Publication Ethics

Sriwijaya Journal of Otorhinolaryngology (SJORL), published by Phlox Institute, is a rigorously peer-reviewed, open-access medical journal devoted to advancing clinical and translational knowledge in otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery. The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity in scientific publishing. This statement defines the ethical responsibilities and expected conduct of all parties engaged in the publication process—authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher—and the procedures the journal follows when these standards are not met.

The editorial and ethical policies of SJORL are explicitly aligned with the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing jointly issued by COPE, the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and, for research conduct, the Declaration of Helsinki. Where ethical concerns arise, the journal acts in accordance with the relevant COPE flowcharts and guidance.

1. Duties of the Publisher

Phlox Institute, as publisher, recognises its responsibility to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record and supports the editorial team in fulfilling the standards set out in this statement.

  • Editorial independence. The publisher guarantees that decisions to accept or reject a manuscript rest solely with the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board, on the basis of scientific and clinical merit, and are never influenced by commercial, advertising, or financial considerations.
  • Stewardship of the scholarly record. The publisher ensures the continued availability and integrity of published content through reliable digital preservation and archiving, and works with the editors to issue corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern when required.
  • Governance and oversight. The publisher maintains transparent ownership, governance, and editorial policies, and provides the infrastructure and support necessary for the prompt and fair handling of allegations of misconduct.

2. Duties of Editors

  • Publication decisions and fair play. The Editor-in-Chief holds full responsibility for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts are published. Decisions are guided exclusively by the validity, clinical significance, originality, and scientific merit of the work, and by its relevance to the journal’s scope. Manuscripts are evaluated on intellectual content alone, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, institutional affiliation, or political philosophy.
  • Confidentiality. Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submission must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a competing interest—whether arising from collaborative, competitive, financial, or institutional relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the work. In such cases, the manuscript is reassigned to another qualified editor.
  • Ethical oversight. Editors critically assess the ethical conduct of every study. Research involving human participants must explicitly state approval by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or research ethics committee and conformity with the Declaration of Helsinki; studies involving animals must document approval and adherence to recognised welfare guidelines. Editors may seek additional documentation or expert ethical review where concerns arise.
  • Integrity and investigation of misconduct. When ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted or published manuscript, the editor takes reasonable responsive measures in accordance with COPE guidance. This may include contacting the authors and their institutions, and may result in correction, retraction, or an expression of concern. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour is examined, even when discovered years after publication.
  • Vigilance over the scholarly record. Editors are willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies whenever needed, and act promptly to preserve the accuracy and integrity of the published literature.

3. Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution to editorial decisions. Peer review assists the editor in reaching editorial decisions and, through constructive communication with the author, may assist the author in improving the scientific and clinical accuracy of the manuscript. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the journal’s quality assurance.
  • Promptness. Any reviewer who feels unqualified to assess the research reported in a manuscript, or who knows that prompt review will be impossible, should promptly notify the editor and decline the invitation so that alternative reviewers can be approached without undue delay.
  • Confidentiality. Every manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be shown to, or discussed with, others except as authorised by the editor. This obligation extends to reviewers who decline the invitation.
  • Standards of objectivity. Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate and strictly prohibited. Reviewers should express their views clearly, supported by evidence-based and constructive argument, so that the editor and authors can act upon them.
  • Acknowledgement of sources. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. They should also draw the editor’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published or unpublished work of which they have personal knowledge, including possible redundant publication or plagiarism.
  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Reviewers must decline to evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or healthcare institutions associated with the work. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

4. Duties of Authors

  • Reporting standards. Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data must be represented accurately. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Reporting should conform to the relevant EQUATOR Network guideline for the study design (for example, CONSORT for randomised trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and CARE for case reports). Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements, including the fabrication or falsification of clinical data, constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
  • Originality and plagiarism. Authors must ensure that they have written and submitted entirely original work, and that the work and/or words of others have been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms—from passing off another’s work as one’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s work without attribution, to claiming results from research conducted by others—constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
  • Data access, retention, and sharing. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study for editorial review and should be prepared to make such data publicly available where practicable and ethically permissible. In all cases, authors must retain the data for a reasonable period after publication. Sharing of clinical data must safeguard patient confidentiality and comply with the consent obtained from participants and applicable data-protection law.
  • Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication. Authors must not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
  • Acknowledgement of sources. Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
  • Authorship of the manuscript. Authorship is limited to those who meet the four ICMJE criteria: (i) substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; (ii) drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; (iii) final approval of the version to be published; and (iv) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. All those who meet these criteria must be listed as authors, and contributors who do not meet all four should be acknowledged. The corresponding author ensures that all appropriate co-authors, and no inappropriate ones, are included on the manuscript and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version and agreed to its submission.
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest. All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their work. All sources of financial support for the project—including grants, pharmaceutical or device-industry funding, honoraria, and consultancies—must be explicitly disclosed.
  • Fundamental errors in published works. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editor and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

5. Research Ethics: Human Participants, Animal Welfare, and Patient Confidentiality

Because SJORL publishes clinical and experimental research in otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery, the following safeguards are mandatory and are verified during editorial assessment.

  • Protection of human participants. All research involving human participants, human material, or human data must have been conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Authors must provide a statement confirming that the study was reviewed and approved by an appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB) or research ethics committee, and must cite the approval reference number and the name of the approving body within the manuscript.
  • Informed consent. Authors must confirm that written informed consent was obtained from all participants (or their legal guardians) prior to enrolment, including consent to participate and, where relevant, consent to publish.
  • Clinical trial registration. Reports of clinical trials must include the trial registration number and the name of the registry (for example, a primary registry within the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform or ClinicalTrials.gov). Prospective registration is required in accordance with ICMJE policy.
  • Animal welfare. For studies involving animals, authors must state that all procedures complied with relevant institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals, provide the ethics committee approval number, and report the work in accordance with the ARRIVE guidelines. Authors should describe the steps taken to minimise pain, distress, and the number of animals used.
  • Patient privacy and confidentiality. Identifying information—including names, initials, hospital record numbers, and recognisable images such as facial, endoscopic, audiometric, or radiological data—must not be published unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or guardian) has given written informed consent for publication. Authors must remove or mask identifying details that are not essential, and the journal will not publish identifiable patient material without documented consent.

6. Conflicts of Interest

All parties involved in the publication process must declare any relationships or interests that could inappropriately influence, or be perceived to influence, their conduct. Authors disclose conflicts in a dedicated declaration within the manuscript; editors and reviewers recuse themselves from any submission in which they hold a competing interest. The journal may publish such declarations alongside the article in the interest of transparency.

7. Similarity Screening and Originality Checks

Every submitted manuscript is screened for textual similarity and potential plagiarism using ORCA (Originality Checking and Citation Analyzer) before peer review and again prior to publication. Manuscripts exhibiting unacceptable levels of overlap, or evidence of plagiarism, redundant publication, or self-plagiarism, are returned to the authors for clarification or are rejected, and may be referred to the authors’ institutions where warranted.

8. Data Fabrication, Falsification, and Image Integrity

Fabrication (reporting non-existent data or results), falsification (manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, data, or images), and inappropriate manipulation of images are serious forms of research misconduct. Authors must ensure that figures and images accurately reflect the original data; grouping, enhancement, or adjustment that obscures or misrepresents information present in the original is not permitted. The journal may request original, unprocessed data or images at any stage.

9. Data Sharing and Reproducibility

The journal encourages authors to deposit the data underlying their findings in a suitable public repository, subject to ethical and legal constraints, and to include a data-availability statement describing where and under what conditions the data may be accessed. Where data cannot be shared—for example, to protect patient privacy—authors should state this clearly and explain the restriction.

10. Use of Artificial Intelligence and AI-Assisted Technologies

Authors who use artificial intelligence or AI-assisted tools in the preparation of a manuscript must disclose this use in the methods or acknowledgements, describing the tool and the manner in which it was used. Large language models and other generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors, because they cannot take responsibility or be accountable for the work. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of their manuscript, including any content produced with AI assistance. Reviewers and editors must not upload manuscripts or any part of them to generative AI tools, as doing so may breach confidentiality and the authors’ intellectual property rights.

11. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

The journal is committed to maintaining the integrity of the published record. When errors or misconduct are identified, the editors act in accordance with COPE guidance: minor errors are addressed through a published correction (erratum or corrigendum); articles whose findings are seriously flawed or invalid, or that are the product of misconduct, are subject to retraction with a clearly labelled retraction notice; and where evidence is inconclusive but concerns are substantial, an expression of concern may be published while the matter is investigated. Corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern are linked to the original article and remain part of the permanent record.

12. Allegations of Misconduct, Complaints, and Appeals

Allegations of research or publication misconduct—whether concerning a submitted or a published article—are taken seriously and investigated in line with the relevant COPE flowcharts. The journal will, where appropriate, seek a response from the authors and may contact their institutions or funders. Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may submit a written, reasoned appeal to the Editor-in-Chief; appeals are considered on the scientific merits of the response. Complaints about the journal’s processes, policies, or conduct should be directed to the editorial office and will be acknowledged and addressed promptly and fairly.

13. Editorial Independence and Advertising

Editorial decisions are not influenced by advertising, reprint income, or any commercial interest. Any advertising or sponsorship associated with the journal is kept entirely separate from the editorial process and content.

14. Copyright, Licensing, and Open Access

Sriwijaya Journal of Otorhinolaryngology is an open-access journal. Articles are made freely available to readers under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This licence permits others to share and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original work and that any derivative works are distributed under the same licence. Authors retain copyright of their work under the terms stated in the journal’s copyright and licensing policy.

15. Archiving and Digital Preservation

To ensure the long-term availability of its content, the journal preserves its published articles through recognised digital archiving systems, so that the scholarly record remains accessible even if the journal ceases publication.

Contact

Questions, concerns, or allegations relating to publication ethics at Sriwijaya Journal of Otorhinolaryngology should be addressed to the Editorial Office through the journal’s contact page at https://phlox.or.id/index.php/sjorl. All communications are treated confidentially and handled in accordance with COPE guidance.