The publication of science involves conscientious, systematic, and comprehensive processes by publishers and editors that need to be dealt with efficiently and competently. To maintain high ethical standards of the publication of quality science, the publisher strives to work closely with journal editors, authors, and peer-reviewers at all times. The ethics statement for CJOMS is based on the statements by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines.
The essentials publishing ethics for all groups involved in the publishing process are as follows：
1. The ethics of editors
1.1 Responsibility and obligation
Editors should check the repetition rate of new papers, which should be less than 15%; editors need to evaluate and select papers objectively and fairly and according to scientific, academic, innovative, readable and practical standards. The editors shall provide timely feedback to the author regarding the opinions of peer review experts and modified opinions in line with the editing specifications. No editorial opinions based on non academic standards beyond the scope and purpose of the journal shall be put forward. Editors should strictly follow the relevant regulations for manuscripts that need to provide ethical review materials. Editors shall not distort the author's original intention to modify the content of the manuscript and shall not implement mutual citations of periodicals.
1.2 Fair treatment
The editors shall mainly review the academic quality of the papers and shall not treat the papers differently due to any other factors except academic standards and norms, including but not limited to the author's race, gender, religious beliefs, origin, department, nationality, etc.
1.3 Confidentiality
Editors must keep confidential the personal information of authors, peer review experts and paper contents. The disclosure of the personal information of the peer review experts to the author or of the author's information to the peer review experts is not allowed; interfering with or affecting the independent review of the peer review experts is also not allowed.
1.4 Conflict of interest
When the editor has a conflict of interest with the author or his or herinstitution due to other factors, such as competition and cooperation, the editor should avoid preliminary examination of the paper and should avoid selecting peer review experts or other editing procedures. Editors shall not publish unpublished papers or research results without authorization; they shall not misappropriate the content of the manuscript. Editors shall not use the pages of periodicals, the confidential information supplied in editing procedures or the rights of the editors to seek outside interests.
2. The ethics of peer review experts
2.1 Responsibility and obligation
Peer review experts need to put forward professional suggestions regarding the revision of articles according to the scientific, academic, innovative, readable, practical, rigorous, normative aspects of papers, as well as whether there is academic misconduct, whether there are ethical problems, etc., to help the authors improve the quality of contributions, to provide the editors with suggestions regarding the verdict of the manuscript and to help the editors to judge the manuscript. Peer review experts shall provide review comments in a timely manner. If peer review experts believe that they are not competent for reviewing the paper, or if they are unable to complete the review within the agreed-upon time, they need to inform the editors immediately so that the editors can contact new peer review experts.
2.2 Objectivity
Peer review experts need to review papers objectively and impartially. The standard for judging papers is academic quality, and personal criticism of authors is not allowed.
2.3 Confidentiality
The journal adopts a single-blind review process. Any papers received by peer review experts must be regarded as confidential documents, and showing or discussing the papers with others is not allowed; the misappropriation of the contents of papers is also not allowed.
2.4 Conflict of interest
Peer review experts shall not seek personal improper private interests through their personal status as review experts. When there is a conflict of interest between peer review experts and the author or his or her unit due to competition, cooperation or other factors, the peer review experts should actively avoid reviewing the manuscript.
3. The ethics of authors
3.1 Manuscript standards
The authors must make sure that all the contents are original, and the papers should be scientific, academic, innovative, readable and practical. The materials should be authentic, the arguments should be clear, the data should be reliable, the sentences should be concise and clear, and the writing should be standardized. Plagiarism of other people's research results and forging or tampering with pictures or data are not allowed. The references shall be listed based on documents published in official publications in recent years, which the author has read personally. The references are described according to the description rules for references (GB/T 7714-2015) and are listed in the order of their citation in the text.
3.2 Research integrity
When submitting a paper, authors shall attach a letter of introduction from the author's unit to prove the authenticity of the manuscript as well as the fact that there are no confidentiality issues, that the signature is not disputed, that there is no infringement, and that there are not multiple submissions of one manuscript. If the author wants to submit the paper to another journal in the future, he or she should contact the editors of this journal to apply for withdrawal. Draft is not allowed to submit more than one journal at the same time and publish it repeatedly. If the contribution is a national-, ministerial- or provincial-funded project or key research project, the name and number of the funded project shall be indicated, and a scanned copy of the approval document (certificate) of the funded project shall be attached.
3.3 Research ethics and informed consent
When the research object of the paper is human, it is necessary to declare that it has obtained the permission of the relevant ethics committee, conduct the research in accordance with the ethical standards set out in the WMA Declaration of Helsinki--Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and provide the standard documents number of the ethics committee and the informed consent of the subjects or their relatives. Clinical trials must obtain a registration number from the primary registration organization of the WHO international clinical trial registration platform.
The animal studies report must state that it has been approved by the relevant ethics committee and provide the standard documents number of the ethics committee. A statement indicating that the protocol and procedures employed were ethically reviewed and approved, as well as the name of the body giving approval, must be included in the Methods section of the manuscript. Authors are encouraged to adhere to animal research reporting standards, for example the ARRIVE guidelines (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments, ARRIVE) and the U.S. Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and, as applicable, the Animal Welfare Act or the Regulations on the Administration of Laboratory Animals and the Guiding Opinions on Treating Laboratory Animals Kindly issued by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China.
The identification information in the study, including the patient's name, initials, portrait and hospital name, should not be disclosed except for written evidence that is important for scientific purposes and has the informed consent of the patient (parent or guardian). Patients should read the published manuscript before signing the informed consent certificate. Identification information should be omitted if not necessary.
3.4 Responsibility of post publication
If the author finds obvious errors or inaccurate content in the published articles of the journal, the author is obliged to inform the journal editor immediately and assist the editorial department to withdraw the manuscript or publish a correction statement and corrigendum. If an editor learns from a third party of a material error in a published article, the author is obliged to cooperate with the editor in withdrawing the article or making a statement of correction.
3.5 Consequences of violating publishing ethics
Our journal has zero tolerance for the violation of publishing ethics and morality. The editors or peer review experts who violate the publishing ethics and morality shall be dismissed; the authors who violate the publishing ethics and morality shall be rejected or withdrawn their manuscripts ; those who violate the law shall be investigated for legal responsibility.
