The Journal of Current Medical Research and Opinion is committed to integrity, transparency, fairness and accountability throughout scholarly publication. The journal seeks to apply recognised principles of responsible publication practice and biomedical research ethics.
Journal of Current Medical Research and Opinion aims to maintain a trustworthy scholarly record through independent editorial assessment, appropriate peer review, transparent disclosure and proportionate action when errors or misconduct are identified.
Authors are responsible for the originality, accuracy and integrity of submitted work. Authors must not fabricate or falsify data, manipulate research records deceptively, plagiarise, submit the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals or misrepresent authorship.
Authors should provide sufficient methodological information to permit scientific assessment; disclose funding and relevant competing interests; identify ethical approval and informed consent where applicable; register clinical trials where required; and cooperate with legitimate editorial investigations.
Editors should make decisions based on scholarly merit, relevance, methodological quality, ethical acceptability and the evidential strength of the work. Decisions must not be influenced by an author's nationality, institutional affiliation, personal characteristics or ability to pay an APC.
Editors must protect manuscript confidentiality, manage conflicts of interest, seek independent review where appropriate and take reasonable action when credible integrity concerns arise.
Reviewers should provide objective, constructive and timely assessments. They must maintain confidentiality, disclose conflicts of interest, avoid personal criticism and must not appropriate unpublished ideas or data.
Potential misconduct may include fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts, deceptive image manipulation, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation or systematic production of unreliable manuscripts.
Allegations are assessed according to the available evidence. The journal may request explanations, original data, ethics documentation or other relevant records. Authors and other parties should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond when appropriate.
When concerns extend beyond the journal's ability to investigate, JMTCR may communicate with an author's institution, research-integrity office, ethics committee, funder or another appropriate authority while limiting disclosure to information reasonably necessary for the matter.
Inventing data or results, altering research records to misrepresent findings or knowingly reporting false information is unacceptable. Reliable evidence that published findings are fabricated or falsified may justify retraction.
Adjustments to scientific images must not obscure, remove, introduce or misrepresent information. Editors may request original image files when manipulation is suspected.
Authors must not publish substantially the same work as a new article without appropriate disclosure, justification and citation. Related manuscripts should be disclosed where necessary for editorial assessment.
Authors, reviewers and editors must not request or add citations primarily for the purpose of artificially increasing citation counts. References should be selected because they are scientifically relevant.
Fabricated reviewer identities, compromised reviewer accounts, undisclosed review arrangements or other attempts to interfere with independent peer review may result in rejection, retraction or further investigation.
JMTCR will seek to correct the scholarly record when reliable evidence shows that published information is materially inaccurate. The appropriate response depends on the seriousness and effect of the problem and may include a correction, expression of concern or retraction.
Information obtained during manuscript assessment or ethics investigations is handled with appropriate confidentiality while recognising that limited disclosure may be necessary to investigate serious concerns.
The journal's scientific decisions are independent of APC payment and other commercial considerations. Payment cannot purchase acceptance or favourable peer review.
Readers, authors and institutions may notify the journal of substantive concerns about published work. Credible concerns will be assessed even when raised after publication.