Editorial Actions

The journal may take appropriate editorial and post-publication actions when concerns arise regarding the scientific reliability, ethical acceptability, authorship, peer review, reporting, or publication integrity of a submitted or published work.

Editorial actions are intended to protect research participants, ensure fair editorial processes, preserve the integrity of the scientific record, and correct misleading or unreliable information. They are not intended to substitute for institutional, disciplinary, regulatory, or legal investigations.

All actions will be based on the available evidence and applied fairly, independently, consistently, and proportionately to the nature and seriousness of the concern.

Principles for Editorial Action

Before taking significant action, the journal will normally:

• assess the credibility and seriousness of the concern;
• review relevant manuscript, peer-review, editorial, and publication records;
• identify and manage any conflicts of interest among persons handling the case;
• provide the relevant author, reviewer, editor, or other party with an appropriate opportunity to respond;
• request additional documentation or expert assessment when necessary;
• distinguish, where possible, between honest error, legitimate scientific disagreement, questionable practice, and potential misconduct;
• consider whether an institution, ethics committee, funder, regulatory body, or another journal should be involved.

Where urgent action is necessary to protect research participants, confidential information, the peer-review process, or the reliability of the scientific record, the journal may act before all aspects of an investigation have been completed.

Actions Before Publication

For manuscripts under consideration, the journal may:

• request clarification, explanation, or additional documentation from the authors;
• request original or underlying data, images, statistical outputs, protocols, ethics approvals, consent documentation, trial-registration records, funding declarations, authorship information, or other supporting materials;
• require corrections, additional disclosure, reanalysis, or revision of the manuscript;
• arrange additional independent scientific, statistical, methodological, ethical, or image-integrity review;
• replace a reviewer or editor where independence or confidentiality has been compromised;
• suspend peer review or editorial processing while a serious concern is assessed;
• require clarification or correction of authorship, funding, conflicts of interest, ethical approval, data availability, or AI-use declarations;
• reject the manuscript when its scientific reliability, originality, ethical acceptability, or compliance with journal policy cannot be established;
• contact another journal where simultaneous submission, duplicate publication, peer-review manipulation, or related publication concerns are relevant;
• refer serious concerns to the appropriate institution, ethics committee, funder, research-integrity office, or regulatory body where independent investigation is warranted.

Rejection of a manuscript does not necessarily end the journal’s responsibility to address a credible allegation of serious research or publication misconduct.

Actions During Peer Review

Where the integrity of the peer-review process is questioned, the journal may:

• verify reviewer identity and qualifications;
• investigate undisclosed reviewer conflicts of interest;
• disregard or remove a compromised review;
• appoint replacement or additional independent reviewers;
• investigate fabricated reviewer identities, fraudulent review reports, unauthorized delegation, or inappropriate author–reviewer contact;
• remove an editor or reviewer from handling the manuscript where impartiality has been compromised;
• restart the peer-review process when necessary to ensure a fair and independent assessment.

Recommendations resulting from manipulated, conflicted, or otherwise unreliable peer review will not be used as the sole basis for an editorial decision.

Actions After Publication

Where a concern relates to a published article, the journal may:

• request explanations or supporting evidence from the authors;
• conduct or commission an additional scientific, statistical, ethical, or technical assessment;
• correct inaccurate metadata, declarations, authorship information, or substantive errors where appropriate;
• publish a Correction when an error materially affects the article but does not invalidate the work as a whole;
• publish an Expression of Concern when serious questions remain unresolved and readers should be alerted while an investigation is continuing;
• issue a Retraction when the published findings are unreliable, the integrity of the article is seriously compromised, or other established grounds for retraction are met;
• update the article and associated metadata so that the status of the published record is clear;
• notify relevant indexing, preservation, or metadata services of significant post-publication changes where appropriate;
• contact institutions, ethics committees, funders, regulatory bodies, or other journals when their involvement is necessary to resolve the concern.

A request by an author to withdraw or remove a published article will not normally result in deletion of the scholarly record. Post-publication changes will be managed through transparent correction, expression-of-concern, retraction, or other appropriate notices.

Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be published when there are serious and credible concerns about an article but the available evidence is not yet sufficient to determine whether correction or retraction is required.

This may be appropriate when:

• an institutional or other formal investigation is ongoing;
• important evidence is unavailable or disputed;
• there are substantial concerns about the reliability or ethics of the work that cannot be resolved promptly;
• an investigation appears unlikely to reach a conclusion within a reasonable period.

An Expression of Concern is an interim measure and does not by itself establish that misconduct has occurred.

Institutional and External Referral

Where a concern cannot be adequately investigated by the journal alone, the journal may communicate with an author’s, reviewer’s, or editor’s institution, ethics committee, research-integrity office, funder, regulatory authority, or another responsible organization.

The journal may provide information necessary for a legitimate investigation while respecting confidentiality and applicable data-protection requirements.

Where an external investigation has direct implications for a submitted or published work, the journal may request the outcome and use relevant findings when determining appropriate editorial action.

Independence and Conflicts of Interest

No person with a relevant conflict of interest should control the investigation or editorial decision concerning the case.

If the concern involves the Editor-in-Chief, an editor, an Editorial Board member, or another person involved in journal decision-making, the case must be handled by an appropriately independent editor or other qualified person who has no involvement in the matter.

Editorial actions involving articles authored by journal editors or Editorial Board members will follow the same scientific and ethical standards applied to other authors.

Proportionality and Due Process

Editorial actions will be proportionate to:

• the strength and reliability of the available evidence;
• the seriousness of the problem;
• whether the conduct appears intentional, reckless, negligent, or the result of an honest error;
• the effect of the problem on the reliability of the research;
• potential risks to patients, research participants, readers, or the scientific record;
• whether the concern is isolated or forms part of a broader pattern.

An allegation alone is not sufficient to establish misconduct. Where practicable, affected parties will be informed of significant concerns and given an opportunity to respond before a final editorial action is taken.

Documentation and Transparency

The journal will maintain appropriate internal records of significant integrity cases and editorial actions.

Substantive changes to a published article will not be made silently. When the scientific record requires correction, the journal will use a transparent post-publication notice linked to the affected article and will preserve appropriate version information.

Detailed criteria and procedures for Corrections, Expressions of Concern, Retractions, and version control are provided in the journal’s Corrections and Retractions Policy.