A statement on publishing ethics and morality
In order to strengthen the academic integrity construction of Chinese Journal of New Clinical Medicine, standardize writing, editing, reviewing and publishing the papers, and resist academic misconducts, the journal has formulated ethical norms for authors, reviewers, editors and publishers of Chinese Journal of New Clinical Medicine in accordance with relevant provisions of the copyright law, domestic and foreign publishing ethics, and in light of the actual situation of the journal.
The authors’ ethics
1. The authors are responsible for the authenticity of the paper and have the responsibility to cooperate with the editorial department to provide original pictures, original data, project approval and project title and other supporting materials as required.
2. When submitting a manuscript, the authors are required to provide a letter of recommendation from their institution. The letter should not only verify the authenticity of the content (data, the authors’ information) of the manuscript but also prove that the manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere, does not involve any confidentiality issues, and there are no disputes over authorship. After the manuscript is accepted, a "Copyright Transfer Agreement for Papers in Journals sponsored and Cooperated by Chinese Medical Doctor Association" signed by all the authors must be submitted.
3. The authors should abide by the "Five Prohibitions" when writing and submitting papers: It is not allowed for a third party to write papers on behalf of the authors. Papers must not be submitted by a third party on behalf of the authors. The content of the papers is not allowed to be modified by a third party on behalf of the authors. False information about peer reviewers is not allowed. No violation of the authorship regulations for papers is allowed (refer to articles 4 to 7). Firmly resist the authorship of papers without substantive academic contributions.
4. The listed authors are the substantial contributors to the paper, including: ① Those who have made significant contributions to the thinking or design of the research , or those who have obtained, analyzed or interpreted data for the research. ② Those who draft the research paper or make important intellectual revisions to the paper. ③ Those who finalize the version to be published. ④ Those who agree to take responsibility for all aspects of the research work to ensure that any issues related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the paper are properly investigated and resolved. Those who do not meet all four of the above criteria (such as those who only provide technical assistance to the paper or offer economic and material support) should not be listed as the authors, but gratitude can be expressed in the acknowledgments section to those who have provided assistance.
5. The authorship is generally ranked in order of contribution, and is determined by the authors of the paper through mutual agreement and confirmation at the time of submission. The authorship and affiliation order generally cannot be changed. If a change is indeed necessary, the persons in charge of the paper writing (the first author and the corresponding author) must submit a written application for the change to the editorial department, stating the reasons, and it must be signed and confirmed by all the listed authors. No unauthorized changes in the authorship are allowed in the revised manuscript.
6. Generally, only one corresponding author is marked. If it is a multi-center or multi-disciplinary collaborative research and the number of corresponding authors indeed exceeds one, the number may be appropriately increased. The added corresponding authors should be the academic responsible persons of different research institutions or different research groups involved in the collaborative research.
7. Authors with equivalent contributions should be indicated at the time of submission. The number of equal contributors is generally no more than two. If it is a multi-center or multi-disciplinary collaborative research and the number indeed exceeds two, the number can be appropriately increased. The additional equivalent contributors should come from different research institutions or different research groups involved in the collaborative research.
8. When submitting a manuscript, the author should clearly indicate their name and affiliation. The author's affiliation should be relevant to the research content of the paper. If not, the author should explain the contributions made in the research or have the author's affiliation issue a certificate proving that the author has indeed engaged in this research.
9. If the institution to which the author belongs is inconsistent with the one that selected the research topic, designed the research plan, conducted the research work, and provided the research conditions (such as a graduate student leaving the training unit, a visiting student, a visiting scholar, or a collaborative researcher, etc.), the institution that provided the research conditions and completed the research work shall be the first affiliated institution.
10. Authors of clinical research papers should follow relevant guidelines when writing (such as the CONSORT guidelines for Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials, the TREND Guidelines for Reporting Non-randomized Controlled Trials, the STROBE guidelines for Reporting Observational studies, and the STARD guidelines for Reporting Diagnostic accuracy Studies, etc.).
11.Clinical trial papers should follow the "benefit principle" and "non-harm principle" of bioethics. For papers involving biomedical research on humans and animal experiments, authors are required to provide ethical review proof documents of the research plan. If patients (subjects) are involved, informed consent forms should be signed.
12. All research involving clinical trials (randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, case reports, research conducted on humans or with specimens from humans, including psychological and social medical research based on questionnaires, in principle, authors should complete registration at a primary clinical trial registry certified by the WHO (such as ClinicalTrials.gov, the Chinese ClinicalTrial Registry, etc.) and indicate the clinical trial registration number in the manuscript.
13. Authors must take various preventive measures to protect the privacy of research subjects. Personal identity information such as patients' names and hospitalization ID numbers must not be involved in the manuscript. For medical research that uses identifiable human body materials or data, the consent of the subjects must be obtained in accordance with the formal procedures, and the parts that can identify the patient's identity (especially the face) must be covered in the manuscript.
14. When submitting a manuscript, the author should declare whether there are any conflicts of interest. If there is a conflict of interest, all economic interests that may affect the research results should be stated (whether there is a commercial interest relationship between the research and the pharmaceutical company; Has the pharmaceutical company provided any financial sponsorship in aspects such as experimental design and implementation, data processing, article writing and publication?
15. If the author has any objections to the review opinions or results, they may submit a written statement to the editorial department, providing detailed explanations and clarifications for each review opinion.
Reviewer Ethics
1. Review experts should adhere to the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality and timeliness to make responsible review opinions on the manuscripts. No prejudice or discrimination shall be held against the author's research institution, region, qualifications, ethnicity, gender, etc., and the author's research content shall not be disclosed.
2. When there is a conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author (such as kinship, teacher-student relationship, alumni relationship, colleague relationship, or competitive relationship), to ensure the fairness of the review, the reviewer should promptly inform the editorial department of the conflict of interest, and the editorial department will decide whether to recuse themselves.
3. When reviewers find that an author's research is similar to their own, they must not take advantage of their review to suppress or belittle the author's paper.
4. Reviewers should review the manuscripts in a timely manner as agreed. If they cannot return their review opinions on time, they should promptly inform the editorial department and withdraw the review, and may recommend other reviewers. Without the consent of the editorial department, reviewers are not allowed to entrust their students, colleagues, etc. to review on their behalf.
5. When reviewers encounter manuscripts they have reviewed before, they are obligated to report the situation to the editorial department and fill in the review opinions in accordance with the requirements for manuscript review.
Editorial Ethics
1. Editors should handle each manuscript fairly, impartially and promptly, and make decisions to accept or reject the paper based on its importance, originality, scientificity, readability, research authenticity and relevance to the journal.
2. Editors should abide by the principle of confidentiality. On the one hand, they need to keep the information of reviewers confidential; On the other hand, the author's research content should be kept confidential.
3. Editors must not be driven by profit to interfere with peer review. They should ensure the independent review of peer review experts to guarantee the fairness and impartiality of peer review.
4. For peer reviewers recommended by authors, editors should verify the authenticity of the reviewers’ information and decide whether to adopt the recommended reviewers based on their research fields and expertise, as well as whether there are any conflicts of interest with the authors. If an author requests to avoid having a certain expert review his or her manuscript and this request is reasonable, the editor should respect it.
5. When selecting reviewers, editors should try to avoid selecting them from the same institution as the authors and must not choose the authors as the reviewers.
6. When there is a conflict of interest between the editor and the author (such as kinship, teacher-student relationship, alumni relationship, colleague relationship, or competitive relationship), the editor should avoid handling the manuscript.
7. The editor should treat the author’ appeal with caution and a collective discussion should be organized or the review experts should be invited to re-examine it.
8. Negative results obtained through rigorous scientific research should be considered for publication by editors to prevent other scholars from repeating unnecessary research.
9. Editors have the responsibility to avoid academic misconduct such as multiple submissions and duplicate publications. They should conduct two rounds of plagiarism checks and reviews for both the first submitted papers and those to be published.
10. Editors have the obligation to remind authors of possible copyright and intellectual property issues after changing their authorship, affiliation and the order in which they are listed.
11. Editors should provide authors with detailed revision suggestions or reasons for rejection as much as possible.
12. Editors should respect the author's viewpoints and writing style. Any key modifications to the paper involving academic viewpoints, etc., should be approved by the author.
Publishers’ Ethics
1. This journal adheres to the principle of first publication and only reports original research results. However, the journal may republish under certain conditions: ① republish in another language for readers in different regions; ② Authors must obtain authorization from the first publication journal and the journal for re-publication. ③ The time interval between the re-publication and the first publication should be at least one week. Papers that are republished should indicate the name of the journal in which they were first published, the year, volume, issue and page number, the title, and the original website address, etc.
2. For manuscripts that have been finalized and accepted, if academic misconduct is found, this journal reserves the right to reject the manuscript and notify the author's institution and the relevant journal.
3. For published papers, if academic misconduct is found, this journal will handle the retraction and publish a retraction statement.
4. The journal publishes detailed guidelines required by authors (such as submission guidelines) and updates them in a timely manner.
5. The journal has established a management system for conflicts of interest among its editors, authors, reviewers and members of the editorial board.
The handling of academic misconduct
This journal has always adhered to strict academic ethics standards and resolutely prevented academic misconduct (such as duplicate publication, deliberate non-disclosure of conflicts of interest, plagiarism, fabrication and tampering, etc.). If any improper behavior occurs during the publication of the paper, the editorial department will fully assist the relevant departments in the investigation. For academic misconduct with conclusive evidence, punitive measures such as notifying the author's institution, warning the author, and retracting the manuscript will be taken.
