Research Standard Violation Policy

Research standards violations normally come to light when a referee sees that informed consent was not obtained from human subjects or that animal protection protocols were not followed in a piece of research. Further, it may be considered if there is a suspicion regarding research data fabrication or falsification.

If there is doubt that the research was conducted in accordance with relevant national or international guidelines, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the aspects of the study that raise doubt. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should be asked whether they followed the institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals. The author should also be willing to share the raw data in the event of allegations of data falsification/ fabrication. 

Recommended action

Any complaint to the same will be investigated by the editorial board. The complainant will be informed that the matter cannot be investigated unless the journal editor informs the corresponding author and, likely, the other journal.

The editor will communicatie to the corresponding author, that the matter is likely to be referred to the institution or company where the research took place, the standard-setting body (if relevant), the institution or company which provided undisclosed financial support (if relevant), or any other relevant institution or agency (for example a funding agency) unless the author provides a reasonable explanation (accepted as reasonable by the editor). They should provide all ethics and scientific research committee documents, and also, if requested, share the raw data for perusal. 

Then the editor will consider whether the author's explanation is reasonable. The editor would also inform the complainant of the author's explanation and seek comment. In case the corresponding author confirms such a violation, or gives an unsatisfactory explanation, a corrigendum or the retraction procedure will be considered. If the complainant and authors, or the employing institutions and funding agencies, fail to reach a consensus or to act in a reasonable time, then the editor will make a determination, in his or her reasonable judgement, as to the underlying facts, and make a recommendationfor a corrigendum, or the retraction and removal process.