Research Integrity

The International Journal of Medical Students (IJMS) requires submitted and published work to be original, accurate, transparent, and supported by an honest account of how the work was conceived, conducted, analyzed, and reported.

Authors, reviewers, and editors share responsibility for protecting the integrity of the scholarly record. The Journal evaluates integrity concerns according to the available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, and the stage at which it is identified.

Contents

  1. Integrity Principles
  2. Originality and Proper Attribution
  3. Plagiarism and Text Reuse
  4. Data Fabrication and Falsification
  5. Image and Figure Integrity
  6. Accurate Methods and Reporting
  7. Duplicate Submission and Overlapping Publication
  8. Fragmented and Redundant Reporting
  9. Citation Integrity
  10. Peer-Review and Editorial Manipulation
  11. Records, Data, and Supporting Evidence
  12. Reporting an Integrity Concern
  13. Editorial Assessment of Concerns
  14. Possible Editorial Actions
  15. Related Policies and Resources

Integrity Principles

Research and scholarly publishing depend on a record that readers can evaluate and trust. Authors must present the work honestly and must not conceal, invent, alter, duplicate, or misrepresent information in a manner that affects its meaning or reliability.

Submissions must:

  • describe work that was actually performed;
  • report methods and analyses accurately;
  • distinguish observed findings from interpretation;
  • present data, images, and results without deceptive alteration;
  • identify and cite relevant sources appropriately;
  • disclose related submissions and publications;
  • avoid manipulation of authorship, citations, peer review, or editorial processes;
  • preserve relevant records and supporting materials; and
  • correct material errors when they are identified.

An honest error is not necessarily misconduct. Errors must nevertheless be disclosed and corrected when they affect the manuscript or published record.

Originality and Proper Attribution

Submitted manuscripts must represent original scholarly work unless the Journal has expressly approved another form of publication.

Authors must:

  • identify the source of ideas, words, data, images, methods, instruments, and other material obtained from others;
  • use quotation marks or another clear format for directly quoted text;
  • cite the original source whenever practical;
  • obtain required permission for protected material;
  • disclose prior dissemination of the same or closely related work; and
  • distinguish the submitted contribution from previously published work.

Common knowledge does not require citation, but specialized facts, interpretations, data, methods, and language derived from another source ordinarily do.

Submitting work created by another person while representing it as the authors’ own is prohibited.

Plagiarism and Text Reuse

Plagiarism is the presentation of another person’s words, ideas, data, images, or other intellectual contribution without appropriate acknowledgment.

Plagiarism may include:

  • copying text without citation or quotation;
  • paraphrasing another source too closely without acknowledgment;
  • using another person’s idea, analysis, interpretation, table, or figure without attribution;
  • submitting another person’s manuscript or unpublished work;
  • copying from a thesis, conference paper, website, report, or non-English source without acknowledgment; or
  • translating previously published material and presenting it as original.

Text Reuse by the Same Authors

Reuse of an author’s previously published text may also be inappropriate when the earlier source is not identified or when the reuse misleads readers about the originality of the manuscript.

Limited reuse of standard methodological language may be acceptable when:

  • the wording cannot reasonably be expressed in a substantially different way;
  • the earlier source is cited when appropriate;
  • the reused text does not conceal duplicate publication; and
  • copyright or licensing requirements permit the reuse.

Substantial reuse in the Introduction, Results, Discussion, or Conclusion ordinarily requires clear attribution and may make the manuscript unsuitable as an original submission.

Data Fabrication and Falsification

Fabrication is the invention of data, participants, observations, results, records, or other information that did not exist.

Falsification is the unauthorized or deceptive alteration, omission, selection, suppression, or manipulation of research materials, processes, data, analyses, or results.

Prohibited practices include:

  • inventing participants, observations, measurements, interviews, or outcomes;
  • changing data values without a documented and methodologically justified reason;
  • removing observations solely to obtain a preferred result;
  • selectively reporting analyses while concealing contradictory findings;
  • altering dates, eligibility criteria, sample sizes, or study procedures;
  • misrepresenting missing data or participant exclusions;
  • reporting analyses that were not performed;
  • presenting simulated or example data as observed research data; and
  • creating false laboratory, survey, clinical, or statistical records.

Legitimate data cleaning, transformation, exclusion, imputation, and statistical adjustment must be methodologically justified and reported transparently.

Image and Figure Integrity

Images, graphs, diagrams, photographs, and other visual materials must represent the underlying information accurately.

Authors may make adjustments that improve clarity when those adjustments:

  • are applied consistently to the complete image;
  • do not add, remove, move, obscure, or selectively enhance information;
  • do not change the interpretation of the image;
  • are consistent across images being compared; and
  • are described when relevant to interpretation.

Prohibited image practices include:

  • adding or removing features;
  • combining images without identifying the boundaries or source panels;
  • duplicating an image or image region to represent different observations;
  • selective enhancement of one region;
  • concealing background irregularities or unwanted results;
  • changing labels, scale, orientation, or sequence deceptively; and
  • presenting an illustrative or stock image as original research evidence.

Authors should retain original, unprocessed image files and provide them when requested.

Accurate Methods and Reporting

The manuscript must accurately describe the design, conduct, analysis, and limitations of the work.

Authors must not:

  • describe a retrospective analysis as prospectively planned;
  • identify an exploratory outcome as a prespecified primary outcome;
  • omit material deviations from the protocol or analysis plan;
  • misrepresent the study population, setting, sample, or data source;
  • report statistical tests, models, or adjustments that were not performed;
  • describe an association as causal without adequate support;
  • conceal adverse, negative, null, or contradictory findings that are necessary to interpret the work;
  • present incomplete work as a complete investigation; or
  • make conclusions broader than the evidence supports.

Changes made after data review must be identified when they materially affect the interpretation of the study.

Reporting requirements for participants, consent, approvals, and registration are addressed on the Research Ethics page.

Duplicate Submission and Overlapping Publication

A manuscript must not be under consideration by more than one journal at the same time.

Authors must disclose manuscripts, reports, preprints, abstracts, conference materials, theses, datasets, or publications that contain the same or closely related data, analyses, figures, or conclusions.

Duplicate publication occurs when a manuscript substantially overlaps with previously published work without clear acknowledgment and editorial authorization.

Potentially acceptable prior dissemination may include:

  • a conference abstract or presentation;
  • a thesis or institutional repository deposit;
  • a registered research protocol;
  • a regulatory or public-health report;
  • a preprint clearly identified as not peer reviewed; or
  • a preliminary report followed by a substantially more complete analysis.

Prior dissemination must be disclosed at submission. The related material should be cited or provided to the Journal when requested.

Acceptable secondary publication requires prior agreement from the relevant editors, clear identification of the earlier publication, and compliance with applicable copyright and licensing conditions.

Fragmented and Redundant Reporting

Authors should not divide a single coherent study into multiple minimally different manuscripts solely to increase the number of publications.

Multiple manuscripts derived from the same study, registry, database, cohort, survey, or trial may be appropriate when each manuscript:

  • addresses a distinct and meaningful research question;
  • provides an independently valuable contribution;
  • identifies the shared data source;
  • cites related publications;
  • explains relevant overlap; and
  • does not present the same analysis or findings as new.

Authors must disclose related manuscripts that are published, submitted, accepted, or in preparation when the overlap may affect editorial evaluation.

The Journal may request that overlapping manuscripts be combined or may decline work that represents redundant or fragmented publication.

Citation Integrity

References must be selected because they are relevant and support the statements for which they are cited.

Authors must not:

  • cite sources they have not verified;
  • misrepresent the findings of a cited source;
  • cite a secondary source as though it were the original evidence;
  • include irrelevant references solely to increase citations to an author, journal, institution, or organization;
  • participate in coordinated citation exchanges;
  • omit directly relevant evidence solely because it conflicts with the authors’ conclusions; or
  • cite retracted work as valid evidence without clearly identifying its status.

Editors and reviewers must not request citations for personal, institutional, or journal advantage. A requested citation must have a legitimate scholarly purpose.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy and appropriateness of every reference.

Peer-Review and Editorial Manipulation

Attempts to influence, circumvent, or manipulate editorial assessment or peer review are prohibited.

Prohibited conduct includes:

  • providing a fabricated reviewer name, identity, affiliation, or email address;
  • creating or controlling an account that appears to belong to an independent reviewer;
  • suggesting a reviewer who cannot provide an independent assessment while concealing the relationship;
  • attempting to identify or contact a reviewer;
  • offering payment, favors, authorship, citations, or another benefit in exchange for a favorable review or decision;
  • coordinating reviews or recommendations without disclosure;
  • submitting fraudulent review reports;
  • misrepresenting editorial communications or decisions;
  • attempting to bypass the submission and editorial system; or
  • using coercion, threats, harassment, or institutional pressure to influence an editorial outcome.

Authors may suggest reviewers only when permitted by the Journal and must disclose relationships relevant to reviewer independence.

Reviewers and editors must maintain confidentiality and disclose conflicts according to the Editorial Policies.

Records, Data, and Supporting Evidence

Authors should retain the records necessary to support the reliability of the submitted work in accordance with applicable institutional, legal, ethical, and disciplinary requirements.

Supporting materials may include:

  • original or appropriately protected research data;
  • analysis files and statistical code;
  • survey instruments or interview guides;
  • laboratory records;
  • original images and figure source files;
  • study protocols and analysis plans;
  • registration records;
  • data dictionaries;
  • ethics and consent documentation;
  • author-contribution records; and
  • permissions or data-use agreements.

The Journal may request relevant supporting information when necessary to evaluate a specific concern. Authors should not provide confidential participant information unless the Journal identifies an appropriate and secure method.

Inability to provide requested material does not automatically establish misconduct, but the absence of supporting evidence may affect whether the Journal can rely on the manuscript.

Reporting an Integrity Concern

Concerns may be reported before or after publication by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, or other individuals.

A report should provide, when available:

  • the manuscript or article title;
  • the manuscript identification number or published citation;
  • a clear description of the concern;
  • the specific text, data, image, citation, or conduct involved;
  • relevant supporting documentation or comparisons; and
  • contact information for follow-up.

Concerns should be raised in good faith and supported by specific information. Personal disputes, speculation, or unsupported allegations may be insufficient to begin a formal assessment.

The Journal will seek to protect confidential information when practical but cannot guarantee anonymity when disclosure is required for a fair assessment, institutional inquiry, legal obligation, or protection of the scholarly record.

Report a Concern to the Journal

Editorial Assessment of Concerns

The Journal assesses integrity concerns fairly, confidentially, and in proportion to their seriousness.

The assessment may include:

  1. recording and reviewing the allegation or concern;
  2. determining whether the concern falls within the Journal’s responsibility;
  3. preserving relevant manuscript and editorial records;
  4. requesting an explanation from the authors or other involved individuals;
  5. requesting supporting data, images, documents, or records;
  6. obtaining independent methodological, statistical, technical, ethical, or legal advice;
  7. consulting the IJMS Ethics Committee when appropriate;
  8. contacting an institution, ethics committee, funder, publisher, or other responsible body when necessary; and
  9. determining the appropriate editorial action.

The Journal does not ordinarily determine whether research misconduct occurred on behalf of an institution or regulatory authority. It may nevertheless decide whether a manuscript or article remains sufficiently reliable for submission, review, acceptance, or publication.

Authors and reviewers are expected to cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification and documentation.

Possible Editorial Actions

The action taken depends on the evidence, seriousness of the concern, reliability of the work, and stage of publication.

Stage or finding Possible action
Concern not substantiated Resume editorial processing or close the assessment without further action.
Clarification required Request an explanation, correction, revised files, or supporting documentation.
Administrative or reporting deficiency Return the manuscript for correction or require additional editorial assessment.
Reliability cannot be established Decline the manuscript, pause processing, or withdraw acceptance.
Possible institutional misconduct Refer the matter to an institution, ethics committee, funder, regulator, or another responsible body.
Concern identified after publication Publish a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other notice when warranted.
Editorial-process manipulation Reject the submission, invalidate affected reviews, restrict involved accounts, or take other proportionate action.

Post-publication notices and challenges to editorial decisions are governed by the Corrections, Retractions, and Appeals policy.

Where appropriate, the Journal may continue an integrity assessment after a manuscript has been withdrawn or rejected.

Editorial Policies

Editorial independence, confidentiality, peer review, reviewer selection, and management of editorial conflicts.

Research Ethics

Ethics review, informed consent, registration, participant protection, and animal-research requirements.

Authorship and Disclosures

Authorship criteria, CRediT contributions, author changes, funding, and competing interests.

Corrections, Retractions, and Appeals

Correction of the published record, expressions of concern, retractions, appeals, and complaints.

Privacy and Data Protection

Protection and handling of personal information collected through the Journal’s systems.

Contact the Journal

Submit a documented question or concern for editorial assessment.
Review Post-Publication Policies Contact the Journal

Return to top