Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
This statement applies to all EJMME submissions, peer reviews, editorial decisions, and published articles. EJMME follows COPE guidance and Core Principles. Relevant WAME and ICMJE recommendations inform authorship and AI safeguards where applicable; referencing these frameworks does not imply membership, certification, or indexing approval.
Duties of Editors
Editors assess manuscripts fairly for scholarly merit, relevance, methodological quality, and ethical compliance, without discrimination. They protect confidential material, check potential conflicts, select suitable independent reviewers, and communicate reasoned decisions.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final academic decision. Editors must not handle their own submissions or work where they have a conflict; an independent, non-conflicted editor takes responsibility in such cases, including when the Editor-in-Chief is conflicted.
Duties of Reviewers
Reviewers accept only assignments within their expertise that they can complete responsibly. They disclose conflicts, decline compromised assignments, and notify the editor if they cannot meet an agreed deadline.
Reports must be objective, respectful, evidence-based, and constructive. Reviewers report suspected plagiarism, ethical concerns, and relevant uncited work to the editor. They must not demand citations for personal benefit or contact authors directly about confidential reviews.
Plagiarism / Duplicate Publication
Plagiarism, unattributed reuse, redundant publication, and simultaneous submission are prohibited. Authors must disclose related manuscripts, prior dissemination, and overlapping content so editors can assess whether the submission makes a distinct contribution.
Similarity findings are assessed in context, not by a percentage alone. Suspected overlap is investigated and authors are asked to respond. Outcomes may include required correction, rejection, or post-publication action according to the seriousness and reliability of the evidence.
Data Fabrication & Falsification
Inventing data, observations, participants, citations, or results is prohibited. Manipulating data, images, analyses, or reporting to misrepresent findings is also prohibited, including undisclosed removal of inconvenient observations.
Authors must retain supporting records and provide appropriate evidence to editors when requested, subject to legal and ethical protections. Suspected fabrication or falsification may require institutional investigation and rejection, an expression of concern, or retraction.
Conflicts of Interest
Authors disclose financial and non-financial interests, funding, sponsor involvement, employment, advisory roles, and relationships that could influence interpretation. A declaration of no relevant conflicts is required when none exist.
Editors and reviewers disclose and recuse themselves for compromising relationships, including recent collaboration, co-authorship, shared institutional affiliation, close personal relationships, financial interests, or direct competition. Relevant author disclosures accompany publication; editorial conflicts are managed independently.
Research Involving Humans or Animals
Where applicable, research involving human participants, identifiable records, surveys, interviews, experiments, or personal data must comply with relevant law and ethical standards. Report approval by the appropriate ethics body with its reference, or explain a documented exemption. Report informed consent, privacy protections, and consent for publication of identifiable information where required.
Animal research, if relevant to an eligible manuscript, must report appropriate ethical approval, legal compliance, and welfare safeguards. Authors must explain when approval or consent is not applicable; ethics approval must never be invented. Editors may request supporting documentation or decline work with inadequate safeguards.
Corrections, Errata & Retractions
Errors that do not invalidate the central findings are addressed through a clearly labelled correction or erratum linked to the original article. Notices explain the change and preserve the scholarly record rather than silently replacing the published findings.
Serious uncertainty may warrant an expression of concern while an inquiry continues. Unreliable findings, major ethical breaches, plagiarism, or redundant publication may warrant retraction following COPE guidance. Retraction notices identify the article, reasons, and responsibility; the article remains clearly marked as retracted unless legal or safety grounds require removal.
Complaints & Appeals
Send a complaint or reasoned appeal to editor@ejmme-journal.eu, identifying the manuscript or article, the decision or conduct challenged, and supporting evidence. Appeals must address a specific procedural error, factual misunderstanding, conflict, or unsupported assessment; disagreement alone does not guarantee reversal.
The journal acknowledges receipt, assesses the evidence, and communicates the outcome and expected handling timeframe. Complaints about a handling editor are reviewed independently; a complaint involving the Editor-in-Chief is assigned to a non-conflicted editor. Additional expert advice may be sought. An appeal does not guarantee acceptance.
Research Misconduct Investigations
Credible concerns may be raised by authors, reviewers, readers, or institutions. The editor records the allegation, preserves relevant evidence, assesses the concern confidentially, and gives the parties a fair opportunity to respond without presuming misconduct.
The journal may pause review or publication, seek independent advice, and refer matters requiring access to original records to the relevant institution or responsible authority. Institutions investigate underlying conduct; the journal determines the appropriate action on the publication record. Outcomes and reasons are documented, with corrections, concerns, or retractions where warranted.
Copyright & Licensing
Authors retain copyright. Published articles are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) license, as described in the Copyright & Licensing policy.
Authors must secure permission for third-party material where needed and identify material excluded from the article's license. Open access does not remove duties of attribution, research integrity, privacy, or permission.
Data Availability
Manuscripts must include a data availability statement describing where supporting data, code, or materials can be accessed, with repository identifiers where available, or explaining why sharing is restricted or not applicable.
Share reproducibility materials where lawful and ethically appropriate. Personal, confidential, commercially restricted, or legally protected data must not be disclosed without authorization. Explain restrictions and any permitted access procedure rather than promising access that cannot be provided. Editors may request confidential verification.
Reviewer Confidentiality
EJMME uses double-blind review. Reviewer-facing manuscripts, metadata, invitations, and communications must use editor-approved anonymized information. Reviewers protect the manuscript, reports, and unpublished findings and must not identify, contact, or exploit authors.
Reviewers must not share files or involve another person without editorial permission and confidentiality safeguards. Reviewer identities and reports are not publicly disclosed without appropriate consent or a lawful requirement. Confidential material must not be uploaded to public or external generative AI services.
Editorial Independence
Academic decisions are independent of publication charges, fee waivers, advertising, sponsorship, institutional relationships, and commercial interests. Payment or Editorial Board membership does not purchase acceptance or favorable review.
The Editor-in-Chief retains final academic responsibility, subject to conflict-of-interest recusal and independent handling. Editors and Board members submitting their own work are subject to the same standards and cannot select reviewers or decide on that work.
Special Issues Policy
If a special issue is organized, its scope, guest editors, and relevant interests must be disclosed. Guest editors work under the oversight of the Editor-in-Chief and must follow the same ethics, confidentiality, and conflict rules as regular editors.
Special-issue manuscripts undergo the same editorial screening and double-blind review by at least two independent reviewers. Guest-editor submissions are handled independently. Invitations, sponsorship, or thematic inclusion do not waive quality requirements or guarantee acceptance.
AI / Generative AI Policy
AI systems cannot be authors. Human authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, citations, permissions, and ethical compliance and must disclose substantive generative AI use, naming the tool and explaining its purpose and extent.
AI must not fabricate research evidence or references. Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential submissions to public or external AI services or delegate independent review or academic decisions to AI. Read the dedicated Generative AI Policy for disclosure requirements, permitted research uses, and safeguards.