Publication Ethics/Similarity Check

Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Exact Community Health & Rehabilitation Sciences (JECH), published by EXACT RESEARCH SOLUTIONS (SMC-PRIVATE) LIMITED, is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and scholarly integrity. The journal adheres strictly to the ICMJE Recommendations and established international best practices in ethical publishing across health, physiotherapy, physical therapy, rehabilitation, and allied medical disciplines.

This statement defines the ethical standards and responsibilities expected of authors, peer reviewers, editors, and the publisher.

Duties of Authors

1.1 Originality & Plagiarism

  • Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts represent entirely original scholarly work.

  • All literature sources, clinical data references, and third-party contributions must be cited accurately and comprehensively.

  • Plagiarism in any form—including verbatim copying, improper paraphrasing, image/data manipulation, and self-plagiarism—is strictly prohibited.

  • All incoming manuscripts undergo mandatory similarity screening via Turnitin prior to peer review.

1.2 Data Accuracy & Integrity

  • Authors must present honest, accurate research findings and raw clinical data.

  • Data fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, or selective reporting is completely unacceptable and constitutes scientific misconduct.

  • Handling editors reserve the right to request raw datasets, anonymized clinical trial records, or analytical scripts for verification during review.

1.3 Multiple, Redundant, or Duplicate Submission

  • Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously.

  • Submitting manuscripts that substantially overlap with previously published works (duplicate or redundant publication) is strictly prohibited.

1.4 Authorship Criteria

Authorship credit must reflect substantial scientific contribution in compliance with ICMJE Recommendations:

  • Substantial contribution to study conception, design, clinical execution, or data acquisition and analysis.

  • Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for intellectual and scientific content.

  • Formal approval of the final version to be published.

  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to accuracy or integrity are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Gift, guest, or ghost authorship is strictly forbidden. All contributors who do not meet full authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments section.

1.5 Conflicts of Interest

  • Authors must explicitly declare all potential conflicts of interest upon submission, including financial relationships, grant funding sources, institutional ties, or personal connections that could be perceived as influencing the research findings or clinical interpretations.

1.6 Ethical Approval & Informed Consent

  • All research involving human participants, patient data, clinical trials, or animal models must have documented approval from an accredited Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Research Ethics Committee.

  • Written informed consent must be secured from all human participants (or legal guardians in the case of minors).

  • Patient anonymity and confidentiality must be strictly preserved at all times.

1.7 Corrections & Retractions

  • Authors must cooperate promptly with the Editor-in-Chief and publishing team to issue formal corrections (Errata/Corrigenda) or retractions if critical errors, data flaws, or ethical breaches are discovered post-publication.

Duties of Reviewers

2.1 Confidentiality

  • Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts, data files, and supplementary documents as strictly confidential.

  • Reviewers must not share, discuss, or distribute any part of a manuscript with third parties without prior explicit authorization from the handling editor.

2.2 Objectivity

  • Peer reviews must be conducted objectively, constructively, and impartially.

  • Feedback must focus on scientific validity, methodological rigor, clinical relevance, and ethical adherence, accompanied by clear supporting arguments.

2.3 Conflicts of Interest

  • Reviewers must immediately decline to review a manuscript if they have financial, institutional, personal, or collaborative conflicts of interest with any of the authors or institutions associated with the submission.

2.4 Timeliness

  • Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the designated timeframe (typically 14–21 days) or inform the editorial office immediately if an extension is required.

2.5 Ethical Responsibility & Generative AI Restrictions

  • Reviewers must alert the handling editor immediately if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, or ethical violations.

  • Reviewers must not utilize manuscript content or preliminary findings for personal or institutional research gain.

  • AI Restriction: Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading or inputting any manuscript text, tables, or figures into generative AI tools or third-party automated software to safeguard author confidentiality and intellectual property.

Duties of Editors

3.1 Editorial Independence & Unbiased Decisions

  • Editorial decisions to accept or reject manuscripts are based solely on scientific merit, methodological validity, clinical significance, and alignment with JECH's scope.

  • Decisions are made without discrimination regarding the authors' race, gender, religious beliefs, citizenship, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation.

3.2 Fair Review Process

  • Editors manage the double-blind peer review process to ensure fair, rigorous, and conflict-free manuscript evaluation.

  • Editors assign independent reviewers with appropriate domain expertise in physiotherapy, community health, or rehabilitation sciences.

3.3 Confidentiality

  • Editors and editorial staff must maintain absolute confidentiality regarding all submission details, reviewer reports, and author communications.

3.4 Handling Misconduct & Conflicts of Interest Recusal

  • Editors systematically investigate allegations of scientific misconduct, plagiarism, data falsification, authorship disputes, or reviewer bias.

  • Recusal Protocol: To ensure editorial independence, manuscripts authored by editors, Editorial Board members, or active reviewers are processed through independent handling pathways; involved individuals are strictly recused from review participation and decision-making.

3.5 Retractions, Corrections, & Expressions of Concern

  • Editors take necessary steps to maintain the integrity of the published record by issuing:

    • Corrections (Errata/Corrigenda): For minor, non-fatal errors that do not compromise core conclusions.

    • Expressions of Concern: When serious allegations of misconduct or data flaws are raised but institutional investigations remain inconclusive.

    • Retractions: For verified scientific misconduct, data fabrication, fatal honest errors, or severe ethical breaches.

Duties of the Publisher (EXACT RESEARCH SOLUTIONS)

EXACT RESEARCH SOLUTIONS (SMC-PRIVATE) LIMITED guarantees:

  • Editorial Independence: Supporting the Editor-in-Chief's full authority over all editorial decisions without commercial or corporate interference.

  • Permanent Preservation: Ensuring continuous open access and perpetual archiving of all published content via the PKP Preservation Network (PKP-PN).

  • Publication Integrity: Collaborating with editors to correct the literature, publish retractions, and handle legal or ethical disputes transparently.

Misconduct Handling Procedure

When allegations of misconduct (such as plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, or unresolvable authorship conflicts) arise, JECH follows structured procedures:

  1. Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the evidence alongside Turnitin reports and raw submission files.

  2. Communication: Authors or reviewers are contacted to provide formal written explanations and supporting documentation.

  3. Escalation & Inquiry: If explanations are unsatisfactory, the editorial office may contact institutional ethics committees or research integrity officers.

  4. Actionable Sanctions: Depending on severity, actions include:

    • Formal rejection of the manuscript.

    • Issuance of a formal retraction or correction notice.

    • Imposition of temporary or permanent submission bans.

    • Reporting findings to the authors' affiliated institutions and funding bodies.

Retraction & Withdrawal Policy

Retraction Conditions

An article published in JECH may be retracted under the following circumstances:

  • Clear evidence that findings are unreliable due to misconduct (data fabrication/falsification) or major honest error.

  • Plagiarism or uncredited duplicate publication.

  • Unethical research practices or lack of mandatory IRB/Ethics Committee approvals.

  • Proven copyright infringement or legal disputes.

Retracted articles remain accessible on the OJS journal platform as part of the permanent scholarly record; however, they are clearly watermarked as "RETRACTED" and accompanied by a linked formal Retraction Notice.

Article Withdrawal

Manuscript withdrawal requests submitted by authors are considered only prior to formal acceptance. Withdrawal after acceptance or publication is permitted only under rare, documented legal or ethical circumstances. All withdrawal requests must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief stating valid justification.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

JECH operates in full alignment with international publication ethics guidance frameworks, including ICMJE Recommendations and established scholarly publishing principles.