Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is a direct reflection of the quality of work of the author and the institutions that support them. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The JPME supports the code of conduct set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)  (

General Principles

·  Authorship of the paper. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.

· Affiliation. The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may additionally be stated. Addresses will not be updated or changed after publication of the article.

· Originality and plagiarism. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. JPME uses iThenticate to screen submitted manuscripts for similarity to published material.

·  Data access and retention. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.

·  Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.

· Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. When reproducing figures and/or schemes from previous publications, it is the author's responsibility to seek appropriate permission from the relevant publishers.

· Keep Criticism Constructive. An experimental or theoretical study may sometimes justify criticism but keep it professional and don’t let it get personal.

· Submission declaration and verification. Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract, a published lecture or academic thesis); that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; that its publication is approved by all authors and that, if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent ofthe copyright-holder.

· Copyright. Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to complete a 'Journal Publishing Agreement'. An e-mail will be sent to the corresponding author confirming receipt of the manuscript together with a 'Journal Publishing Agreement' form. The corresponding author signs a copyright license on behalf of all of the authors.

· Coauthor Notification. During manuscript submission, the submitting author must provide contact information (full name, email address, institutional affiliation and mailing address) for all of the coauthors. The author who submits the manuscript for publication accepts the responsibility of notifying all coauthors that the manuscript is being submitted.

· Author contributions. In absence of specific instructions and in research fields where it is possible to describe discrete efforts, the Publisher recommends authors to include contribution statements in the work that specifies the contribution of every author in order to promote transparency. These contributions should be listed under a separate heading before references. Free text Example: All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by [full name], [full name] and [full name]. The first draft of the manuscript was written by [full name] and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. CRediT taxonomy Example: Conceptualization: [full name], …; Methodology: [full name], …; Formal analysis and investigation: [full name], …; Writing - original draft preparation: [full name, …]; Writing - review and editing: [full name], …; Funding acquisition: [full name], …; Resources: [full name], …; Supervision: [full name],….

· Changes of authorship. Authors are expected to consider the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the journal Editor. To request such a change, the Editor must receive the following from the corresponding author: (a) the reason for the change in author list and (b) written confirmation (e-mail, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been accepted.

· Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All manuscripts must include disclosure of all financial and personal relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest and could inappropriately influence (bias) their work.

· Role of the funding sources. You are requested to identify who has provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article and to briefly describe the role of the sponsor(s).

· Suggesting / excluding reviewers. Authors are welcome to suggest suitable reviewers and/or request the exclusion of certain individuals when they submit their manuscripts. When suggesting reviewers, authors should make sure they are totally independent and not connected to the work in any way. It is strongly recommended to suggest a mix of reviewers from different countries and different institutions. When suggesting reviewers, the Corresponding Author must provide an institutional email address for each suggested reviewer, or, if this is not possible to include other means of verifying the identity such as a link to a personal homepage, a link to the publication record or a researcher or author ID. Please note that the Journal may not use the suggestions, but suggestions are appreciated and may help facilitate the peer review process.

· Data sharing and reproducibility: Manuscript submissions must be accompanied by data sharing statements that include whether data of the study will be shared, what data will be shared, whether additional documents such as study protocols will be available, when and for how long the data will be available, and by what access criteria data will be shared. Authors may use Mendeley Data to store and share the research data. 

· Intellectual property: In line with related laws and regulations, authors are required to obtain written permissions from the copyright holders for any copyrighted material used in the study. Additionally, the original source must be properly cited. 

· Ethical oversight: All related persons and establishments are expected to strictly follow ethical principles throughout the publication process. COPE guidelines states that “Ethical oversight should include, but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and ethical business/marketing practices.” Accordingly, editors, editorial staff, and publisher of the journal constantly observe the compulsory compliance with ethical principles and regulations.  

· Appeal. Everyone has the right to appeal a decision. Appeals will only be considered when the decision to reject a manuscript was based on a serious scientific misunderstanding of a core aspect of the manuscript. Differences in opinion regarding the novelty or significance of the reported findings are not considered as grounds for appeal. Manuscripts that were rejected due to violations of JPME ethical guidelines will not be reconsidered. Appeals must be sent by email by the submitting corresponding author to JPME and addressed to the editor who handled the manuscript.

· Dealing with Unethical Behavior. Editors must follow up on all allegations of scientific misconduct, including from anonymous whistleblowers when clear evidence is presented.  The author/reviewer in question should be informed and given the chance to respond. Editors are not in a position carry out a formal investigation themselves. In complex cases, or where the allegations are contested, an institutional investigation may be requested. If appropriate, a retraction or corrigendum should be published to correct the scientific record.  Sanctions may be considered by the editorial office, including rejecting the paper with a warning regarding future conduct, banning the author from submitting further manuscripts for a certain period, or informing the author's institution.

· Addressing post-publication issues. We are committed to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record and thoroughly investigate concerns that are directly raised with us by authors and readers.  Authors are always given an opportunity to respond to the concerns raised. We may request original unprocessed data and consult with experts in the course of an investigation. Depending on the seriousness of the issues, the following outcomes may proceed:

  • If the manuscript is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author.


· Fundamental errors. Authors have an obligation to correct mistakes once they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published article. The author(s) is/are requested to contact the journal and explain in what sense the error is impacting the article. A decision on how to correct the literature will depend on the nature of the error. This may be a correction or retraction. The retraction note should provide transparency which parts of the article are impacted by the error.

· Sanctions. Editors will take appropriate measures when ethical concerns are raised against a manuscript under review or a published article, even if it is discovered after years after publication. In cases of suspected misconduct, appropriate COPE flowcharts will be followed. In the event of documented malpractices or lack of reasonable explanations, one or more of the following sanctions may applied:


  • If the article has already been published online, depending on the nature and severity of the issues: a correction or Addendum may be issued. an Editor’s Note or Editorial Expression of Concern may be issued; these are typically followed by a second notification once the investigation concludes the article may be retracted.

  • The author’s institution may be informed if we identify potentially serious issues.

  • Immediate rejection of the manuscript under review,

  • Immediate rejection of all the manuscripts of all co-authors,

  • Prohibition of the co-authors from submitting new manuscripts up to five years,

  • Prohibition of the co-authors from serving as a reviewer or editorial board member of the journal,

  • Retracting the published article that involves the malpractice.

  • Informing appropriate legal entities about the details of the case.