Journal of Otology Open Access Editor-in-Chief: Shiming YANG
Home Journal of Otology Publishing Ethics
Publishing Ethics
Publishing Ethics

Journal of Otology (the Journal) is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and adhere to its principles and flowcharts on how to deal with acts of misconduct so as to ensure the integrity of research.    

The Journal will conduct an investigation in accordance with the principles and flowcharts provided by COPE if there is suspicion of misconduct or alleged fraud. If valid concerns arise, the author(s) will be contacted to discuss the matter. The Journal and/or the Publisher-Tsinghua University Press (TUP) would take the following measures:

1) If the manuscript is still under review, it might be rejected.

2) If the paper has been published online, the response will vary based on the nature and severity of the violation:

  • A correction may be published,
  • An expression of concern may be issued alongside the paper,
  • Or, in extreme cases, a retraction of the paper may be warranted.
Research Ethics

To ensure the research that we published is conducted in an ethical manner, especially the research that involving human subject or animal participants, we require that all submissions should conform to the high ethical standards. We reserve the rights to reject any manuscript which could not meet these requirements of ethical standards, even if authors have obtained ethical approval or if ethical approval is not required.

1) Research involving human subjects

Ethical Approval

For published research based on human subjects (human participants, human tissue, human material or human data), authors must obtain the approval from institutional ethics committee(s) prior to the commencement of the research. The research also need to conform to international ethical and legal standards for research, Declaration of Helsinki.

Authors should provide evidence that they obtained ethical and/or legal approval prior to conducting the research at submission. Manuscripts should include the name of the local ethics committee that approved the research (or confirmation that such approval is not needed) and the approval number. Authors also need to state how the study conforms to recognized standards (e.g. declaration of Helsinki or the Ethical Review Methods for Biomedical Research involving Humans) in the manuscript.

  • Example of the statement: “The research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (the approval number).”

2) Participant/patient privacy and informed consent

Published research involving human subjects should ensure that patients’ privacy has not been infringed without prior consent:

Consent to participate

For all published research involving human participants, authors should obtain written consent from the participants prior to the commencement of the research. If the research participants are not adults, or unable to provide informed consent, the written consent must be given from their parents/guardians.

Where consent for participation was not obtained or only verbal informed consent obtained, the journal/editor might ask for the evidence of consent or consent procedures, or even the need for consent was waived by an ethics committee.

Consent to publish

For submissions that include any information which might identify an individual, authors should obtain written informed consent to publish from individual participants (or their parents/guardians if the participant is not an adult or unable to give informed consent). Identifying information includes (but is not limited to) photographs, videos, individual clinical data, written description and any other details that might identify the participant. A statement to confirm that consent to publish has been obtained must be included within the manuscript.

3) Research involving animals, specimens and heritage sites

Research involving animals

For published research involving animal research, authors must obtain the approval from the relevant institutional ethics committee prior to the commencement of the research. The research procedures must comply with relevant local and international animal welfare guidelines.

Authors should provide evidence that they obtained ethical and/or legal approval prior to conducting the research at submission. Manuscripts should include the name of the ethics committee and the approval number.

Research involving specimens

For published research involving the collection of biological specimens (cultivated or wild), samples or fossils, authors should carry out it follow the authors’ institution(s) guideline and national/international regulations. Authors should also comply with the local laws. All such samples must be collected in an ethical and equitable way, and in accordance with relevant applicable laws comply with local legislation, and the manuscript should include a statement of appropriate permissions granted and/or licenses.

The manuscript should include the Ethical Statement of appropriate permissions granted. Voucher specimens must be deposited in an accessible herbarium or other public collection providing access to deposited material. Information on the voucher specimen and who identified it must be included in the manuscript. Editors reserve the rights to reject any manuscript which could not meet these requirements.

4) Clinical trials registration

All clinical trials should make prospective registration in publicly accessible databases (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov) before participants are enrolled. The clinical trials also need to follow the CONSORT (CONsolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) guideline. Manuscripts should include clinical registration name, registration identification number, the name of the register, and the URL for the registry in accordance with journal instructions.

Corrections

The Journal acknowledges its responsibility to correct any scientifically relevant errors in published papers that may impact their scientific interpretation. Once approved by the Editorial Office and Editors-in-Chiefs (EiCs), there will be a mark indicating that the paper has a correction. A correction is a distinct publication that is linked to the original paper. It serves to inform all readers that a significant change has been made, and the updated version is available on the website. Notification will be sent to all relevant indexing databases to ensure that they update their records as well.

Corrections can be submitted if:

  • There are scientifically relevant errors, e.g., missing sections/tables/figures, raw data errors, images, tables, and figure errors OR,
  • There are any added/deleted/replaced references.

Correction must be submitted separately by the corresponding author with the approval of all co-authors. The original article title, author list, and details of the correction should be included in the new manuscript. 

Retractions

The findings and conclusions will be unreliable if a published paper is found with scientific or ethical issues. To correct the scientific record, the published paper should be retracted. Retractions could be requested by the author(s), readers, or the editors and they will be finally decided by the EiCs. The Journal adheres to COPE’s Retraction guidelines and procedures for handling retractions.

The original publication will be retained on the platform with a “Retracted” watermark, and the explanation for the retraction is provided in a note linked to the watermarked paper. A paper will only be fully removed from journal website and indexing databases under rare and exceptional circumstances, such as when retaining the article online will be unlawful or pose a risk of substantial harm.

Expression of Concern

When an investigation is ongoing or the evidence is inconclusive, an Expression of Concern may be issued. Editors believe that it is essential to inform readers about potential issues within the paper to uphold journal’s transparency:

  • There is a suspicion of academic misconduct within the paper, yet the evidence is insufficient to determine it OR,
  • The results of the study are suspected to be unreliable, but the author(s)’ institution is unwilling to initiate an investigation OR,
  • Conflicting interpretations exist among the authors OR,
  • An investigation is in progress, and final conclusions may require an extended period.
Appeals

Appeals only apply to the manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed. Authors who want to appeal concerning the peer-review process and editorial decisions should present substantial evidence or new information/data as well as point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments and the editors’ decisions.

Authors must not submit their manuscript elsewhere until they receive a final decision or decide to withdraw their manuscript from consideration and have informed the Journal accordingly. Each appeal is assessed on its individual merits. Editors will consider only one appeal per manuscript, and the EiCs’ decision on the appeal is final.

Comments and Complaints

Readers who have concerns/complaints about published papers may contact the Editorial Office while simultaneously present the details of the concerns/complaints and the evidence. Lack of evidence or complaints with personal attacks would be regarded as vexatious and will be ignored.

The Editorial Office will investigate together with EiCs in accordance with the guidelines published by COPE.

Authorship

Author(s) are encouraged to value the opportunity for publication and uphold the esteemed reputation of the Journal. Before submitting the findings, author(s) should carefully read and adhere to the following responsibilities:

  • Author(s) should be the persons who have made substantial contributions to the work, e.g., the conception/experimental design of the research, theoretical development, prototype development, data acquisition/analysis/interpretation and who have contributed to drafting the paper or reviewing and/or revising it critically. The others who have participated in certain aspects could be listed as contributors and acknowledged in the “Acknowledgment” section. AI tool should not be listed as an author.
  • For papers with multiple authors, one author should be indicated as the corresponding author. The corresponding author should ensure obtaining the consent of all co-authors prior to submitting a manuscript and ensure all co-authors’ approval of the final version before publication. Besides, the corresponding author has responsibility for communication with the Editorial Office, overseeing the publication process, and ensuring the integrity of the final document.
  • Any change to the author list during editorial process should be applied ahead of final decision. An application form manually signed by all authors should be sent for the Editorial Office’s approval. Post-acceptance applications will not be considered.
Duplication, Plagiarism and Originality

The Journal only publishes original content and author(s) should ensure the originality of their works. Author(s) should not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals at the same time, and should wait for the final decision on the manuscript before submitting the research to another journal. Once the unethical publishing behavior is found, an investigation or action would be taken based on the COPE code of conducts.

Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. All submissions will be checked for plagiarism via iThenticate. The paper will be rejected once the paper is found too similar to the previous documents. If plagiarism is detected after publication, an investigation or action would be taken based on the COPE principles on plagiarism.

Reuse of text work should be appropriately cited or quoted. Authors should obtain the appropriate permission prior to publication where the research involves any third-party figures, tables, and images.

The fabrication/falsification of data or images is not allowed and will be regarded as misconduct which will lead to a retraction of the publication affected.

Conflict of Interest

All contributors involved, author(s), editors and reviewers should disclose any potential conflict of interest that might inappropriately influence (bias) the results of the manuscript.

Potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include but are not limited to financial interests (employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, grants or funding sources) and non-financial interests (personal or professional relationships, affiliations, and personal beliefs).

Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. For author(s), conflicts of interest should be disclosed when the paper is submitted to the Journal, stating fully the personal, institutional, and financial interests and support which might influence the research. Reviewers/Editors assigned to a manuscript should disclose any personal, financial, or intellectual interests that would affect the fair evaluation.

A statement of conflict of interest should be published in the final version and if there are no conflict of interest to be declared, it can be stated as “The author(s) declare no conflict of interests”.

Peer-Review Policy

This publication follows a single-blind review process in which the names and details of the reviewers are kept confidential from the author(s). A regular review process for each submitted manuscript consists of three stages: initial check, preliminary assessment, and peer review.

Initial Check

The submissions will be initially checked by the Editorial Office. At this stage, a decision of “Reject without review” would be made for the submissions which do not meet the aims and scope and/or the ethical requirements of the Journal. In addition, submissions will be screened for plagiarism by iThenticate. Those with high overlap scores might also be rejected directly without further review.

Preliminary Assessment

The editorial board members of the Journal (i.e., Editors-in-Chief and Executive Editors-in-Chief) act as scientific editors. A scientific editor will be assigned to handle the manuscript. They evaluate the manuscript and decide whether it is worth peer review. Manuscripts which pass through the initial check will be preliminarily assessed by the EiCs and then the handling editors. At this stage, the EiCs have sole discretion, with the help of the handling editors, on whether to send the manuscript for peer review or reject it without review. EiCs will be excluded in the process when they are listed as authors. In such cases, Editorial Board Members will be assigned to assess the manuscript.

Peer-Review

At least two favorable reviews are required for a paper to be considered for publication.​ Final decisions are made by the EiCs on the basis of the review reports and their own assessment.

All manuscripts would be evaluated by relevance, quality and originality of the work, potential interest to the Journal’s readership, and clarity (including clear tables and graphics, the standard of technical written English).

Artificial Intelligence Tools

The Journal follows the COPE position statement when it comes to the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools. TUP is a member of STM, the Journal also follows the Ethical and Practical Guidelines released by STM Generative AI in Scholarly Communications.

AI tools can be used to help authors in formatting, language editing, correcting. AI tools should not be listed or cited as an author or co-author. AI tools cannot be used to create, alter, or manipulate original research data and images.

Author(s) should disclose the use of AI tools with sufficient details at submission in the cover letter and disclose details of how the AI tools were used within Method, Acknowledgment or other related sections.

Reviewers and editors should not upload the manuscript or any part of it to a public generative AI platform to keep the manuscript confidential before final publication.

The Journal will monitor this development and will adjust or refine this policy when appropriate.

Post-Publication

Author(s) will have chance to double check the full content, especially the symbols, formulas, and figure legends before final publication, for these may accidentally be changed during editing. After final publication, substantial changes could only be updated by corrections.

Archiving

TUP is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of the published content in the Journal.

Article Processing Charge

This journal is a peer reviewed, subsidized open access journal where Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital pays the OA fee. Authors do not have to pay any open access publication fee.
Peer review under the responsibility of Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital.

Copyright and Permission

To get information of Copyright and Permission, please visit Copyright & Permission.

Advertising Policy

The Journal has no advertisement business, and will not post any advertisement.