PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

1. Introduction

Medical JKK is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, research integrity, transparency, and academic responsibility. This Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement establishes the ethical principles and responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher throughout the scholarly publishing process.

Medical JKK adopts the principles and recommendations outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing developed by COPE, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

All parties involved in the publication process are expected to uphold honesty, fairness, accountability, confidentiality, and respect for intellectual property. Editorial decisions are based on the scientific quality, originality, relevance, validity, and ethical compliance of submitted manuscripts, independently of commercial interests or external pressure.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of the Editor

2.1. Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief and editorial team are responsible for deciding which manuscripts are accepted, rejected, or returned for revision. Decisions are based on the manuscript's scientific merit, originality, relevance to the journal's scope, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and reviewers' recommendations.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by the author's nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, institutional affiliation, political views, or personal characteristics.

2.2. Fair and Independent Evaluation

Editors must ensure that all manuscripts receive fair, objective, and appropriate consideration. Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, reviewers, or individuals with personal or professional relationships with the editorial team must undergo an independent review process without preferential treatment.

Editors must not allow commercial considerations, publication fees, sponsorship, advertising, or other financial interests to influence editorial decisions.

2.3. Confidentiality

Editors must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and related communications. Manuscript information may only be disclosed to individuals directly involved in the editorial and review process or when disclosure is required for a legitimate ethical, legal, or investigative purpose.

Editors must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for their own research or personal advantage without the author's explicit written permission.

2.4. Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could affect their judgment. Editors with relevant conflicts must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript and ensure that an independent editor manages the evaluation process.

2.5. Investigation of Ethical Concerns

Editors must take all allegations of publication misconduct seriously, whether identified before or after publication. Where concerns arise, editors will assess the available evidence, request explanations from the relevant parties when appropriate, and conduct a fair investigation consistent with applicable ethical guidance.

If necessary, the journal may contact the authors' institutions, research ethics committees, funding bodies, or other relevant authorities. Appropriate editorial actions may include rejection, correction, an expression of concern, or retraction.

3. Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviewers assist editors in evaluating the quality, validity, originality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts. Reviews should provide constructive, evidence-based comments that help editors make informed decisions and enable authors to improve their work.

3.2. Objectivity and Professional Conduct

Reviewers must conduct evaluations objectively and professionally. Personal criticism, discriminatory remarks, hostile language, and unsupported accusations are unacceptable.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited and alert editors to potential plagiarism, redundant publication, data inconsistencies, methodological weaknesses, or other ethical concerns.

3.3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, distribute, reproduce, or discuss manuscript content with unauthorized individuals without prior permission from the editor.

Reviewers must not use unpublished data, findings, arguments, or ideas obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.

3.4. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest, including financial relationships, personal relationships, institutional affiliations, academic competition, or collaborative relationships with the authors.

Reviewers who cannot provide an impartial assessment must decline the invitation or notify the editor promptly.

3.5. Timeliness and Expertise

Reviewers should accept assignments only when they possess appropriate expertise and sufficient time to complete the evaluation. If a reviewer cannot meet the agreed deadline, the editor should be informed promptly.

4. Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

4.1. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts represent original work and appropriately acknowledge the contributions, ideas, data, and publications of others.

Plagiarism, including direct copying, inappropriate paraphrasing, plagiarism of ideas, and presenting another person's work as one's own, is unacceptable. All sources must be cited accurately and consistently.

Manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism-detection software. Similarity reports will be interpreted contextually because a similarity score alone does not establish whether plagiarism has occurred.

4.2. Original Submission and Redundant Publication

Authors must submit manuscripts that are not simultaneously under consideration by another journal and have not previously been published in substantially the same form, except where prior dissemination is permitted under the journal's policies and is transparently disclosed.

Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously, duplicate publication, and redundant publication without appropriate disclosure are unacceptable.

Authors must disclose relevant preprints, previous reports, related publications, and overlapping manuscripts when submitting their work.

4.3. Accuracy and Integrity of Research

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the data, methods, results, figures, tables, and conclusions reported in their manuscripts are accurate and presented honestly.

Fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, selective omission of material results, and deliberate misrepresentation of findings constitute research misconduct.

Authors must retain appropriate research records and provide supporting information when reasonably requested for editorial verification or a legitimate investigation, subject to applicable privacy, confidentiality, and legal requirements.

4.4. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must reflect substantial intellectual or scholarly contributions to the research and manuscript. Individuals who qualify for authorship must be appropriately credited, while contributors who do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged with their permission.

All listed authors must approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission to Medical JKK. Each author is responsible for the integrity of their contribution and should be able to identify the other contributors' roles.

Guest authorship, gift authorship, ghost authorship, and the exclusion of individuals who qualify for authorship are unacceptable.

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be justified and approved by all affected authors. The editor may request written confirmation and supporting documentation before deciding whether to approve the change.

4.5. Acknowledgment and Funding Disclosure

Authors must acknowledge individuals, institutions, and organizations that made significant contributions but do not qualify for authorship.

All sources of financial and material support must be disclosed. Authors should clearly explain the role of funders or sponsors in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions.

If the research received no specific funding, authors should state this explicitly.

4.6. Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence the research or its interpretation.

Relevant interests may include employment, consultancy, honoraria, grants, patents, financial investments, personal relationships, professional affiliations, or other competing interests.

The disclosure of a conflict does not automatically disqualify a manuscript. The purpose is to ensure transparency and allow readers and editors to assess the potential influence of the disclosed interests.

4.7. Corrections and Retractions

Authors have a responsibility to notify the editor promptly if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work.

Authors must cooperate with the editorial team in investigating concerns and implementing appropriate corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary.

5. Research Ethics and Ethical Oversight

5.1. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, identifiable human data, human biological materials, or other activities requiring ethical review must comply with applicable laws, institutional requirements, and recognized ethical standards.

Authors must obtain approval from an appropriate research ethics committee or institutional review board when required by the study design and applicable regulations. The manuscript must identify the approving committee, approval number where applicable, and approval date or other relevant documentation.

If ethical approval was not required, authors should explain the basis for that determination where appropriate. The journal may request supporting documentation.

Authors must not claim ethical approval that was not obtained.

5.2. Informed Consent

Authors must obtain informed consent from research participants when required by the nature of the study and applicable ethical standards.

For clinical case reports, clinical images, or other materials containing potentially identifiable patient information, authors must obtain appropriate consent for publication where required. Removing a person's name alone may not adequately protect their identity.

The journal may request confirmation that informed consent has been obtained. Consent documentation must be handled confidentially and in accordance with applicable privacy requirements.

5.3. Privacy and Confidentiality

Authors, editors, and reviewers must protect the privacy and confidentiality of research participants, patients, and other individuals whose information is included in submitted manuscripts.

Identifiable personal information must not be published without an appropriate legal and ethical basis and the necessary consent or authorization.

5.4. Research Involving Animals

Research involving live animals must comply with applicable animal welfare laws, institutional policies, and recognized ethical standards.

Authors must obtain approval from an appropriate animal research ethics committee when required and provide relevant information about animal care, handling, procedures, and measures taken to minimize pain, distress, or suffering.

5.5. Clinical Trials and Research Registration

Clinical trials should be registered in a publicly accessible, recognized clinical trial registry before the enrollment of the first participant, in accordance with applicable requirements and recognized standards.

Authors should provide the registry name, registration number, and registration date in the manuscript where applicable.

The journal may request additional information about trial protocols, outcome measures, data availability, or registration status when necessary to assess research integrity.

5.6. Ethical Approval Does Not Replace Ethical Responsibility

Ethical approval does not automatically guarantee that all aspects of a study are ethically acceptable. Authors remain responsible for the ethical conduct, accurate reporting, and appropriate interpretation of their research.

Medical JKK reserves the right to request additional documentation or clarification when ethical concerns arise.

6. Data Availability and Reproducibility

Authors should provide a data availability statement explaining whether the data supporting the findings are publicly available, available upon reasonable request, restricted for ethical or legal reasons, or unavailable.

Where appropriate and lawful, authors are encouraged to deposit research data, analytical code, study protocols, and other supporting materials in suitable repositories.

Data sharing must respect participant confidentiality, informed consent, intellectual property rights, data protection regulations, and other legitimate restrictions.

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, selectively manipulate, or inappropriately withhold data to mislead readers or conceal material findings.

Editors may request access to underlying data or supporting materials when necessary to evaluate a manuscript or investigate a credible concern.

7. Peer Review Process

Medical JKK uses peer review to evaluate the scientific quality, originality, validity, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.

The journal's peer review model and procedures are described in its peer review policy. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and suitability for the subject matter.

Editorial decisions may include acceptance, rejection, or a request for revision. Acceptance is not guaranteed by submission, payment, personal relationships, or professional affiliation.

Authors must respond accurately and professionally to reviewers' comments. Editors retain responsibility for the final publication decision.

Reviewers and editors must not manipulate peer review for personal, institutional, or financial advantage. Any suspected review manipulation, including fabricated reviewer identities, falsified reports, or unauthorized interference, will be investigated.

8. Plagiarism, Research Misconduct, and Other Ethical Violations

Medical JKK does not tolerate research or publication misconduct. Potential violations include, but are not limited to:

1. Plagiarism or misappropriation of another person's work.

2. Data fabrication or falsification.

3. Duplicate or redundant publication.

4. Simultaneous submission to multiple journals.

5. Inappropriate authorship practices.

6. Undisclosed conflicts of interest.

7. Unethical research involving human participants or animals.

8. Falsification of ethical approval or informed consent.

9. Citation manipulation or coercive citation practices.

10. Peer review manipulation.

11. Unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential information.

12. Undisclosed or inappropriate use of generative artificial intelligence.

13. Deliberate misrepresentation of research methods, results, or conclusions.

When potential misconduct is identified, the journal will assess the concern fairly and confidentially. The relevant authors or parties will normally be given an opportunity to respond before an editorial decision is made, unless urgent action is necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Where appropriate, the journal may consult independent experts, research institutions, ethics committees, or other relevant authorities.

Possible outcomes include rejection, requests for clarification, correction of the scholarly record, an expression of concern, retraction, or notification of relevant institutions. The response will depend on the nature, seriousness, and available evidence relating to the concern.

9. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

Authors must disclose the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools when such use materially contributes to manuscript preparation, including the generation or substantial revision of text, images, data, code, or other research outputs, in accordance with the journal's applicable author guidelines.

The disclosure should identify the tool and explain its role in the work. Routine spelling, grammar, or reference-formatting assistance may be treated differently where the journal's instructions expressly permit it.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of scholarly work.

Authors remain fully responsible for verifying all AI-assisted content, including factual statements, citations, calculations, data interpretations, and generated images. Fabricated references, misleading content, undisclosed synthetic data, and inappropriate manipulation of research materials are unacceptable.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished research materials to external AI systems when doing so would breach confidentiality, data protection obligations, or the journal's policies. AI tools must not replace the independent scholarly judgment required for editorial decisions and peer review.

10. Copyright, Intellectual Property, and Permissions

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts do not infringe the copyright, intellectual property rights, or other lawful rights of third parties.

Permission must be obtained for the reproduction or adaptation of copyrighted materials when required. Sources of reproduced or adapted figures, tables, images, and other materials must be appropriately acknowledged.

The journal's copyright, licensing, and open-access arrangements are specified in its respective policies. Authors are responsible for complying with the applicable terms and ensuring that submitted material is eligible for publication.

Suspected copyright infringement or intellectual property violations will be investigated and may result in rejection, correction, removal of affected material, or other appropriate action.

11. Complaints and Appeals

Medical JKK provides a fair and transparent process for receiving complaints and appeals concerning editorial decisions, peer review, publication procedures, alleged misconduct, or the conduct of editors, reviewers, and the publisher.

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the editorial office, with a clear description of the issue and relevant supporting evidence.

Appeals against editorial decisions must explain the substantive reasons for reconsideration, such as a significant factual misunderstanding, a demonstrable error in the review process, or relevant evidence that was not adequately considered.

Appeals will be assessed by the editor or an independent editorial representative who is not directly involved in the matter and has no relevant conflict of interest. An appeal does not guarantee a change in the original decision.

Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief should be referred to an appropriate independent representative of the publisher. All complaints will be handled fairly, confidentially, and as promptly as reasonably possible.

Where a complaint remains unresolved, the complainant may pursue appropriate institutional, regulatory, or external publication-ethics mechanisms.

12. Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections

Medical JKK recognizes that scholarly communication continues after publication. Readers and researchers may raise substantiated concerns about published articles through the journal's official communication channels.

The editorial team will assess credible concerns and, where necessary, consult the authors, independent experts, or relevant institutions.

When a published article contains an error that does not invalidate its overall findings, the journal may publish a correction. When serious concerns exist but the evidence remains inconclusive, an expression of concern may be appropriate.

If an article is found to contain serious errors, unreliable findings, significant ethical violations, or other grounds warranting withdrawal from the scholarly record, the journal may retract it.

Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions will be clearly identified, linked to the affected article where practicable, and accompanied by an explanation of the reason for the action. The original publication record will be handled transparently in accordance with applicable publication-ethics guidance and technical requirements.

13. Editorial Independence and Journal Management

Medical JKK maintains editorial independence in evaluating manuscripts and making publication decisions.

The publisher, sponsors, advertisers, and other interested parties must not interfere with editorial judgments or require favorable treatment in exchange for financial or other benefits.

Publication fees, if applicable, are governed by the journal's published fee policy and must not determine acceptance or rejection decisions.

The journal is committed to transparent editorial procedures, responsible management of manuscripts, appropriate training of editorial personnel, and periodic review of its ethical policies.

14. Retraction Policy

Medical JKK may retract a published article when reliable evidence demonstrates that its findings are seriously unreliable or that significant ethical or publication violations have occurred.

Possible grounds for retraction include:

• Demonstrated data fabrication or falsification.

• Plagiarism or substantial unattributed duplication.

• Serious methodological or analytical errors that invalidate the findings.

• Unethical research or lack of required ethical approval where the violation warrants retraction.

• Duplicate publication that materially misrepresents the scholarly record.

• Fraudulent authorship or other serious publication misconduct.

• Other circumstances in which retraction is necessary to correct the scholarly record.

Retraction decisions will be based on the available evidence and the seriousness of the concern. The journal will normally seek explanations from the authors and, when appropriate, consult relevant institutions or independent experts.

A retraction notice will identify the affected article, explain the reason for retraction, and distinguish the notice from the original article. The journal will preserve an appropriate record of the retraction in accordance with its publication and archiving policies.

Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record and should not be used as a punitive measure where a less severe action adequately addresses the problem.

15. Publisher Responsibilities

The publisher supports the editorial team in maintaining ethical and transparent publishing practices.

The publisher is responsible for providing an appropriate publishing infrastructure, maintaining the integrity and accessibility of the journal's records, and supporting the implementation of editorial policies.

The publisher must respect editorial independence and must not permit commercial interests to override ethical standards or scientific merit.

When credible allegations of misconduct arise, the publisher will cooperate with the editorial team and relevant institutions to facilitate a fair investigation and appropriate corrective action.

16. Handling Ethical Misconduct Allegations

Medical JKK follows a fair, evidence-based process when handling allegations of publication or research misconduct.

The process may include:

1. Receiving and documenting the allegation.

2. Conducting an initial assessment of the available evidence.

3. Requesting clarification or a response from the relevant parties.

4. Seeking independent expert advice or institutional input when necessary.

5. Evaluating the evidence and determining an appropriate editorial response.

6. Communicating the outcome to the relevant parties, subject to confidentiality and applicable legal obligations.

7. Correcting the scholarly record when warranted.

8. Retaining appropriate records of the investigation and its outcome.

The journal will avoid premature conclusions and will respect the rights of all parties to a fair assessment. Anonymous allegations may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable evidence.

17. Commitment to Ethical Publishing

Medical JKK is committed to upholding academic integrity, responsible research conduct, transparency, accountability, and respect for all participants in scholarly communication.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher share responsibility for maintaining trust in the scientific record. All parties are expected to comply with this statement, the journal's author guidelines, and other applicable editorial policies.

This Publication Ethics statement is informed by the COPE Core Practices and may be reviewed periodically to reflect developments in publication ethics, research integrity, medical research standards, and applicable regulations.

Ethical Reference Framework:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Core Practices.

• COPE, Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

• COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME, Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

• Applicable national regulations and recognized international ethical standards for medical research.