Ethics and Malpractice Statement | Insights in Biology and Medicine

Insights in Biology and Medicine is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and addresses the responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process.

Editorial Responsibilities

Editorial Independence and Integrity

Editors of Insights in Biology and Medicine are responsible for:

Decision Making

Making fair and unbiased decisions independent of commercial interests
Evaluating manuscripts solely on intellectual merit
Maintaining transparency in editorial processes
Providing clear communication to authors throughout the process

Confidentiality

Protecting the confidentiality of authors' work
Not disclosing information about submitted manuscripts
Ensuring blind review processes are maintained
Protecting reviewer identities

Prohibited Practice: Editors must not use unpublished materials from submitted manuscripts in their own research without explicit written consent from authors.

Conflict of Interest Management

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in cases of:

Conflict Type	Examples	Required Action
Personal	Family relationships, close personal friendships	Immediate recusal, assignment to another editor
Professional	Current collaborators, recent co-authors	Declaration and potential recusal
Financial	Financial interests in research outcomes	Mandatory recusal and disclosure
Academic	Direct competitors, institutional rivalries	Assessment and potential reassignment

Author Responsibilities

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original:

All submitted work must be original and not published elsewhere

Proper acknowledgment of others' work must always be provided

Plagiarism in all forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior

Text recycling from authors' previous work must be minimal and properly cited

Plagiarism Examples: Verbatim copying without quotation marks, paraphrasing without attribution, reuse of figures/tables without permission, translation plagiarism from other languages.

Data Integrity and Reproducibility

Authors are responsible for data accuracy and accessibility:

Data Standards

Present accurate and objective interpretation of research findings
Provide sufficient detail to permit replication
Retain raw data for reasonable period post-publication
Make data available upon reasonable request

Best Practice: Deposit data in appropriate repositories and include data availability statements in manuscripts.

Authorship Criteria

We adhere to ICMJE authorship criteria. Authors must meet all four conditions:

Substantial contributions to conception, design, execution, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation
Drafting or critical revision of the article for important intellectual content
Final approval of the version to be published
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work

Authorship Violations: Gift authorship (including individuals who did not contribute), ghost authorship (excluding contributors), coercive authorship (demanding inclusion), denial of deserved authorship.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Constructive and Timely Review

Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining publication quality:

Review Standards

Provide objective, constructive, and unbiased assessments
Complete reviews within agreed timeframe
Maintain confidentiality of review process
Declare conflicts of interest immediately

Review Content

Evaluate scientific validity and methodology
Assess originality and significance
Identify relevant published work not cited
Point out ethical concerns or data integrity issues

Confidentiality and Anonymity

Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality:

Not discuss the manuscript with others without editor permission
Not use knowledge of the work before publication
Destroy copies of manuscripts after review completion
Not retain manuscripts for personal use

Research Integrity Standards

Human Subjects Research

Research involving human participants must comply with:

Declaration of Helsinki ethical principles

Institutional review board approval

Informed consent from all participants

Protection of participant privacy and anonymity

Clinical trial registration where applicable

Animal Research

Studies involving animals must demonstrate:

Requirement	Documentation Needed	Standards
Ethical Approval	Institutional animal care committee approval	AAALAC, national guidelines
Welfare Standards	Adherence to the 3Rs (Replace, Reduce, Refine)	ARRIVE guidelines
Housing and Care	Description of housing conditions and care	Species-specific guidelines
Euthanasia	Humane methods description	AVMA euthanasia guidelines

Publication Malpractice Handling

Complaint Investigation Process

1 Complaint Receipt

All complaints are documented and acknowledged within 5 working days. Complaints can be submitted via email to [email protected].

2 Initial Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief conducts preliminary assessment to determine complaint validity and potential severity.

3 Investigation Committee

For serious allegations, an ad-hoc ethics committee is formed with relevant expertise and no conflicts of interest.

4 Evidence Collection

All relevant documentation is collected, including communications, original data, and expert opinions when needed.

5 Decision and Action

The committee makes recommendations for appropriate actions, which may include corrections, retractions, or sanctions.

6 Communication

All parties are informed of outcomes, and public notices are issued when appropriate.

Types of Malpractice and Sanctions

Minor Violations

Examples: Minor citation errors, unintentional duplicate publication, inadequate data description

Actions: Correction notice, author education, warning letter

Moderate Violations

Examples: Inappropriate authorship, undeclared conflicts of interest, data manipulation

Actions: Expression of concern, retraction, temporary publishing ban (1-2 years)

Severe Violations

Examples: Data fabrication, plagiarism, ethical violations in research conduct

Actions: Immediate retraction, permanent publishing ban, notification of institutions

Corrections and Retractions

Correction Policy

We publish corrections when errors affect interpretation:

Correction Type	When Used	Process
Erratum	Publisher-introduced errors	Published by journal, linked to original article
Corrigendum	Author-introduced errors	Initiated by authors, approved by editors
Addendum	Additional information or clarification	Author-initiated, editor-approved

Retraction Policy

Articles are retracted for serious ethical breaches or invalid results:

Clear retraction statement indicating reason

Identification of retracted article

Transparency about who is retracting

Maintenance of original article with retraction watermark

Notification to indexing services

Conflicts of Interest

Disclosure Requirements

All participants must disclose potential conflicts:

Financial Conflicts

Employment or consulting relationships
Stock ownership or options
Patent applications or registrations
Research funding from commercial entities
Travel grants or honoraria

Non-Financial Conflicts

Personal relationships
Academic competition
Intellectual passion
Political or religious beliefs
Institutional affiliations

Data and Image Integrity

Image Manipulation Standards

We maintain strict standards for image presentation:

Permitted Adjustments

Minor brightness/contrast adjustments applied equally
Cropping to remove irrelevant areas
Color space conversions
Size adjustments maintaining resolution

Prohibited Manipulations

Selective enhancement or obscuring of features
Removal or addition of elements
Cloning or duplication without indication
Misrepresentation of composite images

Appeals Process

Appeal Procedure

1 Appeal Submission

Authors may appeal editorial decisions within 30 days by submitting a formal appeal with detailed justification.

2 Appeal Review

The Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editor reviews the appeal, original decision, and any new information.

3 Independent Assessment

For complex cases, independent experts may be consulted to provide additional perspective.

4 Final Decision

The appeal committee makes a final decision, which is communicated to the authors with detailed explanation.

Whistleblower Protection

Reporting Protection

We protect individuals who report ethical concerns in good faith:

Confidentiality for whistleblowers
Protection against retaliation
Independent investigation of concerns
Transparent process while protecting identities

Reporting Channels: Concerns can be reported anonymously through our secure reporting system or directly to the ethics committee.

Compliance and Monitoring

Ongoing Compliance

We maintain several systems to ensure ethical compliance:

System	Purpose	Frequency
Plagiarism Detection	Identify textual similarity and potential plagiarism	All submissions
Image Screening	Detect inappropriate image manipulation	Selected manuscripts
Data Verification	Validate statistical analyses and data integrity	High-impact studies
Author Verification	Confirm author identities and contributions	Random sampling

Education and Training

Capacity Building

We provide resources to support ethical publishing practices:

Educational Resources

Author guidelines and tutorials
Reviewer training materials
Ethics case studies and examples
Regular updates on policy changes

Partnerships: We collaborate with research integrity offices and provide workshops on publication ethics.

Ethics Committee Contact

For questions, concerns, or reports regarding publication ethics:

Ethics Committee Chair:
Email: [email protected]
Phone: +1 (555) 123-4571

Secure Reporting:
Online Form: https://www.biologymedjournal.com/ethics-report

COPE Membership:
We are members of the Committee on Publication Ethics and follow their guidelines.

Response Time: We acknowledge all ethics inquiries within 3 working days and provide initial assessment within 15 working days.

Policy Review: This Ethics and Malpractice Statement is reviewed annually and updated as needed to reflect evolving best practices in publication ethics. Last comprehensive review: October 2023.

Applicability: This policy applies to all content published in Insights in Biology and Medicine and all individuals involved in the publication process.