Publication Policies
The journal follows the ethical guidelines and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The following policies outline how the journal handles ethical issues in scholarly publishing.
1. Allegations of Misconduct Policy
a. Policy Statement
The Journal of Antimicrobial Stewardship and Infectious Diseases is committed to preserving the integrity of the scientific record. All allegations of research or publication misconduct are addressed in a structured, transparent, and confidential manner to ensure fairness to all parties involved.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Definition of Misconduct
Misconduct includes, but is not limited to:
Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism and text recycling)
Data fabrication or falsification
Image manipulation beyond acceptable enhancement
Duplicate or redundant publication
Salami slicing of data
Undisclosed conflicts of interest
Ethical violations in human or animal research
Misrepresentation of authorship or contribution
c. Reporting of Allegations
Allegations may be raised by authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, or third parties. Reports should be submitted in writing with sufficient detail and supporting evidence.
d. Initial Assessment
The Editor-in-Chief or a designated ethics editor conducts a preliminary evaluation.
Plagiarism detection and content integrity checks may be performed.
Allegations lacking evidence may be dismissed with documentation.
e. Investigation Process
Authors are informed of the concern and invited to respond.
Investigations are conducted confidentially and objectively.
When appropriate, affiliated institutions, ethics committees, or funding bodies may be contacted.
The journal does not itself adjudicate institutional misconduct but cooperates fully.
f. Outcomes
Depending on severity and findings, actions may include:
Manuscript rejection
Request for explanation or revision
Publication of a correction or expression of concern
Retraction of the article
Notification of institutions or regulatory bodies
Record Keeping
All records related to misconduct investigations are securely maintained.
2. Complaints Policy
a. Policy Statement
The journal is committed to addressing complaints fairly, promptly, and transparently, ensuring accountability in editorial and publication processes.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Scope of Complaints
Complaints may relate to:
Editorial decisions
Peer review conduct
Ethical concerns
Delays or procedural issues
Conflicts of interest
Alleged bias or discrimination
Submission Process
Complaints must be submitted in writing to the journal’s official contact email.
Anonymous complaints are considered if sufficient evidence is provided.
c. Handling and Review
Acknowledgment is provided within a reasonable timeframe.
Complaints are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent senior editor.
If a conflict exists, an alternate editor or ethics committee member is assigned.
d. Resolution
Decisions are based on evidence and COPE guidance.
The complainant is informed of the outcome.
All decisions are documented.
Malicious or vexatious complaints may be dismissed.
3. Appeals Policy
a. Policy Statement
The journal recognizes authors’ right to appeal editorial decisions when legitimate concerns exist regarding fairness or process.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Grounds for Appeal
Appeals are considered only when:
A factual or procedural error is identified
Evidence of bias or conflict of interest exists
Reviewer misunderstanding materially affected the decision
c. Appeal Procedure
Appeals must be submitted in writing within the stipulated timeframe.
The appeal is reviewed by an independent editor or editorial board member.
Additional peer review may be sought if warranted.
d. Final Decision
Decisions after appeal are final.
Appeals do not guarantee reversal of the original decision.
4. Editor Conflict of Interest & Self-Submission Policy
a. Policy Statement
The journal maintains strict separation between editorial responsibilities and author interests to preserve editorial independence.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Conflict Disclosure
Editors and board members must disclose all potential conflicts of interest.
Conflicts include financial, institutional, academic, or personal relationships.
Handling Editor Submissions
Editors are completely excluded from editorial decisions on their own manuscripts.
An independent editor oversees the review and decision process.
Peer review is conducted without preferential treatment.
c. Transparency
Published articles include disclosure statements when editors are authors.
5. Corrections Policy
a. Policy Statement
The journal ensures the accuracy of the scholarly record through timely and transparent corrections.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Types of Corrections
Erratum: Publisher-introduced errors
Corrigendum: Author-introduced errors
Addendum: Clarifying information not affecting conclusions
c. Process
Errors are assessed by the editorial team.
Corrections are published promptly and clearly labeled.
Correction notices are linked to the original article.
Online and indexing metadata are updated.
6. Retractions Policy
a. Policy Statement
Retractions are issued to correct the literature and alert readers when published findings are unreliable.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Grounds for Retraction
Scientific misconduct
Serious methodological or analytical errors
Duplicate publication
Unethical research practices
Legal or copyright violations
c. Retraction Procedure
Thorough investigation with author notification
Opportunity for author response
Publication of a transparent retraction notice
Original article retained with clear retraction labeling
Notification to indexing and archiving services
7. Expressions of Concern Policy
a. Policy Statement
An Expression of Concern may be issued when serious questions arise but investigations are incomplete.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Issuance Criteriaa
Ongoing institutional investigation
Inconclusive evidence of misconduct
Delays in obtaining information
Follow-up
Expression of Concern is temporary
Outcome leads to correction, retraction, or removal
Updates are communicated transparently
8. Peer Review Policy
a. Policy Statement
Peer review is central to ensuring scientific rigor, credibility, and ethical integrity.
This journal follows the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
b. Review Model
Double-blind peer review is employed.
Manuscripts are evaluated by at least two independent experts.
c. Reviewer Responsibilities
Maintain confidentiality
Declare conflicts of interest
Provide objective, constructive, and timely reviews
Avoid misuse of unpublished data
d. Editorial Decision-Making
Decisions are based on scientific merit, relevance, and ethical compliance.
The Editor-in-Chief has final decision authority.
e. Reviewer Misconduct
Suspected reviewer misconduct is investigated and may lead to removal from the reviewer database.
The journal follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
https://publicationethics.org/guidance