Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

1. General Principles

Gevher Nesibe Journal of Medical and Health Sciences is committed to the principles of scientific integrity, impartiality, transparency, accountability, and responsibility in scholarly publishing. The journal aims to publish original research, reviews, and other scholarly works in health sciences, basic and clinical medical sciences, pharmacy, veterinary medicine, animal sciences, and related disciplines in accordance with established ethical standards.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are expected to comply with the principles of research and publication ethics. Authors, editors, reviewers, and other individuals involved in the publication process are expected to perform their duties in accordance with the principles of scientific integrity, confidentiality, impartiality, and professional responsibility.

The journal's ethical policies are informed by the principles and guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as relevant national and international regulations governing research ethics.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for the originality, scientific accuracy, and ethical compliance of their work. Manuscripts submitted to the journal must meet the following requirements:

• Submitted manuscripts must be original and must not reproduce previously published work without appropriate attribution or authorization where required.

• Ideas, methods, data, tables, figures, and statements derived from other researchers must be appropriately cited and acknowledged.

• Fabrication, falsification, selective manipulation, or misleading presentation of research data and findings is unacceptable.

• The author list must include individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the work. Individuals who do not meet the applicable authorship criteria must not be listed as authors.

• All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and accept responsibility for their contributions and the integrity of the work.

• Funding sources, potential conflicts of interest, and required ethics committee approvals must be clearly disclosed.

• A manuscript must not be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal for consideration.

• All sources used in the preparation of the manuscript must be properly and accurately acknowledged.

• If generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools are used, their use must be disclosed in accordance with the journal's AI policy. AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Human authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and reliability of the submitted content.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for managing the evaluation and publication processes of submitted manuscripts based on their scientific quality, originality, relevance to the journal's scope, and ethical compliance.

• Editorial decisions must be made fairly and impartially, without discrimination based on authors' personal characteristics, institutional affiliations, gender, beliefs, ethnic origin, or other irrelevant factors.

• Editors must withdraw from the evaluation and decision-making process when a conflict of interest exists.

• The identities of individuals involved in the editorial process, manuscript content, and evaluation-related information must be kept confidential, subject to the journal's peer-review model and applicable policies.

• When suspected ethical misconduct arises, editors must ensure that the matter is examined fairly and may request explanations or supporting documentation from the relevant parties.

• Publication decisions must be based on scientific assessments and the journal's editorial policies.

• Editors must initiate appropriate correction, retraction, or other post-publication procedures when necessary.

• Editors must maintain professional, respectful, and transparent communication with authors and reviewers throughout the editorial process.

4. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts in terms of scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, contribution to the literature, and ethical compliance.

• Reviews must be objective, constructive, and based on sound scientific reasoning.

• Reviewers must inform the editor if they have a conflict of interest or lack sufficient expertise to evaluate the manuscript adequately.

• Information and data obtained during peer review must not be used for personal, professional, or financial gain.

• Manuscript content and information relating to the review process must be treated confidentially.

• Reviewers must notify the editor of any suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate duplicate publication, or other potential ethical violations identified during the review process.

5. Research Ethics and Ethics Committee Approval

Research involving human participants, animals, or personal data must comply with relevant legislation, ethical principles, and applicable institutional requirements.

Research involving human participants must obtain ethics committee approval when required by the nature of the study and applicable regulations. Informed consent procedures must be appropriately implemented, and participants' privacy and personal data must be protected.

Research involving animals must obtain approval from the relevant ethics committee and any required legal authorizations. Applicable regulations concerning animal welfare, housing, care, and experimental procedures must be followed.

For studies requiring ethics committee approval, the name of the committee, approval date, and approval or decision number must be stated in the manuscript. For studies that do not require ethics committee approval, this status must be explained with an appropriate justification.

The requirement for ethics committee approval or other legal authorization depends on the type of research and the applicable legislation. Obtaining the required approvals does not exempt researchers from their other ethical and legal responsibilities.

6. Plagiarism and Other Forms of Research Misconduct

The journal does not accept plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate division of research findings into multiple publications (salami publication), data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate authorship, or unauthorized use of published material.

Submitted manuscripts may be screened using similarity-detection software and other editorial assessment methods when considered necessary. A similarity score alone is not sufficient to establish research or publication misconduct. The nature and context of the similarity, the use of citations, and the relevant passages must be evaluated together.

When suspected misconduct is identified, the authors may be asked to provide an explanation or supporting documentation. If a violation is confirmed, the journal may discontinue the review process, reject the manuscript, or take appropriate corrective or retraction measures for a published article.

7. Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, personal, or professional relationships that could influence the conduct of the research, interpretation of the findings, or publication of the manuscript.

All sources of research support, including funding institutions, project numbers, grants, and other financial contributions, must be acknowledged in the manuscript. If no specific funding was received, this must be stated explicitly.

Editors and reviewers must also disclose any conflicts of interest that could compromise the impartiality of the evaluation process and withdraw from the relevant duties when necessary.

8. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Procedures

The journal is committed to maintaining the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record. If an error or ethical concern is identified in a published article, an appropriate correction, retraction, or other editorial notice may be issued depending on the nature of the problem and its impact on the scientific record.

Such decisions are made by considering the available evidence, explanations provided by the authors, relevant ethical principles, and the potential consequences for the reliability of the published findings. Post-publication actions must ensure that readers are accurately informed about the status of the article.

9. Ethical Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, and readers may submit concerns regarding research or publication ethics, as well as appeals relating to editorial decisions or procedures. Submissions should include a clear explanation of the concern and supporting documentation where available.

Complaints and appeals are examined in accordance with the principles of impartiality, confidentiality, and fair assessment. When necessary, additional information may be requested from authors, reviewers, or relevant institutions. Appropriate editorial or administrative action is taken based on the outcome of the examination.

10. Data Transparency and Scientific Responsibility

Authors are responsible for the accuracy and reliability of the data supporting their research findings. Data sharing must take into account the nature of the research, participant confidentiality, personal data protection, intellectual property rights, and applicable legislation.

Any restrictions on data availability must be clearly explained in the manuscript. The journal supports scientific transparency and the verifiability of research findings, while recognizing the legitimate ethical and legal limitations that may apply to data sharing.

11. Implementation of the Policy

These ethical principles apply to all manuscripts submitted to the journal throughout the evaluation, acceptance, publication, and post-publication processes.

When ethical concerns arise, the journal conducts an appropriate examination based on the nature of the case. Necessary actions are taken in accordance with the relevant ethical principles, the journal's editorial policies, and applicable regulations.