Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Publication Ethics

Journal of Orthopaedics, Sports Science, and Rehabilitation is committed to adhering to the guidelines and core practices set forth by a number of organisations, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (a joint statement by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME), and the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals by ICMJE. These guidelines and recommendations are designed to promote transparency, integrity, and best practices in scholarly publishing. By adhering to these standards, the journal aims to ensure that the research it publishes is of the highest quality and meets the ethical standards of the scientific community.

In the context of medical research involving human subjects, including research on identifiable human material and data, the WAME Declaration of Helsinki (amended in 2013) provides guidance on a number of key issues. These include the importance of obtaining informed consent from participants, the need to protect their privacy and confidentiality, and the avoidance of harm to study participants.

Furthermore, Journal of Orthopaedics, Sports Science, and Rehabilitation adheres to the WAME Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals. These recommendations provide guidance on the handling of conflicts of interest, the investigation of suspected research misconduct, and the assurance of the integrity and transparency of the peer review process. By following these recommendations, the journal ensures that the research it publishes meets the highest ethical standards.

It is recommended that authors utilise the EASE Ethics Checklist for Authors in order to guarantee that their manuscripts adhere to the requisite ethical standards and practices.

 

Human and animal rights 

All research involving human subjects, medical records, or human tissues must undergo a review and approval process by a designated reviewer board, such as an institutional review board (IRB) or an ethics committee, prior to its commencement. The name of the ethics committee that reviewed and approved the research, along with the ethics committee approval number and date, must be included in the Methods section of the manuscript when it is submitted for publication. Furthermore, the journal may require authors to provide a copy of the ethics committee approval as part of the manuscript submission process. This is to guarantee that the research has been adequately examined and endorsed and to enable the journal to ascertain that the research adheres to the ethical standards necessary for publication.

In the event that a study is exempt from the necessity of ethics committee approval, the authors are required to present a statement from the ethics committee elucidating the rationale for the exemption. This is to guarantee that the research has been evaluated by an ethics committee and that the decision to exempt the study was taken in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations.

In the event that a manuscript is submitted to Journal of Orthopaedics, Sports Science, and Rehabilitation without the requisite ethics committee approval, the journal will undertake a review in accordance with the COPE's Research, Audit and Service Evaluations guidelines. This guideline provides guidance on the handling of manuscripts that do not have ethics committee approval, thereby enabling the journal to assess the risks and potential ethical concerns associated with publishing the research.

In the event that the journal deems the absence of ethics committee approval to be a significant issue, the manuscript may be rejected following an editorial review. This is to guarantee that the journal maintains the highest ethical standards and only publishes research that has been duly reviewed and approved by an ethics committee.

In the case of studies involving animals, it is necessary to obtain approval of the research protocols from an ethics committee. It is the responsibility of the ethics committee to review research protocols in order to ascertain their compliance with relevant guidelines and regulations. These include the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (8th edition, 2011) and the International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals (2012). These guidelines provide comprehensive guidance on the ethical and humane conduct of research involving animals and are widely regarded as the benchmark for such research.

It is incumbent upon authors to provide detailed information in their manuscripts regarding the ethical treatment of animals, including the measures taken to prevent pain and suffering. The ARRIVE checklist may be used to assist authors in providing this information in a clear and comprehensive manner.

Furthermore, authors are required to provide detailed information on the measures taken to prevent pain and suffering in addition to the ethical treatment of animals. This is to guarantee that the research is conducted in an ethical and humane manner and to enable readers to ascertain that the research complies with the relevant ethical standards.

 

Informed consent 

In the case of manuscripts pertaining to research conducted with human subjects, it is imperative to include a statement attesting to the fact that written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The process of informed consent must be documented in writing, and a copy of the informed consent form should be retained by the researchers for future reference.

In the case of research involving children under the age of 18, informed consent must be obtained from the parent or guardian on behalf of the child. This is due to the fact that children are regarded as a vulnerable demographic and may lack the capacity to fully comprehend the potential risks and benefits associated with their participation in research.

In the event that the manuscript presents the findings of a survey or interviews, the author is obliged to confirm that the participants provided informed consent to engage in the study and that their personal details are to be recorded, should this be the case. Should quotations or other attributable statements be included, these must be de-identified, or the manuscript must state that the individual in question has consented to be named.

Information pertaining to the process of informed consent should be presented in the Methods section of the manuscript, accompanied by any additional pertinent details concerning the manner in which the research was conducted.

It is the responsibility of the authors to safeguard the anonymity of study participants and to guarantee that the research is conducted in a manner that respects their privacy and confidentiality. This is particularly crucial in the case of photographs that could potentially reveal the identity of patients, as the publication of such images without the requisite consent could constitute a violation of the individuals depicted.

In order to safeguard the anonymity of patients depicted in photographs, it is the responsibility of the authors to obtain signed releases from the patients themselves or their legal representatives. Such releases should indicate that patients have consented to the publication of the photographs and should specify any restrictions or conditions on their use. Information on the approval for the publication of photographs should be included in the Methods section of the manuscript.

 

Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct

All submissions are subjected to multiple rounds of screening by similarity detection software (Crossref Similarity Check Powered by iThenticate) throughout the peer-review and production processes.

It is imperative that, when discussing the work of others (or your own), the material is cited correctly in every instance.

It is incumbent upon authors to refrain from any form of plagiarism and ethical misconduct, as exemplified below.

The practice of citation manipulation refers to the alteration of the number of citations received by an author, journal, or other publication through various means, such as self-citation, excessive citation of articles from the same journal, or the inclusion of honorary citations or citation stacking The practice of manipulating the number of citations received by an author, journal, or other publication through various means, such as self-citation, excessive citation of articles from the same journal, or the inclusion of honorary citations or citation stacking, is known as citation manipulation.

The practice of repurposing existing text without proper attribution is referred to as self-plagiarism, or text recycling. The practice of repurposing sections or sentences from an author's previous publications without providing appropriate citations. This constitutes a form of plagiarism, as it entails the utilisation of another individual's intellectual property (in this case, the author's own work) without the requisite attribution.

The practice of using the same data from a research study in several different articles is known as salami publication. This is considered to be unethical, as it involves reporting the same hypotheses, population, and methods of a study in multiple papers.

The term "data fabrication" is used to describe the act of creating or altering data in a way that is not in accordance with the facts. The introduction of data that was not present during the collection of data or the execution of experiments. This is regarded as a form of research misconduct, given that it entails the presentation of false or misleading information in a manner that suggests it is factual data.

The manipulation and falsification of data represents a significant ethical concern in scientific research. The practice of modifying research data with the intention of creating a false impression. Such practices may include the manipulation of images, the removal of outliers or results that are deemed to be "inconvenient", the alteration of data points, and other forms of manipulation. Such actions are also regarded as a form of research misconduct, given that they entail the presentation of false or misleading information in a manner that conveys the impression of authenticity.

In the event of alleged or suspected research misconduct, such as plagiarism, citation manipulation, or data falsification/fabrication, the Editorial Board will adhere to the appropriate COPE flowcharts to ensure that the allegations or suspicions are handled in a fair, transparent, and consistent manner.