Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The Proceedings of the International Seminar on Health Entrepreneurship and Technology (ISOHET), published by the Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitas Duta Bangsa Surakarta, is committed to maintaining integrity, transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the publication process. Ethical standards apply to editors, reviewers, authors, and the publisher from manuscript submission to post-publication evaluation.

Publication ethics policies are guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. These principles address allegations of misconduct, authorship and contributorship, complaints and appeals, competing interests, data and reproducibility, ethical oversight, intellectual property, editorial management, peer review, and post-publication corrections.

1. Editorial Responsibilities

Editorial decisions are based on academic quality, relevance to the scope of ISOHET, clarity of presentation, methodological appropriateness, originality, and contribution to the field. Decisions must not be influenced by nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, religion, political view, commercial interest, or personal relationship.

Editors are responsible for protecting the integrity of the editorial process. Submitted manuscripts and related correspondence must be treated as confidential material. Information obtained during evaluation must not be used for personal, institutional, or commercial advantage.

An editor with a direct conflict of interest concerning a manuscript must not take part in the evaluation or final decision. Editorial responsibility must be transferred to another qualified editor whenever impartiality may reasonably be questioned.

2. Peer Review

Manuscripts considered for publication undergo academic evaluation by qualified reviewers. The review process is intended to assess scientific quality, relevance, methodological soundness, clarity, originality, and the reliability of conclusions. Reviewer comments should be objective, specific, respectful, and supported by academic reasoning.

Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and must not distribute, reproduce, discuss, or use unpublished manuscript content outside the review process. Any personal, professional, financial, or institutional conflict that may affect impartial assessment must be disclosed before review begins.

Suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified information, inappropriate citation practices, undisclosed conflicts, or other ethical concerns identified during review must be reported to the editorial team for further examination.

3. Author Responsibilities

Manuscripts must present original scholarly work and must provide an accurate account of the research performed. Data, methods, analysis, and conclusions must be reported honestly. Fabrication, falsification, selective manipulation of evidence, and misleading presentation of results are unacceptable.

Material derived from previous publications must be properly quoted, paraphrased, and cited. Submission of substantially the same manuscript to more than one publication at the same time is not acceptable. Redundant or overlapping publication must be disclosed when relevant.

Supporting data and documentation should be retained in accordance with disciplinary, institutional, and legal requirements. Reasonable requests for clarification or verification of published findings should receive an appropriate response through the editorial process.

4. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must reflect meaningful scholarly contribution to the work. Listed authors should have contributed substantially to the conception or design of the study, acquisition or interpretation of data, preparation or critical revision of the manuscript, or other significant scholarly activities directly related to the publication.

Guest authorship, gift authorship, ghost authorship, and the omission of eligible contributors are not acceptable. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately when permission and relevant disclosure requirements are satisfied.

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission require a clear explanation and appropriate agreement from the parties concerned. Unresolved authorship disputes may result in suspension of editorial processing until sufficient clarification is available.

5. Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication

Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. Prohibited practices include copying text without attribution, presenting another person's ideas or data as original work, inappropriate reuse of previously published material, and substantial duplication without transparent citation.

Similarity findings require editorial assessment because a numerical similarity score alone does not establish misconduct. Context, source attribution, amount of duplicated material, and the nature of the overlap must be considered before an editorial decision is made.

6. Research Ethics and Ethical Oversight

Research involving human participants, identifiable personal information, vulnerable populations, biological materials, or animals must comply with applicable ethical standards, institutional requirements, and relevant national regulations. Ethics approval or exemption information should be stated when required by the nature of the study.

Informed consent must be obtained when required. Identifiable personal or clinical information must not be published without appropriate authorization. Confidentiality and privacy must be protected throughout research reporting and publication.

Editorial clarification, supporting documentation, or evidence of ethical approval may be requested when ethical compliance requires verification.

7. Data Integrity and Reporting

Research data must be presented accurately and without fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, or selective alteration intended to misrepresent findings. Statistical analysis and research methods should be described with sufficient clarity to support academic evaluation.

Data availability statements, repository information, supporting files, or additional documentation may be requested when appropriate to the discipline and study design. Confidential, sensitive, or legally restricted data remain subject to applicable privacy and access requirements.

8. Conflicts of Interest

Financial, professional, institutional, academic, or personal interests that could reasonably influence the interpretation, review, or editorial handling of a manuscript must be disclosed. Relevant funding sources and the role of funders should also be stated when applicable.

Editors and reviewers must disclose potential competing interests before participating in manuscript evaluation. Appropriate reassignment or recusal must be applied whenever independence may be affected.

9. Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must protect unpublished information, author correspondence, reviewer reports, and editorial records from unauthorized access or disclosure.

Confidential information obtained through manuscript handling must not be used for research, publication, competition, financial gain, or any purpose unrelated to the legitimate editorial process.

10. Allegations of Misconduct

Allegations concerning plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, authorship manipulation, peer-review manipulation, citation manipulation, undisclosed conflicts, unethical research, or other forms of publication misconduct must be examined fairly and confidentially.

Decisions should be based on available evidence rather than unsupported accusation. Additional information may be requested from authors, reviewers, institutions, research ethics committees, or other relevant parties when investigation requires clarification.

Publication misconduct concerns may be handled with reference to applicable COPE guidance and flowcharts. Cooperation with relevant institutions may be required in cases where formal investigation falls within institutional responsibility.

11. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Actions

Published material may require correction when an error affects accuracy but does not invalidate the main findings. Retraction may be considered when findings are unreliable because of major error or misconduct, when plagiarism or redundant publication is established, when unethical research is identified, when unauthorized material is used, or when serious manipulation of the publication process has occurred.

Retraction notices should identify the affected publication, explain the reason for the action, remain linked to the original record where technically possible, and use objective language. Corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, and other post-publication notices must preserve the transparency of the scholarly record.

12. Complaints and Appeals

Academic complaints or appeals concerning editorial decisions, peer review, ethical matters, or publication procedures should provide clear reasons and relevant supporting information. Complaints must be considered objectively and without retaliation.

An appeal does not automatically reverse an editorial decision. Reconsideration may occur when substantial evidence indicates a procedural error, factual misunderstanding, undisclosed conflict, or other matter that could materially affect the original decision.

13. Intellectual Property and Copyright

Copyright, licensing, permissions, and reuse of published material must follow the Copyright and License Statement of the Proceedings. Authors are responsible for obtaining necessary permission for copyrighted third-party material included in submitted manuscripts.

Copyright infringement, unauthorized reproduction, and improper use of protected material may result in editorial action before or after publication.

14. Publisher Responsibilities

The Faculty of Health Sciences, Universitas Duta Bangsa Surakarta, as the publisher, supports the editorial independence and integrity of the Proceedings. Publication decisions should remain separate from inappropriate commercial, institutional, or personal influence.

The publisher supports appropriate maintenance of publication records, ethical policies, editorial procedures, corrections, and other actions required to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

15. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Ethical policies and procedures are developed with reference to the COPE Core Practices and relevant COPE guidance. COPE resources provide recognized frameworks for handling authorship disputes, competing interests, peer-review concerns, research misconduct, complaints, ethical oversight, intellectual property, and post-publication corrections.

Further guidance is available through the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices . Retraction procedures may also refer to the COPE Retraction Guidelines .