Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Open Access Policy and Copyright
Authorship and Contributorship
Research Ethics and Human/Animal Rights
Editorial Process and Peer Review Policy
Conflict of Interest
Plagiarism and Publication Integrity
Data Sharing and Transparency
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy
Post-Publication Policies
Advertising and Sponsorship Policy
Summary of Responsibilities

1. Open Access Policy and Copyright

1.1 Open Access Statement

Acta Health Scientifica is a fully open-access journal. All published content is freely available online at www.actahealthsci.com without any subscription or access fee, in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI). Open access promotes the widest possible dissemination of research and accelerates the advancement of science for the benefit of society.

1.2 Creative Commons License

All articles published in Acta Health Scientifica are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). Under this license, third parties may copy, distribute, adapt, and build upon the work for non-commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors and source, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated. Commercial use of the published material is not permitted without explicit written permission from the journal.

1.3 Copyright

Authors retain the copyright of their published work. By submitting a manuscript, authors grant Acta Health Scientifica the right of first publication under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license. When using previously published content — including figures, tables, or extensive quotations — from any source in their submissions, authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions from the copyright holder. All legal, financial, and ethical liabilities arising from copyright infringement belong solely to the author(s).

1.4 Self-Archiving and Preprint Policy

Authors are permitted to self-archive their manuscripts at any stage of the publication process on personal or institutional websites and open-access repositories (e.g., PubMed Central). Authors who have shared their work on preprint servers (e.g., medRxiv, bioRxiv) prior to submission must declare this in the Cover Letter at the time of submission. The preprint version must not be updated until the journal's editorial decision has been communicated. Upon publication, authors are requested to add a link to the final published version and include the DOI number in any previously deposited preprint.

1.5 Publication Fee Policy

Acta Health Scientifica operates on a strictly non-commercial, open-access publishing model. No fees are charged at any stage of the editorial workflow — including manuscript submission, peer-review processing, article production, or publication. The journal is committed to eliminating financial barriers to scientific communication.

2. Authorship and Contributorship

2.1 Authorship Criteria

Authorship of a scientific publication confers credit and entails responsibility and accountability. Acta Health Scientifica adopts the authorship criteria recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). To qualify as an author, all four of the following criteria 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 critically revising it for important intellectual content;
Final approval of the version to be published;
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including the investigation and resolution of any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work.

All individuals meeting all four criteria should be listed as authors. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet all four criteria should not be listed as authors; their contributions must be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section with their explicit written permission.

2.2 Unacceptable Authorship Practices

The following practices are strictly prohibited and constitute publication misconduct:

Ghost authorship: Omitting individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the work from the author list.
Gift/Guest authorship: Including individuals who have not made substantial intellectual contributions to the work as authors, solely based on seniority, authority, or personal relationship.
Denied authorship: Excluding a deserving contributor from the author list without their knowledge or consent.

Cases of suspected authorship misconduct will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines and flowcharts.

2.3 Changes to Authorship

Any additions, deletions, or rearrangements of the author list after submission — but before acceptance — must be approved by the Editor-in-Chief. Requests for authorship changes must be submitted in writing by the corresponding author and must include (a) the reason for the change and (b) written confirmation of agreement from all existing authors and, where applicable, the author being added or removed. Authorship changes after acceptance will not be permitted except in the most exceptional circumstances.

2.4 Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal on behalf of all co-authors throughout the submission, peer-review, revision, and publication process. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors meet the ICMJE authorship criteria, have reviewed and approved the final manuscript, and have agreed to the submission. The corresponding author is also responsible for managing any post-publication correspondence, including responses to corrections or retractions.

3. Research Ethics and Human/Animal Rights

3.1 General Principles

Acta Health Scientifica is committed to upholding the highest standards of research ethics. The Editorial Board adheres to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the Council of Science Editors (CSE), the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), the World Medical Association (WMA), and the US National Library of Medicine (NLM). The journal conforms to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing.

3.2 Ethics Committee Approval

Formal ethics committee approval is mandatory for all studies involving human participants, animal subjects, patient data (including retrospective archival studies), or biological material. The following must be explicitly stated in the Methods section of the manuscript and on the Title Page:

The full official name of the ethics committee that granted approval;
The exact date of the ethics committee decision;
The official decision/issue number.

The original ethics committee approval document must be uploaded as a separate file during submission. Manuscripts submitted without ethics committee approval documentation will not proceed to evaluation. If ethics committee approval was not obtained for a specific study type (e.g., certain literature reviews), authors must clearly justify this in the manuscript and the editorial team will assess the submission in accordance with COPE guidance (Guidance for Editors: Research, Audit and Service Evaluations).

3.3 Declaration of Helsinki

All research involving human participants must be conducted in accordance with the ethical principles set forth in the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki — Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects (most recently revised in 2024 by the WMA). Authors must explicitly confirm compliance with these principles in the Methods section of the manuscript.

3.4 Informed Consent

For all research involving human participants, authors must confirm in the Methods section that written informed consent was obtained from all participants (or their legally authorized representatives) prior to enrollment in the study. For participants under 18 years of age, a consent form bearing the signatures of both parents or the legal guardian must be obtained. Informed consent is also required for case reports in which any patient data or images are used. Authors do not need to submit the consent documents to the journal; however, they must confirm that consent was obtained by signing the Copyright and Authorship Form. Patient anonymity must be strictly preserved in all submitted materials.

3.5 Animal Research

For studies involving animal subjects, authors must confirm in the Methods section that the study received approval from the relevant institutional animal care and use committee, and that all procedures were conducted in accordance with the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (8th edition, National Academies Press, 2011) and applicable national and institutional regulations. The ARRIVE (Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) guidelines must be followed when reporting animal studies.

3.6 Clinical Trial Registration

Acta Health Scientifica adopts the ICMJE's clinical trial registration policy. Prospective clinical trials — defined as any research project that assigns people to an intervention based on a health-related outcome — must be registered in a publicly accessible primary registry of the WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), such as ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov), at or before the time of first patient enrollment. The registry name and unique registration number must be provided at the end of the abstract and on the Title Page. Studies that were not registered prospectively may not be considered for publication.

3.7 Sex and Gender Reporting

Authors are encouraged to follow the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines throughout the research process, from study design to manuscript preparation. Authors should clearly distinguish between biological sex and socially constructed gender where relevant, disaggregate data by sex and/or gender when applicable, and acknowledge any related limitations in the study.

4. Editorial Process and Peer Review Policy

4.1 Editorial Independence

The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the editorial and scientific content of Acta Health Scientifica and the timing of publication. Editorial decisions are made solely on the basis of scientific merit, originality, and ethical compliance. The journal's editorial decisions are independent of commercial, institutional, or personal interests. The publisher does not interfere with editorial decisions.

4.2 Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial technical screening by the editorial office to verify compliance with the journal's Author Guidelines and submission requirements. Manuscripts that do not comply with formatting or file requirements will be returned to the corresponding author with a technical correction request before any scientific evaluation begins. Manuscripts that pass technical screening are assessed by the Editor-in-Chief and/or Associate Editors for suitability in terms of scope, originality, and scientific merit. Manuscripts deemed outside the scope or of insufficient quality may be rejected at this stage without external peer review.

4.3 Double-Blind Peer Review

All manuscripts that pass initial screening are subjected to a rigorous double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the evaluation. Each manuscript is assigned to at least two independent external reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected by the handling editor to ensure a balanced and objective assessment. Authors must ensure that the Main Document is thoroughly anonymized before submission.

4.4 Editorial Decision Categories

Following peer review, manuscripts may receive one of the following editorial decisions:

Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication as submitted or with only minor typographical corrections.
Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited revisions that do not necessitate a further round of peer review.
Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and must be re-evaluated by the reviewers.
Reject and Resubmit: The manuscript has significant fundamental flaws but may be considered as a new submission after comprehensive revision.
Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in its current form and the decision is final.

Authors of manuscripts requiring revision must submit their revised manuscript together with a point-by-point response letter addressing each reviewer comment within the time frame specified by the editorial office. The Editor-in-Chief is the final authority in all acceptance and rejection decisions.

4.5 Reviewer Responsibilities

Peer reviewers are expected to adhere to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewers must:

Evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive, specific, and evidence-based feedback;
Declare any potential conflicts of interest and decline the review assignment if such conflicts exist;
Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and its content;
Not use ideas, data, or findings from a manuscript under review for their own work prior to publication;
Notify the editor promptly if they suspect misconduct (plagiarism, fabrication, data manipulation, etc.).

Reviewers must not upload any manuscript content to generative AI tools, as this constitutes a breach of confidentiality. Peer-review reports will not be posted publicly.

4.6 Editor Responsibilities

Editors must handle all submitted manuscripts with strict confidentiality. Editors must declare any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which such conflicts exist. If an editor is a co-author on a submitted manuscript, they must withdraw entirely from the evaluation process for that submission. Editors may not use unpublished manuscript content for their own research without explicit written consent from the authors.

4.7 Estimated Processing Times

Acta Health Scientifica is committed to a timely and transparent editorial process. While exact timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of revisions, the journal aims for the following approximate timelines:

Initial technical screening: within 5–7 business days of submission;
First editorial decision (post-peer review): within 6–10 weeks of submission;
Authors will be notified of any significant delays and will be given the opportunity to withdraw their manuscript if they wish.

5. Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when any party involved in the publication process — author, editor, or reviewer — has financial, personal, professional, or institutional relationships that could inappropriately influence their contributions or decisions. Transparency regarding conflicts of interest is essential for maintaining the credibility and integrity of scientific publishing.

5.1 Authors

All contributing authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission by completing the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form (www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest). This includes, but is not limited to, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, grants, and other funding. If no conflict of interest exists, this must also be explicitly stated. Conflict of interest disclosures are published with accepted manuscripts.

5.2 Editors

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest, including any financial or personal relationship with the authors, or intellectual competition with the submitted work. Editors must not make acceptance or rejection decisions on manuscripts authored by members of the same institution or with whom they have collaborated within the past three years.

5.3 Reviewers

Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest to the editorial office before accepting a review assignment. Reviewers must decline review invitations if a conflict of interest exists. This includes situations where the reviewer is a collaborator or close colleague of one or more of the authors, or where the reviewer has a financial interest in the subject matter of the manuscript.

6. Plagiarism and Publication Integrity

6.1 Originality Requirement

All manuscripts submitted to Acta Health Scientifica must be entirely original and must not have been previously published in any language, in whole or in part (including as full text in conference proceedings). Manuscripts must not be simultaneously under consideration for publication in any other journal. Authors must declare compliance with this requirement in both the Cover Letter and the Copyright and Authorship Form.

6.2 Plagiarism Screening

All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using recognized detection software (iThenticate or Turnitin) at least twice during the editorial process: once prior to peer review and once prior to publication. The overall similarity index must not exceed 20% (excluding the reference list). A high similarity score may result in rejection before, during, or after the peer-review process, depending on the severity and nature of the overlap. Authors are required to submit a full plagiarism report with their initial submission.

6.3 Forms of Research and Publication Misconduct

The following constitute forms of research or publication misconduct and will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines:

Plagiarism: Presenting another author's work, ideas, text, or data as one's own without appropriate attribution.
Self-plagiarism: Reproducing substantial portions of one's own previously published work without proper citation or disclosure.
Data fabrication: Presenting data or results that were not obtained through actual experimentation or observation.
Data falsification/manipulation: Altering, misrepresenting, or selectively omitting research data to distort findings.
Duplicate/redundant publication: Submitting or publishing the same study or substantial portions of it in more than one journal without disclosure.
Salami publication: Dividing a single study into multiple smaller publications to artificially inflate the number of publications.
Image manipulation: Altering, enhancing, or fabricating images in a way that misrepresents the original research data.

6.4 Consequences of Misconduct

If misconduct is detected prior to publication, the manuscript will be rejected immediately. If misconduct is detected after publication, the article may be retracted, and a correction or expression of concern may be issued. The journal reserves the right to notify the authors' institutions and relevant regulatory bodies. All cases of suspected misconduct will be investigated according to COPE flowcharts.

7. Data Sharing and Transparency

7.1 Data Sharing Statement

Authors are encouraged to make the underlying data supporting their published findings openly available in publicly accessible repositories (e.g., Zenodo, Figshare, Dryad, OSF) wherever feasible, consistent with participant confidentiality and applicable ethical regulations. A Data Sharing Statement must be included on the Title Page of all submissions. The statement should specify: (a) whether the data are available; (b) where they can be accessed and under what conditions; or (c) a clear explanation of why data sharing is not possible in cases where this applies.

7.2 Reporting Guidelines and Reproducibility

To promote scientific reproducibility and transparency, authors must adhere to the appropriate reporting guideline for their study design (see Author Guidelines, Section 4). The completed EQUATOR Network reporting checklist must be uploaded as part of the submission package. Authors must provide sufficient methodological detail in the Methods section to allow the study to be independently replicated.

8. Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy

Acta Health Scientifica follows the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in scientific publishing.

8.1 AI Cannot Be Listed as an Author

AI tools and large language models (e.g., ChatGPT, GPT-4, Gemini, and similar tools) do not meet the ICMJE criteria for authorship and cannot be listed as authors or co-authors in any submission. Authorship requires accountability and the capacity to consent, neither of which AI tools possess. The authors bear full responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of all content in a submitted manuscript, including any content generated or assisted by AI.

8.2 Mandatory Disclosure of AI Use

Authors who use generative AI tools at any stage of manuscript preparation — including writing, editing, paraphrasing, image generation, data analysis, or literature searching — must transparently disclose this use. The disclosure must be included in a dedicated statement in the Methods section (for AI used in data analysis or research) or in the Acknowledgments section (for AI used in writing or editing assistance), as applicable. The disclosure must specify: (a) the name and version of the AI tool used; (b) the specific purpose for which it was used; and (c) confirmation that all AI-generated content was verified, edited, and approved by the authors.

The following template may be used for disclosure: "During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [Tool Name, Version] for [specific purpose, e.g., language editing, literature search assistance]. After using this tool, the authors reviewed and edited all AI-assisted content and take full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the published work."

8.3 Prohibited Uses of AI

AI tools must not be used to generate the scientific ideas, hypotheses, study design, or original conclusions of a study;
AI tools must not be used to fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent data or references;
Confidential patient data, ethics committee documents, or copyrighted materials must not be uploaded to AI systems;
Reviewers must not upload any manuscript content under review to AI tools, as this constitutes a breach of manuscript confidentiality;
AI-generated images may only be used when they are directly relevant to research on AI itself, and must be clearly labeled as AI-generated with the tool name specified.

8.4 Editor and Reviewer AI Use

Editors may use AI-assisted tools for limited administrative purposes such as language quality checks or similarity screening during initial technical review. However, all editorial decisions must be made solely by qualified human editors. Reviewers may use AI tools only for language editing of text they have personally written (i.e., the review report itself) and must not submit manuscript content to any AI system.

9. Post-Publication Policies

9.1 Corrections and Erratum

If a published article contains significant errors that affect the scientific integrity or interpretation of the findings — but do not invalidate the conclusions — an erratum (publisher error) or corrigendum (author error) will be published. Authors who identify significant errors in their published work are obliged to notify the editorial office promptly. The correction will be linked to the original article.

9.2 Retraction

Acta Health Scientifica will retract a published article in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines if: (a) there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable as a result of misconduct (data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism) or honest error; (b) the study constitutes duplicate or redundant publication; (c) the research was conducted without proper ethics approval; or (d) authorship is disputed in a manner that cannot be resolved. A retraction notice will be published and linked to the retracted article; the original article will be clearly marked as retracted and will remain accessible for scholarly record. Retraction decisions are made after a thorough investigation in accordance with COPE flowcharts.

9.3 Expression of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when the journal has reason to suspect research or publication misconduct but does not yet have sufficient evidence to issue a full retraction. This notice alerts readers to potential integrity concerns while an investigation is conducted.

9.4 Letters to the Editor and Post-Publication Discussion

Acta Health Scientifica encourages post-publication scientific discussion. Readers and researchers may submit a Letter to the Editor in response to published articles. Authors of the original article may be invited to respond. Responses will be subject to editorial review before publication.

10. Advertising and Sponsorship Policy

Acta Health Scientifica operates on a non-commercial, open-access model and does not accept paid advertising on its website or within its published content. The journal does not solicit or accept sponsorship from commercial entities in exchange for editorial coverage or preferential publication consideration. Editorial decisions are made entirely on the basis of scientific merit and are independent of any commercial interests.

11. Summary of Responsibilities

This policy is reviewed and updated periodically. Last updated: 2026.