Research and Publication Ethics

Acta Medica adopts and adheres to the ethical guidelines and standards established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Publisher's Responsibilities

Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, as the publisher, is committed to the editorial independence of Acta Medica and aims to ensure that editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit and are not influenced by political, financial, or commercial considerations. The publisher provides the necessary resources and technical infrastructure for the journal and assists the editors in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

The editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. They are obliged to:

  • Follow the COPE Core Practices (formerly the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors).
  • Fair Play and Independence: Evaluate manuscripts exclusively on their academic merit without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation.
  • Confidentiality: Ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential.
  • Use of Artificial Intelligence: Not upload manuscripts or any part of them to publicly available AI tools, as this may violate the confidentiality of the manuscript. Editors may use AI tools only to improve the language of the feedback and decision letters they have written for the authors, provided that no confidential information from the manuscript is shared.
  • Use of Unpublished Material: Not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the authors.
  • Conflicts of Interest: Recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest. Manuscripts submitted by editors are handled as described in the Submissions by Editors and Editorial Board Members section.
  • Investigation: Take responsive measures when ethical complaints or allegations of misconduct are raised concerning a submitted manuscript or published article, as described in the Handling of Allegations of Misconduct section.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers assist the editors in making editorial decisions and may also assist the authors in improving the manuscript. They are obliged to:

  • Follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
  • Contribution: Assist in the decision-making process and help improve the quality of the manuscript objectively.
  • Confidentiality: Treat any manuscript received for review as a confidential document.
  • Anonymity: Respect the double-blind peer review process by not attempting to identify the authors and not revealing their own identity to the authors.
  • No Direct Contact: Not contact the authors directly regarding the manuscript; all communication must take place through the journal.
  • Timeliness: Accept a review invitation only if they can complete the review within the specified period, and notify the editors promptly if they are unable to complete the review on time.
  • Use of Artificial Intelligence: Uploading the manuscript or any part of it to AI tools is strictly prohibited, as it violates the confidentiality of the peer review process and the proprietary rights of the authors. Reviewers may use AI tools only to improve the language of the comments they have written for the authors and editors, provided that no confidential information from the manuscript is shared. Reviewers are fully responsible for the content of their review reports.
  • Standards of Objectivity: Conduct reviews objectively, avoiding personal criticism of the authors.
  • Acknowledgement of Sources: Identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Citation suggestions must be based on valid scientific reasons; reviewers must not request citations to their own work or to the work of their colleagues, the journal, or any group merely to increase citation counts or visibility.
  • Conflicts of Interest: Not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

  • Original Content: The journal publishes only original scholarly work. Manuscripts submitted to the journal must not have been published or be under consideration for publication elsewhere. However, authors can submit their manuscript to the journal after receiving a rejection letter from another journal. Manuscripts previously posted on a preprint server are also considered for publication, provided that the preprint is disclosed as described in the Originality and Preprints section. Theses and dissertations that are not archived online are considered original and unpublished; however, authors submitting a manuscript that uses content or data from theses or dissertations must declare this during submission under the Prior Presentation, Preprint, Abstract, or Thesis heading.
  • Authorship: Authors must adhere to the authorship criteria outlined in the Authorship section and avoid gift or ghost authorship.
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use: AI-assisted tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors must disclose any use of AI-assisted technologies during submission and, where applicable, describe it in the Materials and Methods section, as described in the Use of Artificial Intelligence section.
  • Redundant Publication: Authors must not submit manuscripts that report the same research, data, or results that have already been published or are under consideration elsewhere (duplicate or redundant publication), and must not divide a single study into multiple publications without scientific justification (salami publication). Secondary analyses of previously published data are acceptable only if this is clearly stated and the original publication is cited.
  • Citations and Plagiarism: Authors must cite relevant, verified literature to support their scholarly work. They must avoid any form of citation manipulation or misconduct when citing other scholarly works and must avoid plagiarism and self-plagiarism.
  • Fabrication and Falsification: Authors must avoid data fabrication and falsification of any content. Authors are obliged to ensure that the data presented in their manuscript are accurate and representative. Authors may be asked to submit their raw data or supplemental data to ensure transparency.
  • Ethical Approval: Studies that require ethics committee approval must include an approval statement in the Methods section of the main document, with the name of the committee and the protocol number blinded for peer review. The approval details (name of the ethics committee, date, and decision or protocol number) must be declared during submission under the Ethics Committee Approval heading. If ethics committee approval is not required for the study, the reason must be stated under the same heading.
  • Informed Consent: For case reports and studies involving human subjects, publication requires a statement that written informed consent was obtained from the participant (or their parent/legal guardian if the participant is a minor or incapacitated). This information must be included in the Methods or Case Presentation section and must be declared during submission under the Informed Consent heading. If the ethics committee waived the requirement for informed consent (e.g., in retrospective studies), this must be stated together with the reason for the waiver.
  • Studies Involving Human Subjects and Vulnerable Populations: All studies involving human subjects must comply with international guidelines (e.g., the Declaration of Helsinki) and the ethical principles established by the relevant authorities. Special attention is required for studies involving vulnerable groups (e.g., minors, prisoners, terminally ill patients, or cognitively impaired individuals). Authors must demonstrate that strict ethical procedures were followed to protect these participants.
  • Animal Studies: Studies involving animals must be approved by an appropriate animal experiments ethics committee in accordance with applicable national regulations. The approval statement must be included in the Methods section, and the approval details must be declared during submission under the Ethics Committee Approval heading. Authors must state that institutional and national standards and international guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals (e.g., Directive 2010/63/EU) were followed, and are recommended to follow the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting.
  • Sex and Gender in Research: Authors are encouraged to follow the SAGER (Sex and Gender Equity in Research) guidelines and to report sex and gender information where relevant. Authors should use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully to avoid confusing the two terms.
  • Conflicts of Interest: Authors must declare any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest during submission under the Conflicts of Interest heading. If there is no conflict of interest, this must also be explicitly declared.
  • Error Notification: Authors must promptly notify the editors of any significant error or inaccuracy they discover in their manuscript and cooperate with the editors in resolving it. Manuscripts under review may be corrected or withdrawn (see Manuscript Withdrawal), and published articles may be corrected or retracted (see Correction and Retraction Policy).

Handling of Allegations of Misconduct

Acta Medica takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and handles them in accordance with the COPE flowcharts. Misconduct includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, image manipulation, duplicate or redundant publication, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts of interest, research conducted without appropriate ethics approval or informed consent, citation manipulation, and manipulation of the peer review process.

  • Reporting: Anyone may report suspected misconduct concerning a submitted manuscript or published article to the editorial office via [email protected]. Reports should describe the concern and include supporting evidence. Anonymous reports are considered if they are supported by sufficient evidence.
  • Confidentiality: The identity of the person raising the concern and the details of the case are kept confidential throughout the process, as far as possible.
  • Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief assesses whether the allegation is substantiated and warrants further action.
  • Contacting the Authors: The authors are informed of the concern, provided with the relevant evidence, and given the opportunity to respond.
  • Institutional Involvement: If the authors' response is unsatisfactory or no response is received, the journal may contact the authors' institution(s), the relevant ethics committee, or other appropriate authorities and request an investigation. The journal does not conduct institutional investigations itself.
  • Outcomes: Depending on the nature and severity of the misconduct and the stage of the manuscript, possible outcomes include rejection of the manuscript, publication of an Expression of Concern, correction or retraction of a published article, and notification of the authors' institution(s).

If an allegation involves the Editor-in-Chief, it is referred to the publisher for independent evaluation.

Correction and Retraction Policy

Acta Medica is committed to preserving the integrity of the scientific record. Occasionally, it may be necessary to correct or retract articles or to publish an Expression of Concern. Changes to articles published in Early View before they are assigned to an issue are handled as described in the Post-Acceptance and Production Process section.

Corrections

Corrections (errata and corrigenda) can be issued for published articles to fix errors that do not affect the validity of the results or the main conclusions of the study. A correction notice is published and linked to the original article.

  • Erratum: Issued when a significant error is introduced by the publisher during the production process (e.g., missing figures, typographical errors in data).
  • Corrigendum: Issued when the authors discover a significant error after publication (e.g., errors in the author list, figure labeling, or calculation errors that do not alter the final conclusion).

Retractions

Acta Medica will initiate a retraction process for articles found to have serious ethical violations or errors that invalidate the results. These include, but are not limited to:

  • Clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication or falsification (e.g., image manipulation),
  • Plagiarism,
  • Redundant publication (findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing),
  • Copyright infringement or other serious legal issues (e.g., the use of material or data without authorization),
  • Unethical research or reporting practices,
  • Compromised or manipulated peer review,
  • Failure to disclose a major conflict of interest that would have unduly affected the interpretation of the work or the recommendations of editors and reviewers.

The journal follows the COPE Retraction Guidelines in such cases. Retracted articles are not removed; they remain accessible, with "RETRACTED" added to the title and clearly marked in the HTML and PDF versions. The retraction notice states the reason for the retraction and who initiated it.

Expressions of Concern

The editors may publish an Expression of Concern when there are serious doubts about the integrity or reliability of a published article but the investigation is ongoing or its outcome is inconclusive. The notice is linked to the original article and describes the concern in general terms. Depending on the outcome, it may be followed by a correction or retraction.

Notices and Metadata

Correction notices, retraction notices, and Expressions of Concern are published as separate, freely accessible items with their own DOIs. Each notice and the original article are linked to each other, the DOI of the original article remains active, and the change is registered in the Crossref metadata.

Complaints

Acta Medica handles complaints in accordance with COPE guidelines. Authors, reviewers, readers, or other parties may submit complaints regarding the editorial or peer review process, the conduct of editors or reviewers, or the journal's policies to the editorial office via [email protected]. Complaints should clearly describe the issue and include any supporting information.

All complaints are treated confidentially and investigated impartially. The Editor-in-Chief aims to resolve complaints swiftly and constructively and informs the complainant of the outcome. If a complaint involves the Editor-in-Chief, it is referred to the publisher (Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine) for independent review. Allegations of research or publication misconduct are handled as described in the Handling of Allegations of Misconduct section.

Appeals against editorial decisions are handled as described in the Appeals section of the Review Process.