Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

Directive Publications is an international open-access publisher of peer-reviewed journals in medicine, the life sciences, and public health. The integrity of the scholarly record is the foundation of everything we do. This Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement sets out the ethical expectations and responsibilities of every party in the publishing process — editors, reviewers, authors, and the publisher — and the procedures we follow when those expectations are not met. It applies to all journals we publish and to all manuscripts submitted to them.

Our Commitment to Publication Ethics

Our editorial policies are developed and maintained in line with the COPE Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics, the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (the joint statement of COPE, DOAJ, WAME, and OASPA). We follow these principles as a matter of policy; they inform our practice rather than confer any membership or accreditation. Where a specific ethical question is not addressed here, editors are guided by the relevant COPE guidance and flowcharts.

These policies work alongside our related guidance on peer review, editorial policies, author guidelines, open access, and plagiarism screening. Directive Publications is clearly identified as the publisher of each of its journals, each of which lists its own editorial board.

Editorial Independence, Standards & Journal Management

Editorial decisions are made solely on the scholarly merit of the work and never on the basis of commercial interest. Editorial and business functions are kept separate: decisions to accept or reject a manuscript are never influenced by advertising, reprint revenue, sponsorship, or the payment of any article-processing charge. The ability to pay a charge, or a request for a fee waiver, has no bearing on editorial evaluation. Each journal is directed by an Editor-in-Chief supported by an editorial board with relevant subject expertise.

Responsibilities of Editors

Fair and merit-based decisions. Editors evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content — originality, validity, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope — without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, seniority, or institutional affiliation.
Confidentiality. Editors must treat every submitted manuscript as a privileged, confidential document and disclose its content only to those involved in its evaluation.
Conflicts of interest. An editor who has a competing interest in a submission — personal, financial, academic, or otherwise — must recuse themselves, and the manuscript will be handled by another editor.
Integrity of the record. Editors are responsible for safeguarding the published record. When ethical concerns are raised about a submitted or published work, they act promptly in accordance with our misconduct procedures, and are prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, or expressions of concern when needed.
Independence. Editorial decisions are free from influence by the publisher's commercial considerations.

The Peer-Review Process & Responsibilities of Reviewers

All research articles undergo double-blind peer review, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are mutually concealed. Peer review assesses the significance, originality, methodological soundness, and clarity of a manuscript and advises the editor, who takes the final decision. Peer review is a cornerstone of scholarly communication, and reviewers who contribute to it accept the following responsibilities:

Confidentiality. Manuscripts under review are privileged documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose them, and must not use unpublished information or ideas for personal advantage.
No third-party or AI disclosure. Reviewers must not upload or input any part of a manuscript into generative-AI tools or other external services, as doing so breaches confidentiality.
Objectivity and constructiveness. Reviews should be objective, evidence-based, and expressed with supporting arguments so authors can improve the work. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable.
Competing interests. A reviewer who feels unqualified, cannot review promptly, or has a competing interest should decline the invitation.
Alertness to ethical issues. Reviewers should notify the editor of any substantial similarity between the manuscript and other published work, or of any suspected ethical concern.

Researchers interested in supporting this process are welcome to apply to join our reviewer community. ORCID identifiers are encouraged for reviewers and authors alike.

Responsibilities of Authors

Originality and attribution. Authors must ensure their work is entirely original, and must appropriately cite and quote the work and words of others. All sources of data and ideas must be acknowledged.
Research integrity. Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and inappropriate data or image manipulation are serious forms of misconduct and are strictly prohibited.
Disclosure. Authors must disclose all sources of funding and any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest.
Data availability. Authors are expected to retain the raw data supporting their conclusions and to be prepared to provide it for editorial review where reasonable.
Post-publication duty. If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal so that a correction or retraction can be issued.

Responsibilities of the Publisher

Directive Publications supports its editors in maintaining the ethical standards described here, provides the infrastructure for confidential review and secure record-keeping, and ensures that potential misconduct is investigated regardless of when it comes to light. We do not permit commercial considerations to override intellectual standards. We are committed to the long-term availability and integrity of published content, which is maintained on off-site backups while we pursue a formal digital-archiving arrangement, and to the prompt publication of corrections and retractions where warranted. Every published article is assigned and registered with a Crossref DOI (prefix 10.52338) and its metadata is made openly available for harvesting via OAI-PMH and JATS XML.

Authorship & Contributorship

Authorship is based on the four ICMJE criteria, all of which must be met:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
Final approval of the version to be published; and
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions of accuracy or integrity are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Contributors who do not meet all four criteria should be recognized in the Acknowledgements rather than listed as authors. A designated corresponding author is responsible for communication with the journal, for confirming that all named authors qualify for authorship and have approved the submission, and for managing correspondence after publication. Any change to the author list — an addition, removal, or re-ordering — requires the written agreement of all authors and the approval of the editor. Ghost, guest, and gift authorship are expressly prohibited.

Originality, Plagiarism & Similarity Screening

All submissions undergo similarity and plagiarism screening using industry-standard similarity-detection software. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable, including verbatim copying, paraphrasing another's work without credit, text recycling or self-plagiarism, and the reuse of images or data without attribution. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarized material may be rejected, and published articles found to be plagiarized are subject to correction or retraction. See our dedicated plagiarism policy for details.

Redundant, Duplicate & Concurrent Submission

Submitted manuscripts must be original and must not be under consideration by another journal, in whole or in substantial part. Publishing the same research in more than one journal constitutes redundant publication. The prior deposit of a manuscript as a preprint, or the publication of a conference abstract, is generally acceptable and should be disclosed at submission; authors uncertain whether earlier dissemination affects eligibility should consult the editor before submitting.

Conflicts of Interest & Funding Disclosure

Authors, reviewers, and editors must declare any competing interests that could be perceived to influence the work. These include financial interests (funding, employment, stock ownership, patents, honoraria, or paid consultancy) and non-financial interests (personal, academic, or political relationships). All sources of funding for the research must be stated, and disclosed interests are published with the article so that readers can assess them. Editors and reviewers with a competing interest recuse themselves from handling the manuscript.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-Assisted Tools

Large language models and other generative-AI tools cannot be listed as authors, because they cannot take responsibility for a manuscript or be accountable for its content. Any use of AI or AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of a manuscript must be disclosed at submission, typically in the methods or acknowledgements. Authors remain fully responsible for all content of their work, including its accuracy and integrity, the absence of plagiarism, and the validity of any AI-generated text, citations, or images. As noted above, editors and reviewers must not upload manuscripts to AI tools, in order to preserve confidentiality.

Research Ethics: Human Participants, Animal Welfare & Informed Consent

As a publisher of medical and life-sciences research, we require that:

Human-participant studies have received prior approval from an appropriate research-ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB) and were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. A statement to this effect, including the approving body, must appear in the manuscript.
Informed consent was obtained from participants, and the manuscript states this. Separate, explicit consent to publish is required for any identifying details, images, or case descriptions.
Animal studies complied with applicable institutional and national welfare guidelines (for example, the ARRIVE guidelines) and carry an ethics-approval statement.
Applicable clinical trials were prospectively registered in a public trials registry (such as a WHO ICTRP primary registry or ClinicalTrials.gov), with the registration number reported in the manuscript.

Data Availability, Reproducibility & Image Integrity

Authors are encouraged to include a data-availability statement and to share the data underlying their findings wherever it is ethically and legally possible to do so, in support of reproducibility. Figures, gels, blots, and other images must faithfully represent the original data. Grouping, cropping, or adjusting an image so as to obscure, misrepresent, or fabricate a result is prohibited; where any adjustment has been applied uniformly for clarity, it should be described.

Corrections, Retractions & Expressions of Concern

When the published record needs to be amended, we follow the COPE Retraction Guidelines and distinguish among:

Corrections (erratum or corrigendum) for errors that do not affect the reliability of the findings;
Expressions of concern where a serious question has arisen but an investigation is not yet complete or has proved inconclusive; and
Retractions where the findings are unreliable — whether through honest error or misconduct — or where the work is redundant, plagiarized, or unethical.

Corrected and retracted articles are never removed. The original article remains available, is clearly labelled with the relevant notice, and retains its original Crossref DOI so that the full history of the version of record is preserved. Each notice is linked from the article and listed on the journal's corrections page. Full details are set out in our corrections and retractions policy.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

We take every allegation of misconduct seriously and investigate it regardless of when it comes to light, whether it concerns a submitted manuscript or a published article. Our process is guided by the COPE Core Practices and the relevant COPE flowcharts:

Receipt and assessment. Concerns may be raised by anyone — a reader, reviewer, editor, or the authors themselves — and are treated confidentially. The handling editor makes an initial assessment of whether the concern, if substantiated, would amount to misconduct.
Gathering evidence. The editor gathers the relevant material and, where appropriate, consults reviewers or subject specialists and re-runs similarity or image checks.
Author response. The corresponding author is given a fair opportunity to respond to the concern and to provide an explanation, clarification, or supporting data.
Escalation where needed. For serious or unresolved allegations, we may contact the authors' institution or an appropriate ethics body, following COPE guidance, and cooperate with any formal investigation.
Outcome. Depending on the findings, outcomes range from a clarification or correction, through an expression of concern, to retraction; a manuscript still under consideration may be rejected. Decisions are based on evidence, and confidentiality is maintained throughout.

Complaints & Appeals

Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may write to the journal with a point-by-point response to the reasons given. Appeals are reviewed by the handling editor together with the Editor-in-Chief, and one appeal is generally permitted per manuscript; the appeal decision is final. Complaints about editorial process, publication ethics, or the conduct of anyone involved in the publication of a work may be sent to [email protected]. Complaints are acknowledged and addressed within a reasonable timeframe, and the person raising the concern is informed of the outcome. Further procedural detail on data availability, appeals, and complaints is provided in our editorial policies.

Contact

Questions about this statement, or notice of an ethical concern, should be directed to our editorial office at [email protected] or by post to Directive Publications, 30 N Gould St, Sheridan, WY 82801, USA. To send us your work under these standards, please visit our submission page and consult the author guidelines.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who qualifies as an author, and how do I add, remove or re-order authors after submission?

Authorship follows the four ICMJE criteria, all of which must be met: a substantial contribution to the work; drafting or critically revising it; final approval of the version to be published; and accountability for the whole work. Contributors who do not meet all four should be named in the Acknowledgements rather than listed as authors. Any change to the author list after submission — adding, removing, or re-ordering authors — requires the written agreement of all authors and the approval of the editor. Ghost, guest, and gift authorship are prohibited.

Do I need ethics approval and consent to publish, for example for a clinical study or a case report with identifying details?

Yes. Studies involving human participants require prior approval from a research-ethics committee or IRB and must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki, with a statement to that effect in the manuscript. Informed consent must be obtained and stated, and separate explicit consent to publish is required for any identifying details, images, or case descriptions. Animal studies must follow applicable welfare guidelines (such as ARRIVE) and include an approval statement, and applicable clinical trials should be prospectively registered with the registration number reported.

Can I use ChatGPT or other generative-AI tools to help write, translate or edit my manuscript, and how do I disclose it?

AI-assisted tools may be used for tasks such as language editing, but they cannot be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the work. Any use of AI in preparing your manuscript must be disclosed, typically in the methods or acknowledgements. You remain fully responsible for all content, including its accuracy and integrity, the absence of plagiarism, and the validity of any AI-generated text, citations, or images. Reviewers and editors are not permitted to upload manuscripts into AI tools, to preserve confidentiality.

What counts as plagiarism, self-plagiarism and redundant publication, and how are submissions screened?

Plagiarism includes verbatim copying, paraphrasing without credit, text recycling or self-plagiarism, and reusing images or data without attribution. Redundant (duplicate) publication means publishing the same research in more than one venue; your manuscript must be original and not under consideration elsewhere. Prior preprints or conference abstracts are generally acceptable if disclosed. All submissions undergo similarity and plagiarism screening using industry-standard detection software, and manuscripts or published articles found to contain plagiarized material are subject to rejection, correction, or retraction.

If a problem is found in my article after publication, what happens, and does my DOI stay active?

Depending on the issue, we may issue a correction (erratum or corrigendum) for minor errors, an expression of concern while an investigation is ongoing, or a retraction where findings are unreliable or affected by serious misconduct, following the COPE Retraction Guidelines. Corrected and retracted articles are not removed: they remain available, are clearly marked, and keep their original Crossref DOI so the history of the version of record is preserved. Notices are linked from the article and listed on the journal's corrections page.

How do I disclose funding and conflicts of interest, and how can I appeal a decision or raise a complaint?

All funding sources and any competing interests — financial (such as employment, stock, patents, or honoraria) or non-financial (personal, academic, or political) — must be declared at submission and are published with the article. To appeal an editorial decision, write to the journal with a point-by-point response to the reasons given; appeals are reviewed by the handling editor and the Editor-in-Chief, with generally one appeal permitted per manuscript. Complaints about process or conduct can be sent to [email protected] and will be acknowledged and addressed within a reasonable timeframe.