Journal Ethics and Integrity Policy

Commitment to Ethical Publishing

International Multispecialty Journal of Health (IMJ Health) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity in accordance with international guidelines and best practices.

Policy Contents

1. Ethical Standards
2. Authorship Ethics
3. Reviewer Ethics
4. Editor Ethics

5. Conflict of Interest
6. Research Misconduct
7. Compliance Framework
8. Reporting Violations

1. Ethical Standards and Guidelines

IMJ Health adheres to internationally recognized ethical standards for scholarly publishing. Our policies are based on established guidelines from leading organizations in research ethics and publication practices.

Foundation Standards

COPE Guidelines: Committee on Publication Ethics standards
ICMJE Recommendations: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
WAME Principles: World Association of Medical Editors
Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research
Singapore Statement: Research integrity principles
Good Publication Practice: Industry standards for publication

Compliance Status

IMJ Health maintains compliance with:

COPE Member since 2016
ICMJE Recommendations
DOAJ Standards
Crossref Ethical Standards
WAME Principles

Core Ethical Principles

All stakeholders in the publication process must adhere to principles of honesty, transparency, accountability, fairness, and responsibility in research and publication.

2. Authorship and Contributorship Ethics

Authorship Criteria

Authorship must be based on substantial contributions to the research and manuscript preparation, following ICMJE criteria.

Authorship Requirements

ICMJE Criteria for Authorship:

Substantial Contribution: Significant contribution to conception, design, execution, or interpretation
Drafting or Revision: Drafting the work or critically revising it
Final Approval: Approval of the final version to be published
Accountability: Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work

All four criteria must be met for authorship. Contributors not meeting all criteria should be acknowledged.

Authorship Responsibilities

Author Obligations:

Originality: Ensure work is original and properly cited
Data Integrity: Maintain accuracy and reliability of data
Ethical Approval: Obtain necessary ethical approvals
Conflict Disclosure: Disclose all potential conflicts of interest
Error Correction: Promptly correct errors when identified
Data Availability: Make data available as appropriate

Contributorship and Acknowledgments

Clear distinction between authors and contributors:

CRediT Taxonomy: Use of Contributor Roles Taxonomy
Acknowledgment Section: Proper acknowledgment of contributions
Funding Acknowledgments: Clear disclosure of funding sources
Technical Assistance: Recognition of technical support
Writing Assistance: Acknowledgement of writing support
No Ghost Authorship: Prohibition of ghost authorship

Authorship Changes

Procedures for authorship modifications:

Addition: Requires consent from all authors
Removal: Justified reasons with author consent
Order Changes: Agreement from all authors required
Corresponding Author: Clear designation and responsibilities
Group Authorship: Proper listing of group members
Post-publication Changes: Formal correction process

Authorship Policy

3. Peer Reviewer Ethics

Reviewer Responsibilities

Confidentiality: Maintain manuscript confidentiality
Objectivity: Provide unbiased, objective assessment
Expertise: Review only within area of competence
Timeliness: Complete reviews within agreed timeframe
Constructive Feedback: Provide helpful, constructive comments
Conflict Disclosure: Declare any conflicts of interest

Ethical Review Standards

Originality Assessment: Check for plagiarism and duplicate publication
Methodological Review: Evaluate study design and methods
Ethical Compliance: Verify ethical approval and consent
Data Verification: Assess data integrity and analysis
Citation Accuracy: Check reference accuracy and relevance
Language Considerations: Focus on scientific content over language

Prohibited Reviewer Practices

Reviewers must avoid these unethical practices:

Misappropriation: Using unpublished work for personal benefit
Delaying Tactics: Unnecessary delay in review process
Unsubstantiated Criticism: Criticism without justification
Breach of Confidentiality: Sharing manuscript content
Undisclosed Conflict: Reviewing despite conflicts of interest
Delegation Without Permission: Transferring review without approval

Reviewer Recognition

Ethical recognition of reviewer contributions:

Anonymous Review: Protection of reviewer identity
Credit Systems: Publons integration for reviewer credit
Annual Recognition: Acknowledgement of top reviewers
Certificate of Service: Formal recognition of contribution
Database Inclusion: Inclusion in reviewer databases
Professional Development: Contribution to academic service

Reviewer Guidelines

4. Editorial Ethics and Responsibilities

Editorial Independence

Editors maintain independence in decision-making:

Academic Merit: Decisions based solely on academic quality
No Commercial Influence: Free from commercial pressures
No Personal Bias: Avoid personal or professional biases
Transparent Processes: Clear and consistent procedures
Appeal Mechanisms: Fair appeal processes available
Policy Adherence: Consistent application of journal policies

Core Principle: Editorial decisions are based on manuscript quality, originality, and relevance, not on authors' characteristics.

Editorial Responsibilities

Key responsibilities of journal editors:

Quality Assurance: Maintain publication standards
Timely Processing: Ensure efficient manuscript handling
Confidentiality Protection: Safeguard author and reviewer identities
Misconduct Handling: Address ethical issues appropriately
Correction Management: Handle corrections and retractions
Continuous Improvement: Enhance journal processes and policies

Editorial Decision Framework

Ethical framework for editorial decisions:

Acceptance Criteria

Based on scientific merit, originality, and relevance

Rejection Criteria

Poor quality, ethical issues, or inappropriate scope

Revision Requests

Clear guidance for improvement and resubmission

Note: All editorial decisions include constructive feedback to authors, regardless of outcome.

5. Conflict of Interest Management

Conflict Disclosure Requirements

All participants in the publication process must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their actions or judgments.

Author Conflicts

Financial Relationships: Employment, consultancies, stock ownership
Funding Sources: Research grants and funding support
Intellectual Property: Patents, copyrights, royalties
Personal Relationships: Family, personal, or professional relationships
Academic Competition: Competitive research interests
Political or Legal: Political affiliations or legal involvements

Reviewer and Editor Conflicts

Competing Research: Direct competition with authors
Personal Relationships: Close personal or professional ties
Institutional Conflicts: Institutional competition or collaboration
Financial Interests: Financial relationships with authors
Previous Collaboration: Recent collaboration with authors
Ideological Differences: Strong ideological disagreements

Institutional Conflicts

Funding Agency Influence: Pressure from funding sources
Commercial Sponsorship: Influence from commercial sponsors
Institutional Policies: Institutional publication requirements
Editorial Independence: Protection from external influence
Publisher Relationships: Relationships with publishing entities
Regulatory Considerations: Compliance with regulatory bodies

Management Procedures

Declaration Forms: Mandatory conflict disclosure forms
Assessment Process: Systematic evaluation of disclosures
Mitigation Strategies: Appropriate management measures
Publication of Disclosures: Publication of relevant conflicts
Recusal Procedures: Recusal when conflicts cannot be managed
Monitoring Systems: Ongoing monitoring of potential conflicts

Conflict of Interest Policy

6. Research Misconduct Handling

Types of Research Misconduct

Fabrication: Making up data or results
Falsification: Manipulating research materials or data
Plagiarism: Appropriating others' work without credit
Duplicate Publication: Publishing same work multiple times
Authorship Misconduct: Inappropriate authorship practices
Ethical Violations: Violation of research ethics standards

Investigation Procedures

Initial Assessment: Preliminary evaluation of allegations
Evidence Collection: Systematic gathering of evidence
Expert Consultation: Consultation with relevant experts
Author Response: Opportunity for author response
Institutional Notification: Notification to relevant institutions
Final Determination: Evidence-based final decision

Corrective Actions

Appropriate responses to confirmed misconduct:

Correction: Publication of correction notices
Retraction: Complete withdrawal of published work
Expression of Concern: Publication of concerns notice
Author Sanctions: Appropriate author penalties
Database Notification: Notification to indexing services
Institutional Reporting: Reporting to relevant institutions

Whistleblower Protection

Protection for those reporting misconduct:

Confidentiality: Protection of whistleblower identity
Non-retaliation: Protection from retaliation
Fair Process: Fair investigation procedures
Support Services: Access to support if needed
Transparent Procedures: Clear investigation processes
Feedback Provision: Feedback on investigation outcomes

Principle: Good faith allegations of misconduct are taken seriously and investigated thoroughly.

7. Compliance and Monitoring Framework

Compliance Monitoring

Systematic monitoring of ethical compliance:

Regular Audits: Periodic ethical compliance audits
Process Reviews: Regular review of ethical procedures
Training Programs: Ongoing ethics training for staff
Policy Updates: Regular updating of ethics policies
Stakeholder Feedback: Collection of stakeholder feedback
Benchmarking: Comparison with industry standards

Quality Assurance

Quality assurance measures for ethical standards:

Checklist Systems: Ethical compliance checklists
Documentation Requirements: Comprehensive documentation
Review Processes: Multi-level review procedures
Internal Controls: Internal control systems
External Validation: External ethical validation
Continuous Improvement: Ongoing process improvement

Compliance Schedule

Regular compliance activities and schedule:

Quarterly

Policy compliance review

Biannual

Staff ethics training

Annual

Comprehensive ethical audit

As Needed

Policy updates and revisions

Last Comprehensive Audit: November 22, 2025

Next Scheduled Audit: November 22, 2026

8. Reporting Ethical Violations

Reporting Procedures

How to report suspected ethical violations:

Designated Contact: Email: info@imjhealth.org
Required Information: Specific details and evidence
Confidentiality: Protection of reporter identity
Response Timeline: Initial response within 7 days
Investigation Process: Transparent investigation procedures
Outcome Communication: Communication of investigation results

Cooperation with Institutions

Collaboration with research institutions:

Institutional Notification: Prompt notification of issues
Joint Investigations: Collaboration on investigations
Information Sharing: Appropriate information exchange
Policy Alignment: Alignment with institutional policies
Training Collaboration: Joint training initiatives
Best Practice Sharing: Sharing of best practices

Principle: We work collaboratively with institutions to address ethical issues effectively.

Policy Review and Updates

This journal ethics policy is reviewed annually to ensure alignment with evolving international standards, technological developments, and best practices in ethical publishing. Updates are implemented as needed to maintain the highest ethical standards.

Ethics Policy Support

For ethics policy questions or violation reports:

Ethics Committee: info@imjhealth.org

Editor-in-Chief: info@imjhealth.org

Response Commitment: We respond to all ethics inquiries within 5 business days. All reports are treated confidentially and investigated thoroughly.

Policy Document Information

Policy Version

Version 5.1

Effective Date

January 15, 2015

Last Updated

February 22, 2026

Note: This journal ethics policy is based on COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) recommendations, and WAME (World Association of Medical Editors) principles. All participants in the publication process are expected to adhere to these ethical standards. The policy is regularly reviewed and updated to reflect evolving best practices in ethical publishing.