King Abdulaziz University Scientific Publishing Center policies

King Abdulaziz University publishes a portfolio of peer-reviewed open-access journals across multiple disciplines. Browse the full list of KAU journals hosted on Digital Commons.

About the Publisher Policy

The Scientific Publishing Center (SPC) of King Abdulaziz University serves as the institutional publisher for scholarly journals issued, hosted, managed, or jointly published under the auspices of the University.

The Publisher Policy establishes a unified framework of publishing policies and standards applicable to all journals within the University publishing portfolio. These policies support integrity, transparency, quality assurance, editorial independence, responsible research practices, and compliance with internationally recognized scholarly publishing standards.

The Publisher Policy is designed to:

  • Promote consistency across all University journals.
  • Strengthen publication ethics and research integrity.
  • Support compliance with international indexing requirements (Scopus, Web of Science, DOAJ, PubMed).
  • Enhance transparency and accountability throughout the publication process.
  • Facilitate sustainable journal development and international visibility.
  • Reduce duplication of policies across individual journals.
  • Support the global visibility and scholarly impact of University publications.
  • Meet the membership criteria of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

These policies apply to all journals published, hosted, managed, or jointly published by King Abdulaziz University. While the Publisher Policy establishes common publisher-level standards, each journal retains responsibility for maintaining its own academic identity through its aims and scope, editorial structure, article types, publication frequency, and discipline-specific requirements.

This document (Version 2.0) has been developed in alignment with: COPE Core Practices and 16 Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing; ICMJE Recommendations (2026); Scopus Source Evaluation Criteria; Web of Science Journal Evaluation Process; DOAJ Application Criteria (2024); Crossref Metadata Best Practices; and ORCID Publisher Recommendations.

Publisher Responsibilities

The Scientific Publishing Center shall:

  • Maintain, review, and update the Publisher Policy periodically.
  • Promote publication ethics and research integrity across all journals.
  • Support editorial independence at all times.
  • Maintain publishing infrastructure and services.
  • Monitor compliance with Publisher Policies.
  • Support indexing and internationalisation efforts.
  • Preserve the scholarly record through recognised digital preservation services.
  • Promote transparency and accountability in scholarly publishing.
  • Maintain COPE membership and compliance with COPE Core Practices.

Scope of Application

The Publisher Policy applies to: scholarly journals published by King Abdulaziz University; scientific conference proceedings published under University authority; jointly published journals and publication partnerships; and newly established journals approved by the University.

Relationship to Journal Policies

Publisher-level policies constitute the official and authoritative policies governing all journals within the University publishing portfolio. Individual journals may establish additional discipline-specific requirements provided such requirements: do not conflict with Publisher Policies; do not weaken Publisher Policies; are publicly disclosed; and remain consistent with applicable University regulations.

Definitions

Author: An individual who has made a substantial scholarly contribution to a submitted or published work and who meets all applicable authorship criteria.

Corresponding Author: The author designated to manage all communications with the journal on behalf of all co-authors throughout the submission, peer review, and publication process.

Reviewer: An independent expert with relevant subject expertise responsible for evaluating scholarly submissions.

Editor: An individual responsible for editorial decision-making and oversight of the peer-review process for a journal.

Editorial Board: A group of scholars appointed to support the editorial activities, governance, and development of a journal.

Guest Editor: A scholar appointed to assist with the development and management of a special issue or thematic collection.

Conflict of Interest: Any circumstance that could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, the objectivity, impartiality, or professional judgment of an author, reviewer, or editor.

Retraction: A public statement indicating that a published work should not be relied upon as part of the scholarly record, issued in cases of misconduct or serious error that affects the reliability of the conclusions.

Correction (Erratum): A formal amendment to a published article that addresses minor errors not affecting the overall findings or conclusions of the work.

Expression of Concern: A notice issued when substantial concerns exist regarding a publication while an investigation remains ongoing and the evidence is insufficient to support a correction or retraction.

Preprint: A scholarly manuscript publicly shared in a recognised preprint repository before formal peer review and publication in a journal.

Version of Record (VoR): The final, typeset, peer-reviewed, and published version of an article, assigned a DOI by the journal and constituting the authoritative version for citation.

Accepted Author Manuscript (AAM): The peer-reviewed version of a manuscript accepted for publication, prior to copyediting and typesetting.

DOI: A Digital Object Identifier: a persistent, unique alphanumeric identifier assigned to a piece of scholarly content, registered through Crossref or another authorised registration agency.

ORCID: Open Researcher and Contributor ID: a persistent digital identifier that distinguishes individual researchers and enables the automated linking of research outputs.

ROR: Research Organization Registry ID: a persistent identifier for research institutions and organisations, used to disambiguate author affiliations.

CRediT: Contributor Roles Taxonomy: a standardised vocabulary of 14 contributor roles (https://credit.niso.org/) used to describe the specific contributions of each co-author to a published work.

Paper Mill: An organisation or service that produces, sells, purchases, or facilitates the production or sale of fraudulent scholarly manuscripts or authorship opportunities.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): A computational system capable of generating text, images, code, data analyses, translations, or other content in response to prompts.

Data Availability Statement (DAS): A statement published in an article describing the availability and location of the data underlying the reported research findings.

EQUATOR Network: The Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research network: an international initiative providing reporting guidelines for health and biomedical research (https://www.equator-network.org/).

CLOCKSS: Controlled Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe: a not-for-profit digital preservation programme that provides a distributed, secure archive of published scholarly content.

Portico: A digital preservation service for electronic scholarly literature, operated as a non-profit initiative.

Report a Concern

The Scientific Publishing Center is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity. Any individual, including authors, reviewers, editors, readers, or members of the public, may report concerns regarding the conduct or content of journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center.

Reportable concerns include, but are not limited to:

  • Plagiarism or textual similarity concerns
  • Authorship disputes (guest, gift, ghost, or purchased authorship)
  • Duplicate submission or duplicate publication
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Image manipulation
  • Citation manipulation or citation stacking
  • Peer-review manipulation or fraudulent reviewer identities
  • Paper mill activity
  • Editorial misconduct or conflicts of interest
  • Non-compliance with ethical approval requirements

All reports will be handled confidentially, fairly, and promptly in accordance with the procedures described in the Publication Ethics and Research Integrity Policy (Policy 1) and the Retractions, Corrections, Complaints, and Appeals Policy (Policy 10), and in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Reports may be submitted to: Scientific Publishing Center, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Email: . Website: https://kau.edu.sa/scientific-publishing-center

Policy 1: Publication Ethics and Research Integrity

Aligned with: COPE Core Practices | COPE Principles of Transparency (Principles 1–16) | ICMJE Recommendations | Scopus Source Evaluation Criteria | WoS Journal Evaluation Process

1. Purpose

The Scientific Publishing Center (SPC) of King Abdulaziz University is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, scholarly integrity, transparency, accountability, and responsible research conduct. This Policy establishes the ethical principles and responsibilities governing all scholarly content submitted to, reviewed by, and published in journals operating under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Scope

This Policy applies to all authors, co-authors, corresponding authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, guest editors, journal staff, and publisher representatives at all stages of the publication process, including submission, peer review, editorial decision-making, publication, and post-publication correction and investigation.

3. Guiding Principles

All journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center shall be guided by honesty, accuracy, transparency, fairness, accountability, independence, confidentiality, respect for intellectual property, and responsible stewardship of the scholarly record.

4. International Standards

The Scientific Publishing Center and its journals operate in accordance with internationally recognised standards and best practices, including: the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices; the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (4th edition, 2022); the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (2026); Crossref Guidelines; and ORCID Recommendations. Where conflicts arise, the more rigorous ethical standard shall prevail.

4A. Plagiarism Screening and Similarity Detection

All manuscripts submitted to journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center shall be screened for textual similarity using a recognised similarity-detection service, such as iThenticate (CrossCheck/Crossref Similarity Check) or an equivalent tool, prior to external peer review. Editors shall review the similarity report and exercise informed professional judgment in assessing whether identified overlap constitutes plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or acceptable citation and quotation practice. A similarity score alone shall not constitute grounds for rejection; the nature, extent, origin, and context of any identified overlap shall be evaluated. Where the editor determines that clarification is required, the corresponding author will be contacted. The Scientific Publishing Center reserves the right to re-screen published articles where allegations of plagiarism are subsequently received.

4B. Image and Data Integrity

Authors shall ensure that all images, figures, micrographs, and other visual data submitted with manuscripts are an accurate and unmanipulated representation of the original research. Acceptable adjustments include linear adjustments to brightness, contrast, or colour balance applied uniformly and identically to the entire image, provided such adjustments do not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information. Prohibited practices include: selective manipulation of individual regions of an image; digital splicing of images from different sources, time points, or experimental conditions without clear disclosure; removal or addition of data elements; and any enhancement that alters the scientific interpretation of the image. Where non-standard image processing is employed, it must be fully described in the Methods section of the manuscript. Journals may subject submitted images to forensic screening; evidence of unacceptable image manipulation will be treated as research misconduct under this Policy.

5. Author Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted work: is original; has not been previously published except where properly disclosed; is not under simultaneous consideration elsewhere unless explicitly permitted; accurately represents research findings; properly acknowledges and cites all sources; complies with applicable ethical requirements; and contains no fabricated, falsified, or manipulated data or images.

Authors shall disclose all funding sources and conflicts of interest, obtain ethical approvals and informed consent where required, and cooperate promptly and fully with investigations when requested. The corresponding author shall ensure that all listed authors qualify for authorship, that no qualified contributor has been omitted, and that all authors have approved submission and publication.

6. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers shall maintain strict confidentiality, conduct objective and constructive reviews based solely on scholarly merit, declare all conflicts of interest, decline review assignments where conflicts exist, respect intellectual property rights, and report suspected ethical concerns to the editor. Reviewers shall not use unpublished information for personal benefit, share manuscripts with unauthorised individuals, or upload confidential manuscripts or review materials to publicly accessible artificial intelligence systems.

7. Editor Responsibilities

Editors shall ensure fair and unbiased editorial evaluation, maintain confidentiality, manage all conflicts of interest, protect the integrity of the peer-review process, make decisions based solely on scholarly merit, and address ethical concerns promptly and appropriately. Editors shall not discriminate based on nationality, gender, ethnicity, religion, political views, institutional affiliation, or personal characteristics. Editors shall not permit commercial, financial, or personal interests to influence editorial decisions.

8. Publisher Responsibilities

The Scientific Publishing Center shall promote ethical publishing practices, support editorial independence, maintain transparent policies, preserve the scholarly record, support investigations into ethical concerns, maintain secure publishing infrastructure, and promote compliance with international standards. The Publisher shall not interfere with editorial decisions based on scholarly merit.

9. Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

  • Fabrication: Making up data, results, participants, experiments, observations, or findings and recording or reporting them as if they were real.
  • Falsification: Manipulating materials, equipment, procedures, images, or data such that research is misrepresented.
  • Plagiarism: Using another person's work, ideas, words, images, data, or findings without appropriate attribution.
  • Self-Plagiarism: Reusing substantial portions of one's own previously published work without appropriate disclosure or citation.
  • Duplicate Submission: Submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals without disclosure.
  • Duplicate Publication: Publishing substantially similar content in multiple publications without appropriate disclosure.
  • Citation Manipulation: Inappropriate citation practices intended to artificially inflate citation metrics.
  • Authorship Manipulation: Including individuals who do not qualify for authorship or excluding qualified contributors.
  • Peer-Review Manipulation: Any attempt to compromise the integrity of peer review, including fabricated reviewer identities or self-reviewing.
  • Paper Mill Activity: The production, sale, purchase, or facilitation of fraudulent manuscripts or authorship arrangements.
  • Image Manipulation: Inappropriate alteration of images, figures, or visual data that misrepresents research findings.

10. Allegations and Investigations

The Scientific Publishing Center and its journals shall investigate credible allegations of misconduct regardless of the source of the allegation, the time elapsed since publication, or the status of the manuscript. All investigations shall be conducted in accordance with the COPE flowcharts for handling research and publication misconduct, available at https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts. Investigations shall involve all relevant parties (authors, editors, reviewers, institutions, funding organisations, or independent experts as appropriate) and shall be conducted fairly, confidentially, impartially, and promptly.

11. Corrective Actions

Where ethical concerns are substantiated, journals may take one or more of the following proportionate actions: request clarification; require corrections; publish corrections or expressions of concern; retract articles; reject submitted manuscripts; suspend consideration of future submissions; or notify relevant institutions or funding agencies.

12. Post-Publication Responsibilities

Publication does not end ethical responsibilities. Authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers share the obligation to correct the scholarly record where necessary. Journals may issue corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or editorial notices when required to preserve the integrity of the published record.

13. Reporting Ethical Concerns

Concerns regarding publication ethics or research integrity may be reported to the Scientific Publishing Center at . All reports shall be handled confidentially and fairly in accordance with this Policy and applicable COPE guidelines.

Related Policies

Policy 2: Authorship and Contributorship

Aligned with: ICMJE Authorship Criteria (2026) | CRediT Contributor Roles Taxonomy (NISO) | COPE Core Practice 2 | Scopus & WoS Transparency Requirements

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes the principles governing authorship, contributorship, corresponding author responsibilities, author identification, and authorship changes for all journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University, ensuring transparency, accountability, fairness, and integrity in the attribution of scholarly contributions.

2. Scope

This Policy applies to all authors, co-authors, corresponding authors, editors, editorial board members, and journal staff, for all manuscript types submitted to journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center.

3. Principles

Authorship shall accurately reflect intellectual and scholarly contributions. All contributors shall receive appropriate recognition. No individual shall be listed as an author without qualifying for authorship. No qualifying contributor shall be excluded from authorship. Authorship carries both credit and accountability.

4. Authorship Criteria (ICMJE)

An individual must satisfy all four of the following ICMJE criteria to qualify as an author:

  • Criterion 1: Substantial Contribution: Substantial contribution to one or more of the following: conception or design of the work; acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; development of new software; or substantive creation of the work.
  • Criterion 2: Drafting or Critical Revision: Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content.
  • Criterion 3: Final Approval: Review and approval of the final version of the manuscript prior to submission and publication.
  • Criterion 4: Accountability: Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including the accuracy and integrity of any part of the work.

Individuals who meet some but not all four criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section rather than listed as authors.

5. Contributors Who Do Not Meet Authorship Criteria

Individuals who do not satisfy all four authorship criteria shall not be listed as authors. Such individuals, including those providing administrative support, technical assistance, language editing, general supervision, or routine data collection without intellectual contribution, may be recognised in the Acknowledgements section, with their consent.

6. Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is the primary contact between the journal and all co-authors throughout the submission, peer review, revision, and publication process. The corresponding author shall: ensure all listed authors qualify for authorship; ensure no qualified author has been omitted; obtain approval from all co-authors before submission; manage all communications with the journal; coordinate revisions and responses to reviewers; confirm the accuracy of all author information; ensure disclosure of all conflicts of interest and funding sources; and ensure compliance with all applicable ethical requirements.

7. Contributorship Statements (CRediT): Required

All manuscripts submitted to journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center are required to include a Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) statement describing the specific contribution of each author. Authors must assign each co-author one or more of the following 14 standardised roles:

  • Conceptualization
  • Methodology
  • Software
  • Validation
  • Formal Analysis
  • Investigation
  • Resources
  • Data Curation
  • Writing – Original Draft
  • Writing – Review and Editing
  • Visualization
  • Supervision
  • Project Administration
  • Funding Acquisition

The CRediT statement shall be submitted at the time of manuscript submission and published as a transparent element of the final article. Manuscripts without a CRediT statement may be returned to authors before peer review. For further information see: https://credit.niso.org/

8. Group and Consortium Authorship

Where research is conducted by a named collaborative group, consortium, study network, or trial group, the group may be listed as author (group authorship). Authors submitting on behalf of a group must identify all individuals who meet the ICMJE authorship criteria and list them either as named individual co-authors or in the Acknowledgements section with a clear description of their contributions. At least one named individual must take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole and be identified as the guarantor of the work. The group name shall appear in the published article in a manner consistent with the journal's citation and indexing requirements.

9. Author Order

The order of authors shall be determined by the authors themselves prior to submission. The journal shall not normally intervene in decisions regarding author order. Disputes regarding author order are the responsibility of the authors and their institutions.

10. Equal Contribution Statements

Where two or more authors have contributed equally to the work, authors may include an equal contribution statement. Such statements shall be disclosed during submission and will be published in the article.

11. Changes to Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission require: a written explanation of the reason for the change; written agreement from all currently listed authors; and written agreement from any author being added or removed. Authorship changes after acceptance will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances and require editor approval and documentation. The journal may suspend processing during an authorship dispute.

12. Authorship Disputes

The Scientific Publishing Center and its journals are not responsible for resolving authorship entitlement disputes. Authors must first attempt resolution among themselves and, where necessary, with their institutions. Journals may suspend editorial processing until a dispute is resolved and may request institutional confirmation before proceeding.

13. Prohibited Authorship Practices

The following practices are prohibited and may constitute research misconduct:

  • Guest Authorship: Listing individuals who did not make a qualifying scholarly contribution.
  • Gift Authorship: Granting authorship as a favour, courtesy, or in recognition of seniority or administrative authority.
  • Honorary Authorship: Listing individuals solely because of their position, reputation, or authority.
  • Ghost Authorship: Failure to acknowledge individuals who made substantial qualifying contributions to the work.
  • Purchased Authorship: Buying, selling, or trading authorship positions.
  • Paper Mill Authorship: Participating in commercial services that produce, sell, or facilitate fraudulent manuscripts or authorship positions.

14. Artificial Intelligence and Authorship

Artificial intelligence systems, generative AI tools, and automated software applications shall not be listed as authors, co-authors, or corresponding authors, as they cannot assume legal and ethical responsibility, approve manuscripts, disclose conflicts of interest, or be held accountable for published work. Any significant use of AI in manuscript preparation must be disclosed in accordance with Policy 4 (Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies).

15. ORCID: Required for Corresponding Authors

Corresponding authors are required to provide a valid ORCID iD at the time of submission. All other authors are strongly encouraged to register for and provide ORCID identifiers. ORCID iDs shall be displayed on the published article and linked to the corresponding ORCID profile. For information on registering for an ORCID iD, see: https://orcid.org/

16. Acknowledgements

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship may be recognised in the Acknowledgements section, with their consent. Examples include individuals providing technical support, statistical consultation, administrative assistance, language editing, or research coordination.

17. Violations

Violations of this Policy, including false authorship claims, undisclosed authorship changes, guest authorship, ghost authorship, purchased authorship, or fraudulent contributor statements, may result in: request for clarification; required corrections; manuscript rejection; suspension of the review process; retraction of published articles; or notification of institutions.

Related Policies

Policy 3: Double-Blind Peer Review

Aligned with: COPE Core Practice 3 | COPE Principles of Transparency (Principle 3) | Scopus Peer Review Transparency Requirements | WoS Editorial Standards

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes the principles, procedures, responsibilities, and standards governing peer review across all journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University, ensuring that peer review is rigorous, fair, objective, transparent, and consistent.

2. Peer Review Model

All journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center shall employ double-blind peer review, under which authors do not know the identity of reviewers and reviewers do not know the identity of authors. Editorial staff shall take reasonable measures to preserve anonymity throughout the review process. All participants shall respect the confidentiality and integrity of the review process.

3. Objectives of Peer Review

Peer review aims to evaluate scholarly quality, assess originality and significance, examine methodological rigour, verify relevance to journal scope, improve manuscript quality, support editorial decision-making, and protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

3A. Target Review Timelines

The Scientific Publishing Center expects journals to manage peer review within the following target timeframes. These represent aspirational standards; actual processing times may vary by manuscript complexity and reviewer availability.

  • Initial Editorial Screening: Completed within 5 business days of submission.
  • Reviewer Invitations Sent: Within 10 business days of a manuscript passing initial editorial screening.
  • Reviewer Reports Due: Reviewers are requested to submit completed reports within 21 days of accepting an invitation.
  • First Decision to Authors: Within 45 days of submission, where possible.
  • Post-Revision Decision: Within 25 days of revised manuscript receipt.

Each journal shall publish its actual average processing times in the Annual Editorial Report in accordance with §17A of this Policy.

4. Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts shall undergo an initial editorial assessment before external review, covering journal scope and relevance, formatting requirements, ethical compliance, originality screening, completeness of submission, and language quality sufficient for review. Editors may reject manuscripts prior to peer review when submissions clearly fail to meet journal requirements.

5. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers shall be selected based on subject expertise, scholarly qualifications, research experience, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest. Editors shall seek to ensure balanced, independent, and objective evaluation. The selection of reviewers is the responsibility of the editorial team. Authors may suggest or exclude reviewers; such suggestions may be considered at editorial discretion.

6. Number of Reviewers

Research and review articles shall normally be evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. Editors may appoint additional reviewers when reviews conflict significantly, specialised expertise is required, ethical concerns arise, or additional evaluation is necessary.

7. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers shall conduct reviews objectively and constructively, evaluate manuscripts based solely on scholarly merit, maintain confidentiality, declare all conflicts of interest, and submit reviews within agreed timelines. Reviewers should focus on originality, relevance, methodological soundness, accuracy, interpretation of results, ethical compliance, and presentation quality.

8. Reviewer Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for review are confidential documents. Reviewers shall not share manuscripts with unauthorised individuals, distribute manuscript content, use unpublished information for personal benefit, retain confidential materials beyond the review process, or upload manuscripts or review materials to publicly accessible artificial intelligence systems.

9. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers shall disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting a review invitation. Reviewers with significant conflicts, including current collaborations, close personal relationships, direct academic competition, institutional affiliations, or financial interests involving the authors, shall decline the invitation. Editors shall manage reviewer conflicts in accordance with Policy 5.

10. Editorial Decision-Making

Editors shall consider reviewer recommendations, scholarly merit, journal scope, methodological rigour, and ethical considerations. Editors are not obligated to follow reviewer recommendations but shall provide reasoned decisions. Editorial decisions shall remain independent and free from external influence, commercial pressure, and conflicts of interest.

11. Editorial Decisions

Possible editorial decisions include: Accept (the manuscript is suitable for publication without further revision); Minor Revision (limited revisions are required); Major Revision (substantive revisions are required before further consideration); and Reject (the manuscript is not suitable for publication in this journal). Editors may request additional rounds of review where necessary.

12. Author Revisions

Authors receiving revision requests shall respond professionally, address all reviewer and editor comments, provide a detailed point-by-point response letter explaining any recommendations not adopted, and submit revised manuscripts within the required timeline. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.

13. Appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions in writing, identifying specific procedural or factual concerns and providing supporting evidence. Appeals shall be handled in accordance with Policy 10. The journal's final decision shall normally conclude the appeal process.

14. Guest Editors and Special Issues

Guest editors shall comply with all peer-review requirements. Guest editors shall not independently accept manuscripts without appropriate editorial oversight, and may not manage the review of manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. The Editor-in-Chief retains responsibility for the integrity of the review process for all issues, including special issues. See Policy 12 for further requirements.

15. Misconduct During Peer Review

Prohibited conduct includes: reviewer identity fraud; fabricated reviewer accounts; manipulation of reviewer recommendations; undisclosed conflicts of interest; breaches of confidentiality; and interference with editorial independence. Suspected misconduct may result in investigation and corrective action under Policy 1.

16. Transparency

Each journal shall publicly disclose on its website: the peer-review model used; a description of the reviewer selection process; the categories of editorial decision; target review timelines; and the publisher's peer-review policies.

17. Annual Editorial Statistics: Mandatory

Each journal shall publish an Annual Editorial Report on its website no later than 31 March of the following calendar year. The report shall include at minimum: total manuscripts received; manuscripts rejected without review; manuscripts sent to external peer review; manuscripts accepted for publication; overall acceptance rate; average time from submission to first decision; average time from acceptance to online publication; and the number of peer reviewers who contributed during the year. The report shall be freely accessible without registration and linked from the journal's About page.

17A. Reviewer Recognition

The Scientific Publishing Center recognises the essential contribution of peer reviewers to scholarly quality. Journals are encouraged to acknowledge reviewer contributions through participation in recognised reviewer recognition platforms such as Web of Science Reviewer Recognition (Clarivate). Reviewer recognition shall be offered with the explicit consent of the reviewer and shall not compromise double-blind confidentiality. Journals may issue formal certificates of peer review activity upon a reviewer's request.

Related Policies

Policy 4: Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies

Aligned with: COPE Position Statement on AI (2023) | STM Generative AI Guidelines (2023) | ICMJE Recommendations §II.A.1 (2026) | Scopus & WoS Transparency Requirements

1. Purpose

The Scientific Publishing Center recognises the growing role of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and other emerging technologies in research, scholarly communication, and publishing. This Policy establishes principles and requirements governing the responsible, transparent, ethical, and accountable use of AI technologies in scholarly publishing.

2. Scope

This Policy applies to all authors, co-authors, corresponding authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, guest editors, journal staff, and all content submitted to journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center.

3. Principles

The use of artificial intelligence shall be governed by the principles of transparency, accountability, accuracy, integrity, confidentiality, human oversight, and responsible use. Human authors remain fully responsible for all submitted and published content regardless of any AI-assisted processes.

4. Permitted Uses of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI tools for legitimate scholarly purposes, including language improvement and grammar correction, editing assistance, translation support, coding assistance, data organisation, literature discovery, and data visualisation. The use of AI shall not compromise the integrity, originality, validity, or reliability of the work. Authors remain fully responsible for accuracy, originality, citations, data integrity, ethical compliance, and all conclusions.

5. Mandatory Disclosure of AI Use

Authors shall disclose all significant use of AI technologies during manuscript preparation. Examples requiring disclosure include generation of text or substantial passages, creation of figures or images, statistical analyses, coding assistance, data interpretation, and translation beyond routine language editing. Routine spelling and grammar correction does not require disclosure.

AI use disclosure shall be included in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript, in accordance with ICMJE Recommendations (2026, §II.A.1). The disclosure shall specify: the AI tool used (name and version); the purpose for which it was used; and the extent of its use. For example: "The authors used [Tool Name, Version X] to assist with [specific purpose]. The authors reviewed and verified all AI-generated content and take full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the submitted work."

6. AI and Authorship

Artificial intelligence systems shall not be listed as authors, co-authors, or corresponding authors. AI systems cannot take responsibility for published work, approve manuscripts, disclose conflicts of interest, or assume accountability for research integrity. Authorship is limited exclusively to human contributors who satisfy all requirements of Policy 2.

7. AI-Generated Text

Authors may use AI-generated text only when accuracy is verified against primary sources, appropriate disclosure is provided, and continuous human oversight is maintained. Authors shall review all AI-generated content before submission. The submission of unverified AI-generated content is prohibited and may constitute research misconduct.

8. AI-Generated Images and Figures

The use of AI-generated images, figures, or illustrations shall be disclosed when such content forms part of the submitted work. Authors shall ensure that AI-generated content does not infringe intellectual property rights, is not misleading, and accurately represents the underlying research.

9. AI and Hallucinations: Fabricated References

Artificial intelligence systems may generate inaccurate, fabricated, or non-existent references, citations, quotations, statistics, or data. Authors shall verify all facts, data, references, citations, and quotations generated by AI tools against primary sources before submission. Submission of fabricated references or misleading AI-generated content may constitute research misconduct under Policy 1.

10. Reviewer Use of AI

Reviewers shall maintain strict confidentiality. Reviewers shall not upload manuscripts, reviewer reports, or supplementary materials to publicly accessible AI systems. The use of AI during peer review shall not compromise confidentiality, objectivity, independence, or integrity. Reviewers remain solely responsible for the content of their reviews.

11. Editor Use of AI

Editors may use AI-assisted tools for limited purposes including language support, workflow management, administrative screening, similarity detection, and metadata enhancement. Editors shall not delegate editorial judgment to AI systems. All editorial decisions shall be made exclusively by qualified human editors.

12. AI in Editorial Decision-Making

Artificial intelligence systems shall not make final editorial decisions, accept or reject manuscripts, override reviewer recommendations, or replace editorial oversight. Editorial responsibility remains exclusively with human editors.

13. Violations

Violations include: failure to disclose significant AI use; listing AI as an author; submission of unverified AI-generated content; submission of fabricated AI-generated references; use of AI in ways that compromise confidentiality. Violations may result in request for clarification, required corrections, manuscript rejection, suspension of processing, retraction of published content, or referral for investigation.

Related Policies

Policy 5: Conflict of Interest, Funding, and Transparency

Aligned with: ICMJE Recommendations §II.B (2026): 3-year disclosure window | COPE Core Practice 5 | Scopus & WoS Transparency Requirements

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes requirements for the disclosure and management of conflicts of interest, funding sources, sponsorship arrangements, financial relationships, and other factors that may influence the conduct, reporting, review, or publication of scholarly work.

2. Scope

This Policy applies to all authors, co-authors, corresponding authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, guest editors, journal staff, and publisher representatives throughout the entire publication process.

3. Principles

The Scientific Publishing Center is guided by transparency, objectivity, accountability, fairness, integrity, and editorial independence. Disclosure of a conflict of interest does not necessarily prevent participation in scholarly publishing activities; however, undisclosed conflicts may compromise the integrity of the publication process.

4. Definition of Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest (COI) exists when personal, professional, institutional, financial, political, ideological, academic, or other considerations could reasonably be perceived as influencing an individual's judgment, objectivity, or responsibilities. Both actual and perceived conflicts of interest shall be disclosed.

5. Author Disclosure Requirements: Three-Year Period

Authors are required to disclose all financial and non-financial interests that have existed within three years prior to the date of manuscript submission and that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the submitted work. This obligation applies regardless of whether the author believes the relationship has in fact influenced the work. Disclosures shall be made at the time of submission and updated if circumstances change before publication.

Where an author has no relevant interests to disclose, the manuscript shall state: "The authors declare no competing interests."

6. Types of Author Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include, but are not limited to:

  • Financial Interests: Employment, consultancy, honoraria, stock ownership, equity interests, royalties, patents, licensing agreements, and paid expert testimony related to the subject of the work.
  • Professional Relationships: Current collaborations, joint research projects, supervisory or advisory relationships with co-authors or competing researchers.
  • Institutional Relationships: Institutional affiliations, sponsorship, or ownership interests that could influence the work.
  • Personal Relationships: Family relationships, close personal relationships, or ongoing personal disputes with individuals who may be affected by the work.
  • Academic Competition: Direct academic competition, competing research programmes, or competing funding applications in the same subject area.

7. Funding Disclosure

Authors shall disclose all sources of funding associated with the reported research. Funding disclosures shall identify the funding organisation, grant number where applicable, funding programme, and relevant project information. Where funders had no involvement in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or publication decisions, authors are encouraged to include the statement: "The funding organisation had no role in the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or publication of this research." Funding disclosures shall be published in the article.

8. Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers shall disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting a review assignment. Conflicts include current collaborations with authors, close institutional or personal relationships, financial interests, or direct academic competition. Reviewers with significant conflicts shall decline the review invitation.

9. Editor Conflicts of Interest

Editors shall disclose conflicts that may affect editorial decision-making and shall recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where such conflicts exist. Where recusal occurs, editorial responsibility shall be transferred to another qualified editor, and the recusal shall be documented.

10. Editorial Board and Guest Editor Conflicts

Editorial board members and guest editors shall disclose relevant conflicts of interest and shall not participate in decisions involving manuscripts where significant conflicts exist. Guest editors shall not make final publication decisions regarding manuscripts in which they have a conflict.

11. Transparency Statements in Published Articles

Published articles shall include, where applicable: a Funding Statement; a Conflict of Interest Statement; Acknowledgements; a Data Availability Statement; an Ethical Approval Statement; and an Informed Consent Statement. These statements promote transparency and accountability.

12. Failure to Disclose

Failure to disclose relevant conflicts of interest is a breach of publication ethics. Where undisclosed conflicts are identified, journals may request clarification, publish corrections, issue editorial notices, conduct investigations, or retract articles where appropriate.

13. Advertising and Commercial Relationships

Advertising, sponsorship, and commercial activities shall be clearly separated from editorial activities and shall not influence editorial decisions, peer review, content selection, or publication scheduling. The Scientific Publishing Center and its journals maintain editorial independence from all advertisers and commercial partners.

Related Policies

Policy 6: Human, Animal, Clinical, and Consent Ethics

Aligned with: Declaration of Helsinki (WMA, 2013) | ICMJE Recommendations §II.E (2026) | ARRIVE 2.0 (2020) | COPE Core Practices | EQUATOR Network

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes the ethical requirements applicable to research involving human participants, animals, clinical data, biological materials, personal information, and sensitive datasets, submitted to journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Scope

This Policy applies to research involving human participants, human biological materials, personal data, patient information, clinical studies, clinical trials, animal subjects, and sensitive datasets. It applies to all manuscript types reporting original research.

3. Core Ethical Principles and Standards

All research submitted to journals of the Scientific Publishing Center shall be conducted in accordance with: the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, as revised in 2013); the Belmont Report principles of respect for persons, beneficence, and justice; applicable national and institutional ethical and legal requirements; and the rights, dignity, safety, and welfare of all research participants. The rights and welfare of research participants shall take precedence over research objectives at all times.

4. Ethical Approval

Where applicable, research shall have received approval from an appropriate ethics committee, institutional review board (IRB), research ethics committee, or equivalent authority before commencement of the study. Authors shall provide in the manuscript the name of the approving body, the approval reference number, and the date of approval. Editors may request supporting documentation. Research that fails to meet ethical approval requirements may be rejected regardless of scientific merit.

5. Human Participant Research and Declaration of Helsinki

Research involving human participants shall comply with the ethical standards established in the Declaration of Helsinki. Authors shall confirm in the manuscript that: all procedures were approved by a named ethics committee or IRB; participants were treated ethically; research was conducted responsibly; and risks were appropriately managed. The name of the approving body, approval number, and approval date shall be stated in the Methods section of the manuscript.

6. Informed Consent

Informed consent from research participants shall be obtained where required by applicable ethical and legal standards. Participants shall be provided with sufficient information regarding the purpose of the study, procedures involved, potential risks and benefits, voluntary participation, and the right to withdraw without consequence. Authors shall retain evidence of consent and provide confirmation when requested by editors. For case reports, clinical images, videos, or other patient-related content, appropriate written consent shall be obtained and confirmed in the manuscript.

7. Privacy and Confidentiality

Researchers shall protect the privacy and confidentiality of all research participants. Personal information shall be handled in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Identifiable personal information shall not be published unless scientifically necessary and appropriate consent has been obtained. Patient anonymity must be protected in all clinical reports.

8. Vulnerable Populations

Research involving vulnerable populations, including children and minors, elderly individuals with diminished capacity, individuals with disabilities, patients with impaired decision-making capacity, economically vulnerable populations, and institutionalised individuals, requires additional ethical safeguards. Authors shall demonstrate compliance with applicable requirements.

9. Clinical Research Standards

Clinical studies shall comply with applicable ethical, legal, and professional standards. Authors shall disclose ethical approval information, relevant regulatory approvals, and trial registration information as required.

10. Clinical Trial Registration: Mandatory

Prospective registration of all interventional clinical trials is mandatory, in accordance with ICMJE Recommendations. Trials must be registered in a recognised registry before the enrolment of the first participant. The trial registration number and registry name shall be included in the abstract of all submitted and published manuscripts. Manuscripts reporting unregistered interventional trials will not be considered for publication.

Recognised registries include: ClinicalTrials.gov; ISRCTN Registry; WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; Saudi Clinical Trials Registry; and other WHO-approved national and international registries.

11. Animal Research: ARRIVE 2.0

Research involving animals shall be conducted and reported in accordance with the ARRIVE 2.0 (Animals in Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments) guidelines. Authors shall confirm that: appropriate ethical approval was obtained from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or equivalent authority; the approving body and approval reference are named in the manuscript; animal welfare standards were followed; procedures minimised pain, distress, and suffering in accordance with the 3Rs principle (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement); and applicable national and institutional regulations were observed. The completed ARRIVE 2.0 checklist shall be submitted as a supplementary file alongside the manuscript.

12. Biological Materials and Specimens

Research involving human or animal biological samples shall comply with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements. Authors shall disclose any approvals or permissions required for the collection, storage, transfer, or use of biological materials.

13. Sensitive Data and Secondary Data

Authors using sensitive datasets, personal information, or secondary data sources shall ensure appropriate permissions have been obtained, ethical obligations have been met, confidentiality has been protected, and applicable regulations have been followed.

14. Required Ethical Statements in Published Articles

Where applicable, published articles shall include the following statements: Ethical Approval Statement (naming the IRB/ethics committee, approval number, and date); Informed Consent Statement; Animal Ethics Statement (IACUC approval, ARRIVE 2.0 compliance); Clinical Trial Registration Statement (registry name and number); and Data Protection Statement.

15. Reporting Standards for Clinical and Biomedical Research

Authors reporting clinical and biomedical research shall follow the applicable reporting guidelines from the EQUATOR Network. Applicable guidelines include: CONSORT 2025 (randomised controlled trials); PRISMA 2020 (systematic reviews and meta-analyses); STROBE (observational epidemiological studies); STARD 2015 (diagnostic accuracy studies); CARE (case reports). See Policy 16 for full requirements.

16. Research Misconduct in Human and Animal Research

The following are serious ethical violations: absence of required ethical approval; fabricated or misrepresented approvals; failure to obtain required informed consent; unauthorised use of personal data; breach of participant confidentiality; and inhumane treatment of animals. Such violations may result in rejection, investigation, correction, retraction, or referral to relevant institutions.

Related Policies

Policy 7: Open Access, Copyright, Licensing, and Self-Archiving

Aligned with: DOAJ Criteria | Creative Commons 4.0 Licences | cOAlition S Plan S Requirements | NIH Zero-Embargo Policy (January 2025) | Crossref Metadata Standards | Jisc's Open Policy Finder

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes the framework governing open access publishing, copyright ownership, licensing, reuse rights, and self-archiving practices across all journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Open Access Principles

The Scientific Publishing Center supports the principle that scholarly research should be freely discoverable, accessible, and available to the global research community without subscription barriers. Published content shall be freely accessible online. Journals shall clearly state their access model on their websites.

3. Copyright Ownership

Unless otherwise specified by individual journal policy or publishing agreement, authors retain copyright in their published work. Authors grant the journal and the Scientific Publishing Center a non-exclusive, worldwide licence to publish, distribute, preserve, and make the work publicly accessible under the applicable Creative Commons licence. Copyright statements shall appear on journal websites, article landing pages, and published article PDFs.

4. Licensing: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0

The preferred licence for journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center is the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0). Under CC BY 4.0, users are free to share and adapt the work for any purpose, provided appropriate credit is given to the original authors, a link to the licence is provided, and any changes made are indicated.

Individual journals may adopt alternative Creative Commons licences where justified by disciplinary, legal, or strategic considerations, provided the applicable licence is clearly disclosed on the journal website and in published articles. The applicable licence shall be clearly displayed on journal websites, article landing pages, and published article PDFs, including the Creative Commons licence icon, licence name (e.g., "CC BY 4.0"), and a hyperlink to the full licence deed.

5. Reuse of Published Content

Subject to the applicable Creative Commons licence, users may read, download, copy, distribute, print, share, cite, and link to published content, provided appropriate attribution to the original work and source is given.

6. Third-Party Materials

Authors are responsible for obtaining necessary permissions to reproduce third-party copyrighted materials (images, figures, tables, maps, photographs, multimedia content) and for ensuring that third-party materials are lawfully used and appropriately acknowledged.

7. Self-Archiving Version Policy

Authors published in journals of the Scientific Publishing Center may self-archive their work as follows:

  • Submitted Version (preprint): The original manuscript before peer review may be deposited immediately upon submission in any preprint server (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv, SSRN, OSF Preprints) or open repository without restriction.
  • Accepted Author Manuscript (AAM): The peer-reviewed version prior to copyediting and typesetting may be deposited immediately upon acceptance in institutional repositories or subject repositories, under the applicable Creative Commons licence, with no embargo.
  • Published Version of Record (VoR): The final typeset, DOI-assigned article may be deposited immediately upon publication in any repository under the applicable Creative Commons licence, with no embargo.

No embargo period applies to any version for journals operating under a CC BY 4.0 licence. Authors are encouraged to update all repository records with the DOI of the Version of Record upon publication.

8. Funder Open Access Mandates: Plan S and NIH

The Scientific Publishing Center recognises the open access requirements of major research funders. Journals operating under a CC BY 4.0 licence and providing immediate open access are compliant with:

  • cOAlition S / Plan S: Journals applying CC BY 4.0 and providing immediate OA satisfy the requirements of Plan S, covering Wellcome Trust, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), the European Research Council, and over 28 other major funders.
  • NIH Zero-Embargo Policy (USA): Effective January 2025, all peer-reviewed manuscripts arising from NIH funding must be deposited in PubMed Central (PMC) immediately upon acceptance with no embargo. Journals published under a CC BY 4.0 licence with immediate OA satisfy this requirement. Authors should consult their institution's research office to confirm compliance.

Authors funded by organisations with OA mandates are responsible for ensuring that their publication arrangements comply with their funder's requirements. The Scientific Publishing Center will provide authors with the Version of Record and metadata upon request to facilitate funder repository deposits.

9. Preprints

The Scientific Publishing Center supports the responsible use of preprint services. Authors may post manuscripts as preprints prior to journal submission unless a journal explicitly states otherwise. Posting a manuscript as a preprint shall not normally constitute prior publication. Authors shall disclose preprint posting during submission, providing the preprint server name, DOI or identifier, and URL where available. Upon publication, authors shall update preprint records with citation information, DOI, and a link to the Version of Record.

10. Digital Preservation: Mandatory Enrolment

All published scholarly content of the Scientific Publishing Center shall be preserved through the King Abdulaziz University Institutional Repository, CLOCKSS, and Portico. The Institutional Repository serves as the primary long-term preservation platform for all content published under the auspices of the University. The preservation arrangements shall be named on each journal's website and included in journal metadata. Preservation enrolment shall be reviewed periodically to ensure continued service availability and content integrity.

11. Version of Record

The journal-published article shall constitute the official Version of Record. Where multiple versions exist, the Version of Record shall serve as the authoritative version for citation, indexing, and scholarly reference.

12. Licence Changes

Licences applied at the time of publication shall normally remain in effect permanently. Requests to alter licensing arrangements after publication shall be considered only under exceptional circumstances and in accordance with applicable legal and contractual requirements.

Related Policies

Policy 8: Article Processing Charges and Publication Fees

Aligned with: COPE Principles of Transparency (Principle 8) | DOAJ Fee Transparency Requirements | Scopus Source Evaluation Criteria

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes requirements governing the transparent disclosure, fair assessment, administration, waiver, and communication of publication-related fees for all journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Principles

All publication fees shall be: transparent and publicly disclosed before submission; fair and consistently applied; clearly communicated in the journal's language. Hidden fees are prohibited. Editorial decisions shall not be influenced by the payment or non-payment of any fee.

3. Fee Transparency

Each journal shall clearly disclose on its website whether it charges submission fees, article processing charges (APCs), publication fees, page charges, colour charges, or any other publication-related fees.

4. No-Fee Journals

Where a journal does not charge any fees, the journal shall display the following statement prominently on its website and in its Author Guidelines:

"This journal does not charge submission fees, publication fees, article processing charges (APCs), page charges, or any other publication-related fees."

5. Fee-Charging Journals

Where fees are charged, the journal shall publicly disclose: fee type; fee amount; currency; payment stage; payment method; applicable taxes; waiver policy; exemption policy; and refund policy. Fee schedules shall be accurate and regularly updated.

6. Editorial Independence from Fees

Editorial decisions shall be based solely on scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigour, relevance, and ethical compliance. Editors, reviewers, and editorial board members shall not receive incentives linked to manuscript acceptance. Acceptance decisions shall not be influenced by the payment or non-payment of APCs.

7. Waivers and Exemptions

Where journals charge APCs, waiver or exemption mechanisms may be established based on factors such as financial hardship, institutional circumstances, funding limitations, or publisher-approved programmes. Eligibility criteria shall be transparent and publicly available.

8. Changes to Fee Structures

Changes to publication fees shall be approved through appropriate governance processes, publicly announced before implementation, and shall not apply retroactively to manuscripts already under review unless clearly communicated and agreed.

9. Institutional and Funder Arrangements

Where journals participate in institutional read-and-publish agreements, transformative agreements, or funder-supported open access programmes, such arrangements shall be disclosed transparently on the journal website and shall not influence editorial decisions.

10. Sponsored Publications

Where publication costs are supported by institutions, research projects, grants, or sponsors, such arrangements shall be disclosed. Sponsors shall not influence peer review, editorial decisions, or publication outcomes.

Related Policies

Policy 9: Research Data, Reproducibility, and Preprints

Aligned with: FAIR Data Principles | COPE Core Practices | Scopus & WoS Open Science Expectations | DOAJ Requirements

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes requirements governing research data availability, reproducibility, code sharing, and preprint dissemination across all journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University, in support of transparency, reproducibility, and scholarly integrity.

2. Scope

This Policy applies to research articles, review articles, data papers, technical reports, computational studies, empirical studies, clinical research, social science research, and all other manuscript types reporting original findings.

3. Data Availability Statements: Required

All manuscripts reporting original empirical research submitted to journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center shall include a Data Availability Statement (DAS). The DAS shall appear as a distinct, labelled section of the published article. The DAS shall specify one of the following:

  • Data are available in a named public repository. provide the repository name, persistent identifier (DOI or URL), and access conditions..
  • Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. provide a contact mechanism..
  • Data are contained within the article and/or supplementary materials.
  • Data sharing is not applicable: a brief explanation of restrictions (e.g., participant privacy, legal constraints, national security, or disciplinary norms) shall be provided..
  • No new data were generated (for review articles, meta-analyses, and similar manuscript types).

Manuscripts without a DAS may be returned to authors before peer review. Editors shall consider DAS quality as part of manuscript evaluation.

4. Data Sharing and Repositories

Authors are encouraged to make research data openly available whenever ethical, legal, and intellectual property considerations permit. Recommended repositories include: Zenodo; Figshare; Dryad; Open Science Framework; institutional repositories; and discipline-specific repositories. Repository records should include a DOI where possible.

5. Sensitive and Restricted Data

The Scientific Publishing Center recognises that certain data cannot be shared openly. Restrictions may apply where data involve personal information, patient data, national security considerations, confidential commercial information, cultural sensitivities, or legal obligations. Authors shall explain all restrictions transparently in the DAS.

6. Reproducibility

Authors shall provide sufficient methodological detail to enable understanding, verification, and evaluation of reported findings. Where feasible, authors shall provide methods, protocols, analytical procedures, data processing workflows, software information, and computational environments. The level of reproducibility detail expected may vary by discipline.

7. Software and Source Code

For computational research, authors are encouraged to provide access to source code, scripts, algorithms, and computational workflows through a recognised repository. Software version, programming language, and key dependencies shall be documented in the Methods section.

8. Data Citation

Research data should be cited appropriately in the reference list when data are reused or obtained from repositories, or constitute a significant scholarly output. Data citations should include sufficient information to identify and locate the dataset, including persistent identifier.

9. Preprints

The Scientific Publishing Center supports the responsible use of preprint services. Authors may post manuscripts as preprints before journal submission unless a journal explicitly states otherwise. Preprint posting shall not normally constitute prior publication. Authors shall disclose preprint posting at submission (providing server name, DOI/identifier, and URL) and update preprint records with the published VoR DOI and citation upon publication.

10. FAIR Data Principles

The Scientific Publishing Center encourages authors to manage and share research data in accordance with the FAIR Data Principles: data should be Findable (with persistent identifiers and rich metadata), Accessible (retrievable via open protocols), Interoperable (using community standards), and Reusable (with clear licences and provenance documentation).

Related Policies

Policy 10: Retractions, Corrections, Complaints, and Appeals

Aligned with: COPE Retraction Guidelines (2019) | COPE Core Practice 10 | ICMJE Recommendations | Scopus & WoS Integrity Requirements

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes procedures governing corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, editorial complaints, publication complaints, and appeals of editorial decisions across all journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Post-Publication Responsibility

Publication does not terminate ethical responsibilities. Authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers share responsibility for maintaining the accuracy and integrity of published content. Where concerns arise after publication, journals shall take proportionate corrective action.

3. Corrections

Corrections (Errata) shall be issued for published content containing errors that affect the accuracy, clarity, or completeness of the scholarly record but do not invalidate the overall findings. Examples include: author information errors; affiliation errors; funding statement errors; figure or table errors; citation errors; and production errors. Corrections shall be: clearly identified and labelled; linked bidirectionally to the original article via DOI; permanently accessible; and clearly describe what was changed and why.

4. Retractions

Retractions shall be issued when a publication is substantially unreliable due to misconduct or serious error affecting the validity of conclusions. The purpose of retraction is to correct the scholarly record, not to punish authors.

Grounds for retraction include: confirmed data fabrication or falsification; plagiarism; duplicate publication; serious methodological errors invalidating conclusions; absent ethical approval where required; fraudulent peer review; image manipulation materially affecting conclusions; and established authorship fraud.

Before retraction, journals shall review available evidence, seek explanations from relevant parties, conduct an appropriate investigation, and consult institutions where necessary, in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

Retraction notices shall: be publicly accessible and freely available; clearly identify the retracted article with full citation and DOI; state the reason(s) for retraction; be linked bidirectionally to the original article; and remain permanently available. Retraction notices shall not be removed, suppressed, or altered after publication regardless of requests from authors, co-authors, institutions, funding organisations, or any third party. Where the full text of the original article is removed for legal reasons, the bibliographic metadata and retraction notice shall remain visible at the original URL and DOI.

5. Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when substantial concerns exist but available evidence is insufficient to support a correction or retraction (e.g., during an ongoing institutional investigation). Expressions of Concern shall be reviewed as investigations progress and may result in no further action, a correction, or a retraction.

6. Article Removal

Removal of published content shall occur only in exceptional circumstances, such as legal requirements, court orders, serious privacy violations, or immediate risks to public safety. Where removal occurs, a public notice explaining the removal shall normally remain at the original URL and DOI.

7. Editorial and Publication Complaints

Complaints regarding editorial conduct, peer-review processes, ethical concerns, publication practices, or policy compliance may be submitted in writing to the journal or to the Scientific Publishing Center. Complaints shall be acknowledged promptly, evaluated objectively, handled confidentially where appropriate, and investigated proportionately.

8. Appeals of Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a written appeal that clearly identifies specific procedural or factual concerns and provides supporting evidence. Appeals are not intended to provide repeated opportunities for reconsideration. Editors may uphold the original decision, seek additional review, or reconsider the manuscript. The journal's final decision shall normally conclude the appeal process.

9. Publisher-Level Escalation

Where concerns involve serious procedural irregularities, alleged editorial misconduct, significant unmanaged conflicts of interest, or serious policy violations, the matter may be referred to the Scientific Publishing Center for review. The Scientific Publishing Center may provide guidance and oversight while respecting editorial independence.

10. Record Keeping

Journals shall maintain appropriate records relating to corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, complaints, appeals, and investigations, in accordance with applicable policies and legal requirements.

Related Policies

Policy 11: Digital Publishing, Metadata, DOI, ORCID, Website Transparency, and Preservation

Aligned with: Crossref DOI Best Practices | ORCID Publisher Recommendations | ROR | JATS XML | DOAJ Metadata Requirements | WCAG 2.1 AA | GDPR | KAU Institutional Repository

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes standards governing digital publishing infrastructure, metadata quality, persistent identifiers, website transparency, indexing readiness, accessibility, data protection, and preservation practices for journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs)

All published scholarly articles shall be assigned a persistent Digital Object Identifier (DOI) registered through Crossref or another authorised registration agency. DOIs shall uniquely identify content, resolve permanently to active article pages, and be displayed prominently on article landing pages, article PDFs, and citation information pages. DOIs shall be included in all metadata submitted to indexing, discovery, and preservation services. Reference lists are encouraged to include DOIs for cited works where available.

3. ORCID Identifiers: Required for Corresponding Authors

Corresponding authors are required to provide a valid ORCID iD at the time of submission. All other authors are strongly encouraged to register for and provide ORCID identifiers. ORCID iDs shall be displayed on published articles and linked to the corresponding ORCID profile. Journals are encouraged to implement ORCID auto-update functionality so that publications appear automatically on author ORCID profiles. For ORCID registration, see: https://orcid.org/

4. ROR Identifiers for Author Affiliations

Authors are encouraged to provide Research Organization Registry (ROR) identifiers for their institutional affiliations at submission, to support accurate affiliation disambiguation and metadata interoperability. See: https://ror.org/

5. Metadata Standards

Accurate and complete metadata are essential for discoverability, indexing, and citation tracking. Article metadata shall include, where applicable: article title; author names; author affiliations; ORCID identifiers; abstract; keywords; DOI; publication date; volume; issue; page range or article number; funding information; licence information; and reference list. Metadata shall be maintained in formats compatible with recognised standards including JATS XML for full-text content. Metadata errors shall be corrected promptly when identified.

6. Mandatory Journal Website Information

Each journal website shall clearly display without requiring registration:

  • Journal title and ISSN(s) (print and electronic)
  • Publisher name, address, and contact information
  • Aims and scope
  • Editorial board with institutional affiliations and countries
  • Author guidelines and submission instructions
  • Peer review model and process description
  • Publisher Policies (link to this document)
  • Open access status and copyright statement
  • Licensing information (with Creative Commons icon and link)
  • APC information (or explicit no-fee statement)
  • Indexing and abstracting information (accurate and current)
  • Current issue and full archive
  • Annual editorial statistics report
  • Preservation service information
  • Publication dates (received, revised, accepted, published) on all article pages

7. Editorial Board Transparency

Journal websites shall publicly display the Editor-in-Chief, all editorial board members, their institutional affiliations, and countries of affiliation. Information shall be kept current and accurate. Individuals who have left the editorial board shall be removed promptly.

8. Article-Level Transparency Elements

All published article landing pages shall display: DOI (prominent, hyperlinked); Creative Commons licence badge, text, and hyperlink; received/accepted/published dates; author ORCIDs (hyperlinked); CRediT contributorship statement; conflict of interest statement; funding acknowledgement; data availability statement; and article type label.

9. Digital Preservation: Mandatory

All published content of the Scientific Publishing Center shall be preserved through the King Abdulaziz University Institutional Repository, which serves as the primary long-term preservation platform for all University publications. The Institutional Repository shall be named on each journal's website and referenced in journal metadata. Preservation arrangements shall be verified and reviewed periodically to ensure content integrity and continued accessibility.

10. Indexing Accuracy

Journals shall accurately disclose all current indexing and abstracting services. Claims regarding indexing status shall be accurate, verifiable, and current. Misleading or false indexing claims are strictly prohibited.

11. Web Accessibility: WCAG 2.1 AA

Journal websites and article content shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level AA. Minimum requirements include: all images have meaningful alternative text; colour contrast ratio of at least 4.5:1 for normal text; site navigable by keyboard; PDFs are tagged for accessibility; and video or audio content has captions or transcripts.

12. Data Protection and Privacy (GDPR Compliance)

Where journals collect and process personal data from authors, reviewers, or readers who are located in the European Economic Area (EEA), the Scientific Publishing Center shall comply with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and applicable national data protection laws. A privacy notice shall be published on the journal website stating: what personal data are collected; the legal basis for processing; data retention periods; and user rights (access, rectification, erasure, portability, and objection). Cookie consent mechanisms shall be implemented where required. Third-party service providers (manuscript submission systems, analytics tools) shall be subject to appropriate data processor agreements.

Related Policies

Policy 12: Special Issues, Supplements, and Guest Editors

Aligned with: COPE Core Practice 9 | Scopus & WoS Special Issue Governance Requirements | DOAJ Requirements

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes the governance, approval, management, and quality assurance requirements for special issues, thematic collections, supplements, and guest-edited publications of journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Principles

All special issues shall adhere to the principles of scholarly quality, editorial independence, transparency, research integrity, fairness, accountability, and consistency. Special issues shall meet the same standards applicable to regular journal content without exception.

3. Approval of Special Issues

Special issues shall be approved before any announcement or solicitation of manuscripts. Approval documentation shall include: a description of the topic and academic justification; proposed guest editor(s) and their qualifications; editorial oversight arrangements; proposed timeline; and expected number of articles. Approval authority shall be determined by the journal's governance structure and applicable SPC requirements.

4. Selection and Responsibilities of Guest Editors

Guest editors shall be selected based on scholarly expertise, publication record, editorial experience, subject knowledge, and professional standing. Guest editors shall: assist with developing the issue concept and soliciting submissions; recommend qualified reviewers; coordinate editorial processes; and recommend editorial decisions, always in accordance with all Publisher Policies. Guest editors shall be free of conflicts of interest with the authors of manuscripts submitted to the issue.

5. Editorial Authority: Editor-in-Chief Responsibility

Guest editors shall not possess unrestricted editorial authority. The Editor-in-Chief retains ultimate responsibility for editorial oversight, peer-review integrity, ethical compliance, and all final publication decisions. Editorial responsibility cannot be delegated entirely to guest editors.

6. Peer Review for Special Issues

All manuscripts submitted to special issues shall undergo double-blind peer review in accordance with Policy 3, with the same standards applied to regular submissions. No manuscript shall receive preferential treatment because it belongs to a special issue. Guest editors shall not independently accept manuscripts.

7. Guest Editor Manuscripts and Conflicts

Where guest editors submit manuscripts to their own special issue, they shall be recused from managing the review process and influencing editorial decisions for those manuscripts. Independent editorial oversight shall be assigned and documented. Guest editors shall disclose all actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest in accordance with Policy 5.

8. Paper Mill Screening for Special Issues

Given that special issues represent an elevated risk vector for paper mill activity, editors shall apply heightened scrutiny to submissions from special issue calls. All special issue manuscripts shall undergo similarity screening in accordance with Policy 1, §4A. Editors are encouraged to verify author identities, institutional affiliations, and the coherence of submitted manuscripts as part of the initial editorial screening. Evidence of paper mill activity shall be investigated and reported in accordance with Policy 1.

9. Sponsored and Conference-Based Special Issues

Sponsored special issues and supplements shall be clearly identified to readers. Conference-based special issues shall comply with all Publisher Policies. Conference presentation alone does not guarantee publication; all conference papers shall undergo full peer review. Sponsors shall not influence reviewer selection, editorial decisions, acceptance decisions, or publication outcomes.

10. Quality Monitoring

Editors shall monitor acceptance rates, reviewer quality, editorial timelines, and ethical compliance for special issues. Acceptance rates that deviate substantially from the journal's regular acceptance rate shall be investigated. The Editor-in-Chief or Scientific Publishing Center may suspend, modify, or terminate a special issue where ethical concerns arise, editorial standards are not met, or Publisher Policies are violated.

11. Transparency

Journal websites shall clearly identify all planned and current special issues, including guest editor information, sponsorship arrangements, and relevant timelines.

Related Policies

Policy 13: Editorial Independence, Diversity, Inclusion, and Internationalisation

Aligned with: COPE Core Practice 7 | Principles of Transparency (Principle 5: Governing Body) | Scopus Editorial Board Diversity Requirements | WoS International Diversity Criteria

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes the principles and requirements governing editorial independence, diversity, inclusion, international participation, and responsible governance across all journals published under the auspices of King Abdulaziz University.

2. Editorial Independence

Editorial independence is fundamental to scholarly publishing. Editors shall have authority to make editorial decisions without improper influence from publishers, sponsors, advertisers, funding organisations, institutions, political groups, commercial entities, or external stakeholders. Editorial decisions shall be based solely on scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigour, relevance, ethical compliance, and contribution to knowledge.

3. Publisher Responsibilities

The Scientific Publishing Center shall: respect and actively protect editorial independence; support ethical editorial practices; maintain transparent governance; avoid all interference in editorial decisions; and provide publishing infrastructure and support services. The Publisher shall not influence manuscript acceptance or rejection decisions for commercial, institutional, political, or reputational reasons.

4. Editor Responsibilities

Editors shall make impartial editorial decisions, maintain confidentiality, manage conflicts of interest, promote publication ethics, support research integrity, protect the integrity of peer review, and ensure fair treatment of all authors regardless of nationality, race, ethnicity, religion, gender, political views, institutional affiliation, seniority, or personal relationships.

5. Diversity and Inclusion Principles

The Scientific Publishing Center actively promotes diversity and inclusion throughout the publishing process. Academic quality and scholarly merit shall remain the primary criteria for all editorial decisions and appointments; however, journals are expected to actively pursue diversity in editorial board composition, reviewer pools, and author communities.

6. Editorial Board Diversity Targets

Journals are expected to maintain editorial boards that reflect meaningful international participation and geographic, institutional, disciplinary, and professional diversity. As aspirational targets, journals shall aim for: at least 40% of editorial board members to be affiliated with institutions outside Saudi Arabia; representation from at least five different countries; and no single institution to hold more than 30% of editorial board positions. Editorial board composition shall be reviewed annually. Journals shall take proactive steps to recruit qualified international board members where diversity targets are not met.

7. Endogeny Monitoring

To protect against editorial endogeny, the disproportionate publication of articles from the journal's own editorial board members or host institution, journals shall monitor and report the following metrics annually: percentage of published articles authored or co-authored by editorial board members; percentage of published articles authored or co-authored by King Abdulaziz University staff. Where the combined endogeny rate exceeds 20%, the Editor-in-Chief shall implement a corrective action plan, which may include appointing additional external board members and applying additional oversight to board member submissions.

8. Reviewer Diversity

Editors are encouraged to seek peer reviewers from diverse countries, institutions, research traditions, and areas of expertise. Reviewer selection shall prioritise relevant expertise and objectivity.

9. Internationalisation

Journals are expected to strengthen their international profile through: internationally diverse editorial board members; international reviewer pools; promotion of submissions from international researchers; engagement in international academic networks; and pursuit of international indexing. Journals shall clearly communicate their language policy and ensure that English-language abstracts are available for all published content, regardless of the language of the full article.

10. Editorial Appointments

Editorial appointments shall be based on scholarly expertise, professional reputation, editorial experience, subject knowledge, and commitment to ethical publishing. Appointments shall be made through transparent and appropriate governance processes. Appointment letters shall outline expected responsibilities.

11. Academic Freedom

Editors and authors shall be free to pursue and communicate scholarly inquiry within the bounds of research integrity, ethical standards, legal requirements, and journal scope. The Scientific Publishing Center supports responsible academic freedom.

12. Transparency

Journal websites shall clearly disclose: editorial structure and board membership with institutional affiliations and countries; editorial responsibilities; peer review model; Publisher Policies; contact information; and annual editorial statistics including diversity metrics where available.

Related Policies

Policy 14: Direct Marketing and Manuscript Solicitation

Aligned with: COPE Principle 16 (Direct Marketing) | COPE Membership Minimum Criterion | DOAJ Requirements | Anti-Predatory Publishing Standards

1. Purpose

The Scientific Publishing Center is committed to ensuring that all editorial communications, including manuscript solicitation, calls for papers, and promotional materials, are conducted with integrity, transparency, and respect for the scholarly community. This Policy establishes standards for legitimate direct marketing and manuscript solicitation practices, in compliance with COPE Principle 16 (Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing).

2. Scope

This Policy applies to all editorial communications issued by or on behalf of the Scientific Publishing Center and its journals, including invitations to submit manuscripts, calls for papers, special issue announcements, reviewer invitations, editorial board recruitment communications, and promotional materials.

3. Standards for Legitimate Solicitation

All manuscript solicitation and editorial communications shall be:

  • Accurate: Communications shall truthfully represent the journal's scope, indexing status, peer review process, acceptance rates, and publication timelines. No misleading or exaggerated claims shall be made.
  • Transparent: Communications shall clearly identify the journal name, publisher (Scientific Publishing Center, King Abdulaziz University), and the specific purpose of the communication.
  • Appropriate: Communications shall be relevant to the recipient's research area and professional background. Mass unsolicited solicitations to unrelated researchers are prohibited.
  • Professional: Communications shall be respectful in tone, accurate in content, and consistent with the standards of the international scholarly publishing community.
  • Non-Intrusive: Communications shall not be excessive in frequency and shall respect the recipient's preferences.

4. Prohibited Practices

The following practices are strictly prohibited:

  • Unsolicited mass solicitation of manuscript submissions to bulk or purchased mailing lists.
  • Communications that create a false sense of urgency or make inaccurate promises regarding acceptance, processing times, or publication fees.
  • Misrepresentation of journal scope, indexing status, impact metrics, or acceptance rates in solicitation materials.
  • Solicitation of manuscripts for journals not yet established or not actively accepting submissions.
  • Payments or incentives to third parties for soliciting manuscript submissions.
  • Any practice inconsistent with the standards of legitimate scholarly publishing.

5. Opt-Out and Consent

All solicitation communications shall include a clear, conspicuous, and easily accessible mechanism for recipients to opt out of future communications. Opt-out requests shall be honoured promptly. The Scientific Publishing Center shall maintain records of opt-out requests and shall not re-contact individuals who have opted out.

6. Third-Party Marketing Services

The Scientific Publishing Center shall not engage third-party marketing or manuscript solicitation services that operate in ways inconsistent with this Policy. Any contracted service shall comply with applicable data protection laws, COPE Principle 16, and the standards established in this Policy.

7. Reviewer and Editorial Board Invitations

Invitations to serve as peer reviewers or editorial board members shall be addressed personally, shall accurately describe the expected commitment, and shall not misrepresent the prestige or standing of the journal. Reviewer and board invitations shall not include incentives that could compromise the integrity of the editorial process.

8. Compliance and Monitoring

The Scientific Publishing Center shall periodically review its solicitation practices to ensure continued compliance with this Policy and with COPE Principle 16. Any communications found to be non-compliant shall be withdrawn and corrective action taken.

Related Policies

Policy 15: Revenue Sources Transparency

Aligned with: COPE Principle 14 (Revenue Sources) | COPE Membership Minimum Criterion | DOAJ Application Requirements

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes the commitment of the Scientific Publishing Center to transparent disclosure of its funding model and revenue sources, in accordance with COPE Principle 14 (Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing) and DOAJ application requirements. Transparency regarding revenue sources builds trust with authors, readers, reviewers, and the broader scholarly community, and differentiates the Scientific Publishing Center from predatory publishing operations.

2. Publisher Funding Model

The Scientific Publishing Center of King Abdulaziz University is an institutional, mission-driven academic publisher. The Scientific Publishing Center and its journal operations are primarily supported by institutional funding provided by King Abdulaziz University as part of the University's commitment to advancing scholarly communication, supporting high-quality research dissemination, and serving the global research community.

3. Article Processing Charges

Individual journals within the Scientific Publishing Center portfolio may charge Article Processing Charges (APCs) or other publication fees where applicable, as disclosed in Policy 8 and on each journal's website. Where a journal does not charge publication fees, this is explicitly stated on the journal website in accordance with Policy 8, §4.

4. Advertising

The Scientific Publishing Center does not derive editorial revenue from advertising placed within the content of its journals. Where any advertising is displayed, it is clearly separated from editorial content and has no influence on editorial decisions, manuscript acceptance, or the content of published articles.

5. Sponsorship and Institutional Arrangements

Where journals receive external sponsorship, enter into read-and-publish agreements, or participate in funded open access programmes, such arrangements shall be disclosed transparently on the journal website and shall not influence editorial decisions, peer review, or publication outcomes. See also Policy 8, §9.

6. Commercial Independence

All revenue sources, whether institutional funding, APCs, or other arrangements, shall be managed in a manner that preserves editorial independence. Commercial, financial, and institutional interests shall not influence editorial decisions, manuscript acceptance, peer-review processes, or the content of published articles.

7. Public Disclosure

This Policy shall be publicly available on the Scientific Publishing Center website. A summary of the publisher's funding model shall be included on the About the Publisher page of the SPC website and referenced in the information provided to DOAJ and other indexing bodies.

Related Policies

Policy 16: Reporting Standards and Research Transparency

Aligned with: EQUATOR Network Guidelines | ICMJE Recommendations §IV | Scopus & MEDLINE Requirements for Clinical Journals | WoS Editorial Standards

1. Purpose

This Policy establishes mandatory reporting standards for research published in journals of the Scientific Publishing Center, ensuring that all submitted and published research is reported with the transparency, completeness, and methodological clarity necessary for readers to understand, appraise, and reproduce findings. Compliance with internationally recognised reporting guidelines is a condition of publication in all journals published by the Scientific Publishing Center.

2. Scope

This Policy applies to all manuscript types reporting original research, including clinical trials, observational studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, diagnostic accuracy studies, case reports, qualitative research, animal research, and computational studies.

3. EQUATOR Network Reporting Guidelines

Authors are required to follow the applicable reporting guideline from the EQUATOR Network for their study design. The appropriate completed checklist must be submitted alongside the manuscript as a supplementary file. Manuscripts that do not include the completed checklist may be returned to authors before peer review.

Applicable guidelines include, but are not limited to, the following:

4. Statistical Reporting Standards

Authors shall report statistical analyses with sufficient detail to allow independent verification. Statistical reporting shall include: the specific statistical test(s) used and justification for their use; precise p-values (e.g., p = 0.032) rather than threshold comparisons (e.g., p < 0.05); effect sizes and confidence intervals where applicable; sample sizes and power calculations for hypothesis-testing studies; software and version used for analyses; and any deviations from pre-registered analysis plans.

5. Open Materials and Protocols

Authors are encouraged to register study protocols prospectively where applicable (e.g., in the Open Science Framework or in ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical trials). Protocol registration numbers shall be cited in the manuscript. Pre-registered studies shall clearly describe any deviations from the registered protocol and provide justification.

6. Artificial Intelligence Research Reporting

Studies involving the development, evaluation, or application of artificial intelligence or machine learning technologies shall provide sufficient detail regarding: the model architecture and training approach; training, validation, and test datasets (sources, sizes, and characteristics); evaluation metrics and benchmarking against appropriate comparators; limitations and potential sources of bias; and reproducibility information including code availability. Authors reporting AI tools used in clinical or high-stakes decision contexts shall address transparency, explainability, and equity considerations.

7. Reviewer Responsibilities

Peer reviewers of manuscripts reporting original research are expected to assess whether the applicable reporting guideline has been followed and to note any deficiencies in their review. Editors may return manuscripts to authors for completion of reporting checklists before or after peer review.

8. Non-Compliance

Manuscripts submitted without the applicable completed reporting checklist may be returned to authors before peer review. Where non-compliance is identified during review or after acceptance, the editor may require a completed checklist before proceeding. Systematic and unexplained non-compliance with reporting standards may result in rejection.

Related Policies