Ethical Oversight

In line with COPE and other international ethical guidelines, this page outlines our approach to ethical oversight — covering research integrity, plagiarism prevention, authorship transparency, conflict of interest disclosure, data availability, and the responsible use of artificial intelligence. These policies set clear expectations for authors, reviewers, and editors, promoting accountability and protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

NexQ Research Consortium follows the authorship criteria recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). To qualify as an author, an individual must meet all four of the following criteria:

• Made a substantial contribution to the concept, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the work.
• Drafted the work or critically revised it for important intellectual content.
• Approved the final version to be published.
• Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring questions of accuracy or integrity are properly investigated and resolved.

Authors should describe each contributor's role using the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework — for example, "A.B. contributed to conceptualisation and writing; C.D. conducted data curation and analysis."

Individuals who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged rather than listed as authors. Activities such as funding acquisition, general supervision, administrative support, language editing, proofreading, or technical editing alone do not qualify someone for authorship. Written permission must be obtained from anyone named in the acknowledgments before submission.

The corresponding author coordinates with the editorial office throughout processing and remains the primary point of contact after publication. Co-authors are expected to participate in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approve the final version, and share accountability for the integrity of the work.

A consortium or group name may be included in the author list only if every individually listed author meets all four ICMJE authorship criteria.

If an author passes away during manuscript processing, the remaining authors must notify the editorial office. A new corresponding author may be nominated by mutual consent, and any conflict-of-interest confirmation may be obtained from next of kin. Published articles will carry a footnote acknowledging the date of the author's passing.

AI tools may support manuscript preparation but cannot be credited as authors, since they cannot take responsibility for the work, disclose conflicts of interest, or manage copyright. See our AI Use Policy below for full guidance.

Any addition, removal, or reordering of authors — before or after publication — requires written consent from all listed authors (including those being added or removed), a revised copyright letter, and a statement of contribution or reason for removal. Requests are evaluated in line with COPE-recommended protocols.

Disputes generally fall into two categories: interpretation disputes (disagreement over whether a contribution meets ICMJE criteria) and ethical breaches such as unauthorised changes to authorship. Disputes are resolved in accordance with COPE guidance; disputed authorship alone does not justify retraction unless the validity of the findings is also in question.

Generative AI and AI-assisted tools are increasingly used in research and scholarly writing. Used responsibly, they can help authors work more efficiently — analysing literature, summarising a field, identifying gaps, and refining language. NexQ Research Consortium recognises this value while emphasising that human oversight, critical thinking, and subject-matter expertise remain essential. AI outputs cannot substitute for human evaluation or judgment, and authors remain fully accountable for the integrity and accuracy of their work.

• AI as assistance only: all AI-generated content must be checked, validated, and revised by the authors; the final manuscript must reflect the authors' own analysis and interpretation.
• Accountability: authors must verify AI-generated content (including references), ensure original contribution, and disclose AI-assisted work transparently.
• Editing and adaptation: AI-generated material must be adapted to reflect the authors' own expertise, not relied upon as-is.
• Responsible use and data privacy: authors must review a tool's terms of use, avoid submitting confidential or personally identifiable data, and check outputs for bias or factual errors.
• Disclosure: use of AI tools must be declared in an AI Declaration section, the Acknowledgements, or the Materials and Methods section, naming the tool, its purpose, and the extent of human oversight. Routine grammar or formatting checks do not require disclosure.
• Authorship: AI tools cannot be credited as authors under any circumstance.

AI-generated images may be used only for illustrative purposes — graphical abstracts, conceptual diagrams, or educational illustrations — and must never represent primary research data or experimental findings (e.g. microscopy, radiology, spectra, gels, or blots).

• Authors must disclose the AI tool used (name and version), the purpose of the image, and confirmation that it has been reviewed and validated.
• Every AI-generated or AI-assisted image must be labelled "AI-generated/AI-assisted image" in the caption.
• Authors must hold the rights to publish the image and confirm the AI tool's licensing terms permit academic publication.

Plagiarism — using someone else's work without proper attribution — is strictly prohibited. Authors must submit only original manuscripts that represent a genuine contribution to academic discourse.

NexQ Research Consortium uses industry-standard similarity-checking software to screen every submitted manuscript for plagiarism. If similarity is detected, the manuscript undergoes a comprehensive content assessment — not a simple percentage check — before any decision on rejection or revision is made.

Suspected cases of plagiarism, whether in a submitted manuscript or a published article, are handled strictly in accordance with COPE guidelines and flowcharts.

Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals, and redundant or duplicate publication of substantially similar work, are both strictly prohibited — they misuse editorial resources and confuse the scholarly record.

At submission, authors must disclose any related manuscripts, overlapping datasets, preprints, conference abstracts, or preliminary reports connected to the work, including:

• Any manuscripts submitted to or published in other journals.
• Overlapping datasets, analyses, or results previously published.
• Preprint versions, including a DOI or link where available.
• Conference abstracts, presentations, or preliminary reports related to the work.

Preprints are acceptable if they represent only a preliminary version not yet published in a peer-reviewed journal. Work derived from a thesis or dissertation is acceptable if clearly acknowledged. Manuscripts based on conference papers are allowed only if substantially extended with new data or analysis, with the original conference paper cited and permission confirmed.

Suspected cases are handled per COPE guidance on concurrent submissions, redundant publication, and self-plagiarism. Undisclosed prior submissions may result in rejection; issues identified post-publication may lead to correction notices or retraction, and in serious or repeated cases, notification of the authors' institutions.

Submitted image files must remain unaltered except for minimal adjustments — such as brightness, contrast, or colour balance for visibility — that do not change the scientific meaning of the original data.

Inappropriate modifications include altering, introducing, or removing features from an image; combining images that should be shown separately without disclosure; and adjusting images in ways that could misrepresent the underlying data.

• All images, including third-party material, must be properly credited with permissions in place.
• If concerns arise, authors may be asked to provide original, unprocessed image files; peer review may pause until resolved.
• Confirmed manipulation during review may lead to rejection or a required correction; after publication, it may lead to a correction, expression of concern, or retraction, with the matter potentially referred to the authors' institution.

All investigations follow COPE guidelines, and any handling editor with a conflict of interest will recuse themselves to ensure impartiality.

Data fabrication — creating results that do not exist — and data falsification — manipulating genuine data to misrepresent findings — are serious ethical violations that undermine our commitment to scientific integrity. Both compromise the reliability and reproducibility of research.

Authors must ensure all presented data are accurate, complete, and honestly reported. Suspected cases are handled per COPE guidelines: the editorial office may request original data or raw records to verify authenticity, and manuscripts found to contain fabricated data may be rejected. Published articles found to contain fabricated or falsified data may receive corrections, expressions of concern, or retraction, with the authors' institution notified where appropriate.

We maintain a strong commitment to integrity, objectivity, and transparency in scholarly publishing. Authors are strongly recommended to disclose any potential conflict of interest under a dedicated "Conflicts of Interest" section in their manuscript.

• Employment or voluntary engagement, and partnerships with advocacy organisations related to the article content.
• Research grants, honoraria, consulting or lecture fees, and royalty income.
• Patents held by authors, their institutions, or funding bodies, and ownership of relevant stocks or shares.

• Personal, political, religious, ideological, or academic conflicts of interest.
• Involvement in legal proceedings related to the research, or direct academic competition.

Undisclosed conflicts of interest identified before or after publication are handled in line with COPE's recommended procedures.

Research involving human subjects, tissue, or data must adhere to the Declaration of Helsinki. Authors should confirm this in a dedicated section, along with the name and approval code of the reviewing research ethics committee.

Authors should follow the 3Rs model (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) and the Basel Declaration when conducting animal research, and are encouraged to reference ARRIVE guidelines for reporting. The name of the approving committee and reference number must be stated, or the reason for any granted exemption.

Plant research must comply with the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and CITES. Authors should provide ethical statements naming the plant species and its source, and deposit voucher specimens of rare or non-model plants in a public repository.

The origin of any cell line used must be stated in the Methods section. For established lines, cite the original source; for previously unpublished lines, provide ethics committee details. Informed consent is required where human cell lines are involved.

Where a manuscript includes identifiable details, images, or videos of a person, written consent must be obtained to publish under our open access licence. If the individual is under 18, consent must come from a parent or legal guardian. Personal identifiers such as names or hospital numbers should not be disclosed unless scientifically indispensable.

Where an individual has passed away, consent should be sought from their immediate family or next of kin, and the manuscript should include a declaration confirming that informed consent has been secured. Unidentified images, such as X-rays or ultrasound scans, do not require consent for publication.

Authors are strongly encouraged to follow ICMJE's recommendations for registering clinical trials in a public trials registry and citing that registration in their manuscript. This applies to all interventional trials, from Phase I through Phase IV.

Where results are not yet published in a peer-reviewed journal, authors should include a statement noting this, updating it once results are published. For randomised controlled trials, we recommend the CONSORT checklist and protocol flow diagram be submitted alongside the manuscript.

Authors are advised to follow the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines, using "sex" (a biological attribute) and "gender" (shaped by social and cultural factors) precisely and consistently. Where relevant, the study design should account for sex and/or gender differences, present data disaggregated accordingly, and analyse results specific to each group. If no sex or gender analysis was conducted, authors should justify this in the discussion.

Depending on the study type, authors should follow the applicable reporting guideline and state which one they used during submission; reviewers verify compliance and note any deviations.

Study Type	Recommended Guideline
Randomised controlled trials	CONSORT
Non-randomised trials	TREND
Systematic reviews & meta-analyses	PRISMA
Case reports	CARE
Observational studies	STROBE
Genetic association studies	STREGA
Diagnostic accuracy studies	STARD / TRIPOD
Qualitative research	COREQ
Animal research	ARRIVE

Authors and reviewers can also consult the EQUATOR Network to identify the most appropriate checklist for a given study design.

We support open science, transparency, and reproducibility. Making research data and materials accessible where possible strengthens verification, reuse, and trust in published work.

All research and synthesis-based articles should include an "Availability of Data and Materials" section, regardless of whether data are shared:

Type	Example Statement
Publicly available	Data are openly available in [Repository Name] at [DOI/URL].
Available on request	Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request due to ethical, legal, or privacy restrictions.
In supplementary files	Data are included in the supplementary material.
No data generated	No new datasets were generated or analysed; data sharing is not applicable.

Authors are encouraged to share raw and processed datasets, code, and workflows via trusted repositories that provide persistent identifiers (DOIs) and support FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). Data should generally be retained for at least five years after publication, and code or datasets licensed for open use where possible.

Our Advisory Board members assist in addressing and resolving matters related to research ethics and potential publication misconduct, providing an additional layer of oversight beyond the editorial office.

We uphold and safeguard intellectual property rights for all submitted and published works. This applies to all authors, editors, and contributors.

• Copyright and licensing: authors retain copyright of their work unless otherwise specified in the applicable copyright or licensing agreement.
• Originality: all submissions must be original and appropriately cite prior work; see our Plagiarism policy above for further detail.
• Third-party content: authors are responsible for obtaining permissions and providing proper attribution for any third-party material included in their submission.
• Data ownership: authors retain ownership of underlying data and supplementary materials, subject to our data-sharing and archiving guidelines.
• Publisher rights: the journal and publisher may archive, index, and reuse published content for research, educational, and promotional purposes in accordance with the copyright agreement.

Disputes regarding authorship, copyright, or ownership are addressed according to our standard procedures, with final authority resting with the Editor-in-Chief.