the research findings.

 

Duplicate Publication

Duplicate publication happens when two or more papers share the same hypotheses, data, discussion points, and conclusions, but are published separately without proper cross-referencing. This practice misleads readers into thinking that the research represents different studies when it is essentially the same work being presented multiple times.

 

Citation Manipulation

Citation manipulation involves the excessive inclusion of citations in a manuscript, which do not contribute meaningfully to the scholarly content of the article. These citations are often added purely to inflate the citation count of an author or to favor articles published in a particular journal. This form of misconduct misrepresents the significance of cited works and can mislead readers.

 

Simultaneous Submission

Simultaneous submission occurs when a manuscript (or substantial sections of it) is submitted to more than one journal at the same time. This creates ethical issues, as it can result in the publication of the same content in multiple journals without proper acknowledgment or approval from the respective publishers.

 

Redundant Publications

Redundant publications involve dividing a single study’s outcomes into multiple articles, typically for the purpose of enhancing an author’s publication record. This practice, often known as “salami slicing,” is considered unethical because it dilutes the scientific contribution of the study and creates unnecessary fragmentation of research findings.

 

Improper Author Contribution or Attribution

All listed authors must have made a significant intellectual or scientific contribution to the research and must approve all claims made in the article. It is critical to acknowledge everyone who made a significant contribution, including students and laboratory technicians. Failing to attribute proper authorship or inaccurately attributing contributions is a violation of publication ethics.

 

Plagiarism

Plagiarism refers to the deliberate use of someone else’s ideas, research, or original material as if they were one’s own. This includes copying text or research findings, even if the source is the author’s previous work, without proper citation. All manuscripts submitted to Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences are subject to plagiarism checks using tools like Grammarly or iThenticate. Plagiarism is a serious breach of ethical publishing, and authors must ensure their manuscripts are thoroughly checked for plagiarism before submission. If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If it is identified after publication, the journal reserves the right to issue a correction or retract the article. The journal also reserves the right to inform the authors' affiliated institutions regarding the plagiarism discovered, either before or after publication.


The Principles of Transparency

Human and Animal Studies

All manuscripts that report experimental investigations involving human subjects must include a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained from each participant or their guardian. A local ethics committee must approve any studies involving human or animal subjects before the research is conducted.

 

Data Availability

Manuscripts must include a data availability statement that explains how readers can access the data that supports the conclusions of the study. If data cannot be made available, authors should provide reasons for its unavailability. Data used to support study findings should be made available upon request from the corresponding author.

 

Study Design and Ethical Approval

Research should be well-justified, well-planned, appropriately designed, and ethically approved. If a study does not meet these standards, it may be considered a breach of research ethics. The authors are responsible for ensuring the scientific accuracy and completeness of the study, including the bibliographic details.

 

Data Analysis

Data should be analyzed appropriately, although improper analysis does not necessarily constitute misconduct. However, fabricating or falsifying data is a clear violation of academic integrity.

 

Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest occur when personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial interests may influence the judgment of authors, reviewers, or editors. All authors must disclose any conflicts of interest in their manuscript or submit a statement declaring the absence of any such conflicts.

 

Peer Review

Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences employs a single-blind peer review process. Authors have the right to inform the editor if they wish to exclude specific reviewers due to potential conflicts of interest. No article will be rejected unless negative feedback is received from at least two reviewers.

 

Archiving and Self-Archiving Policy

The Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences is committed to the long-term preservation and dissemination of published research.

  • Preprint: Authors are allowed to archive the preprint version of their manuscript (before peer review) in personal, institutional, or subject repositories.
  • Postprint (Author Accepted Manuscript): Authors may deposit the accepted version (after peer review and revisions, but before publisher formatting) in institutional or subject repositories, provided that the published source is properly cited.
  • Publisher’s Version (Version of Record): The final published PDF is available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) and may be freely archived and shared on institutional repositories, personal websites, and academic networks, with appropriate citation and a link to the journal’s official website.

The journal ensures the long-term preservation of its content through digital archiving. Authors are encouraged to post their articles in institutional or other subject repositories before or during submission to foster early dissemination and increased citation. 

Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences is now formally archived at: 

 

Publishing Schedule

The journal is published quarterly, with all content available permanently on the journal’s website.

 

Privacy and Confidentiality
  • The Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences is committed to upholding the principles of privacy and confidentiality throughout all stages of the publishing process. Information related to authors, reviewers, and submitted manuscripts will be used exclusively for scholarly and publishing purposes and will not be disclosed to third parties without explicit permission from the individuals concerned.
  • All manuscripts are treated with strict confidentiality during evaluation and peer review. Editors and reviewers are required to refrain from sharing or discussing manuscript content with others, except when formally authorized by the Editor-in-Chief. Upon completion of the review or publication process, no copies of manuscripts should be retained by unauthorized persons, and no information may be disclosed without prior consent.
  • The journal also ensures that personal data of authors, reviewers, and readers (including names, email addresses, and institutional affiliations) are collected and stored solely for editorial and publishing purposes. Such information will not be used for commercial purposes or shared inappropriately under any circumstances.
 
Ownership and Management

A strong editorial team, including experts in various fields of health science, manages the Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences. The full names and affiliations of the editorial board members are listed on the journal’s website.

 
Copyright and Licensing

Copyright of all published articles in the Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences is retained by the journal. However, to ensure open access and compliance with international publishing ethics, all content is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). This means that users are free to copy, share, and adapt the articles for non-commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original work. 

 
Advertising

The journal does not accept any form of advertising.

 
Corrections and Retractions

The Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. In accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, the journal will issue corrections or retractions when necessary to ensure transparency and uphold the highest ethical standards.

  • Corrections (Errata)

Minor errors that do not affect the overall results, interpretations, or conclusions of an article will be corrected through the publication of an official Erratum. The Erratum will be clearly linked to the original article to ensure proper citation and academic accountability.

  • Retractions

In cases where the scientific validity, reliability, or integrity of an article is substantially undermined—whether due to honest error, research misconduct, or ethical concerns—the journal will issue a formal Retraction. Retraction notices will be indexed, permanently accessible, and clearly linked to the original article, which will remain in the scholarly record with a clear indication of its retracted status.

By adhering strictly to COPE’s Retraction Guidelines, the journal ensures that corrections and retractions are handled consistently, transparently, and in the best interest of the scientific community.


Process for Identification of and Dealing with Allegations of Research Misconduct

The Editor-in-Chief takes reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of articles that involve research misconduct, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication.

The first action by the journal's Editor is to inform the Editorial Office by providing relevant material and a draft letter to the corresponding author, requesting an explanation in a non-judgmental manner.

If the author’s explanation is deemed unacceptable and it appears that serious unethical behavior has occurred, the issue will be referred to the Publication Committee via the Editorial Office. After careful review, the Committee will determine whether the case is serious enough to warrant a ban on future submissions.

In less severe cases, the Editor, with advice from the Publication Committee, will send the author a formal reprimand and remind them of the journal's publication policies. If the manuscript has already been published, the Editor may request that the author issue an apology to correct the record.

If a violation is detected, the corresponding author will be notified, and any work by the author or any work they have coauthored that is under review by the journal will be immediately rejected.

Authors found responsible for misconduct will be prohibited from serving on the journal's editorial board or acting as reviewers. The journal reserves the right to take additional actions as necessary.

In cases of serious fraud that lead to retraction of the article, a retraction notice will be issued in the journal, and the article will be marked as “retracted” on the online version with the retraction date.


Complaints and Appeals Process

Before submitting a manuscript, authors are strongly encouraged to read all the guidelines and policies regarding the manuscript submission and publication process. The journal views complaints as an opportunity to improve the manuscript processing system.

How to File a Complaint?

Authors may file complaints or request clarification regarding misconduct related to policies and ethical guidelines by submitting a letter. Complaints may relate to issues such as plagiarism, copyright violations, deceptive research practices, incorrect results, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or delays in manuscript processing.

Upon receiving a complaint, an acknowledgment letter will be sent to the complainant, assuring that appropriate actions will be taken within a reasonable timeframe. The investigation will be conducted according to the Editor-in-Chief’s guidelines. After the investigation, the final decision will be communicated to the complainant via email.

The editors will accept only one appeal per article. Upon receiving an appeal, the editors may involve the referees and editorial board members who reviewed the manuscript.

The final decision made by the editors and editorial board regarding appeals is binding and may result in manuscript rejection, further peer review requests, or a request for a revised version of the manuscript.


Generative AI Policy

At JJHS, we uphold the integrity of scientific publishing through the careful and transparent use of evolving technologies, including Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs). In line with COPE recommendations and international best practices, this policy outlines the use of such tools by authors, reviewers, and editors.

  1. Author Use of AI in Manuscript Preparation
  • Generative AI tools may be used only for grammar correction, language refinement, or improving clarity.
  • They must not be used to generate new research content, analyze data, draw conclusions, or create references.
  • Authors are fully responsible for reviewing AI-assisted outputs and ensuring accuracy.
  • Any use of AI must be disclosed in the Acknowledgments section, including the tool name and purpose.
Disclosure Example:

“The authors used [Tool Name] to enhance language and readability. All scientific content was produced, reviewed, and approved by the authors.”

  1. Use of AI in Images and Figures
  • Authors must not use AI tools to create or manipulate images, figures, charts, or graphical abstracts.
  • Exception: when AI-generated content is part of the research methodology, with full details provided in the Methods section.
  • Only minor adjustments (brightness, contrast, color) are acceptable, without altering the original data.
  1. Reviewer Conduct
  • Reviewers must not use AI to analyze, summarize, or evaluate manuscripts.
  • Uploading confidential manuscripts into AI tools is strictly prohibited and considered an ethical violation.
  • All review reports must be based on independent human judgment.
  1. Editorial Practices
  • Editors must not use AI to process manuscripts, prepare decision letters, or handle author communications.
  • Editorial evaluations must rely on scholarly reasoning and peer feedback.
  • AI tools may be used only for internal technical tasks (e.g., format checking), never with confidential manuscript content.
  1. Enforcement

Failure to comply with this policy may result in:

  • Rejection or retraction of the manuscript.
  • Disqualification of authors, reviewers, or editors.
  • Formal notification to affiliated institutions.

 

For further guidance, please see:


COPE’s Guidelines & Flowcharts

Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences is committed to adhering to the guidelines and flowcharts set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in its reviewing and publishing processes. For more detailed information about COPE’s guidelines and flowcharts, please visit: COPE Flowcharts.

COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practices for Editors

(https://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf),

(https://publicationethics.org/files/2008%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf)

All published material in Jundishapur Journal of Health Sciences is under the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief. The Editors must:

  • Strive to meet the needs of both readers and authors;
  • Continuously work to improve the quality of the journal;
  • Implement processes to ensure the high quality of published material;
  • Uphold the freedom of expression;
  • Maintain the academic integrity of the journal;
  • Ensure that business considerations do not compromise intellectual and ethical standards;
  • Always be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary.

Best practices for editors include:

  • Actively seeking feedback from authors, readers, reviewers, and editorial board members to improve the journal's processes;
  • Encouraging and being aware of ongoing research into peer review and publishing, and reassessing the journal’s processes in light of new findings;
  • Supporting initiatives aimed at reducing research and publication misconduct;
  • Promoting initiatives to educate researchers on publication ethics;
  • Regularly assessing the impact of the journal’s policies on author and reviewer behavior, and revising policies to foster responsible conduct while discouraging misconduct.