Publication Ethics Policy

The Journal of Clinical Advances in Dentistry (JCAD) upholds strict publication ethics to ensure the integrity, quality, and credibility of scholarly research. This policy is based on the COPE Code of Conduct, ICMJE Recommendations, and best practices from the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

Ethical publishing is the shared responsibility of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher. JCAD maintains zero tolerance for unethical practices including plagiarism, data falsification, duplicate submission, or undeclared conflicts of interest.

General Ethical Responsibilities

  • Authors: Ensure originality, cite sources properly, and disclose conflicts of interest.
  • Editors: Make unbiased decisions, maintain confidentiality, and investigate misconduct.
  • Reviewers: Provide fair, timely, and constructive evaluations while maintaining confidentiality.
  • Publisher: Support editorial independence, preserve the academic record, and handle misconduct transparently.

Authorship and Contribution

JCAD follows ICMJE authorship criteria. Only those who have made substantial contributions to conception, design, data acquisition, or analysis are listed as authors. All contributors must approve the final version of the manuscript prior to submission.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial or personal conflicts of interest that could influence research outcomes or editorial decisions. Disclosures are published with the article to ensure transparency.

Human and Animal Research Ethics

Research involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and receive prior approval from an institutional review board. Studies involving animals must follow internationally accepted animal welfare guidelines. Ethical approval statements must be included in the manuscript.

Data Integrity and Transparency

Authors must ensure accuracy of data and be prepared to provide raw data upon request. Selective reporting, fabrication, or falsification of results is considered misconduct.

Peer Review Ethics

JCAD employs a double-blind peer review process. Reviewers must provide objective, respectful, and timely feedback. They must not use unpublished material for personal benefit or disclose it to others.

Plagiarism and Redundant Publication

Manuscripts are screened with plagiarism detection software. Overlap beyond acceptable limits (20% excluding references) is not permitted. Redundant, duplicate, or salami publications are strictly prohibited.

Misconduct Handling Procedures

Allegations of misconduct are investigated following COPE flowcharts:

  • Initial screening by the Editor-in-Chief
  • Requesting explanation from authors
  • Consultation with editorial board and, if necessary, institutions
  • Decisions ranging from rejection to retraction or expression of concern

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Errors or ethical issues identified post-publication are corrected promptly. Serious ethical violations result in retractions, while minor issues may be addressed with corrections or expressions of concern.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are free from influence of publishers, sponsors, or advertisers. JCAD’s editorial board is committed to fairness and impartiality.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal decisions by providing detailed justification. Complaints related to ethical standards or editorial handling are investigated by the Editor-in-Chief and resolved according to COPE guidelines.

FAQs

What should I do if I notice an error in my published article?

Contact the editorial office immediately. Corrections will be issued transparently.

How are plagiarism allegations handled?

The editorial office investigates, and if confirmed, manuscripts are rejected or retracted.

Can authorship be changed after submission?

Yes, but only with written approval from all listed authors and editorial board approval.