Allegations of Misconduct

NERS Jurnal Keperawatan (NJK)
Faculty of Nursing, Universitas Andalas, Indonesia

1. Introduction

NERS Jurnal Keperawatan (NJK) is committed to maintaining the integrity of scholarly publishing and upholding high standards of research and publication ethics. This policy establishes the principles and procedures for receiving, assessing, and addressing allegations of research and publication misconduct involving manuscripts submitted to or articles published in NJK.

NJK follows the ethical principles and relevant guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when handling allegations of misconduct. The journal aims to ensure that concerns are handled fairly, objectively, confidentially, and consistently, while protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and other individuals involved in the journal's editorial and publication processes.

2. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct may occur during the planning, conduct, reporting, review, or publication of research. NJK considers the following examples of potential misconduct, including but not limited to:

a. Fabrication

Inventing data, research participants, results, or other research information and reporting them as genuine.

b. Falsification

Manipulating research materials, methods, processes, images, or data, or selectively changing or omitting results in a manner that misrepresents the research findings.

c. Plagiarism and Redundant Publication

Using another person's words, ideas, data, or findings without appropriate acknowledgment. This includes substantial unattributed copying, duplicate publication, and inappropriate reuse of previously published material without proper disclosure.

d. Authorship Misconduct

Inappropriate attribution of authorship, including gift, guest, or ghost authorship, as well as the exclusion of individuals who have made qualifying contributions to the research or manuscript.

e. Citation Manipulation

Inappropriately adding, requesting, or arranging citations to inflate citation counts or misrepresent the relevance or importance of scholarly work.

f. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest

Failure to disclose financial, professional, personal, or other interests that could improperly influence research, peer review, editorial decisions, or publication.

g. Breaches of Research Ethics

Failure to obtain required ethical approval, inappropriate consent procedures, violations of participant rights, or improper handling of confidential information in research involving patients or other human participants.

For nursing and health research, this may include the unauthorized disclosure of patient information, identifiable clinical records, photographs, or other sensitive information.

h. Peer Review and Editorial Misconduct

Manipulating the peer review process, submitting false reviewer identities, interfering improperly with editorial decisions, breaching reviewer confidentiality, or misusing unpublished manuscript information.

i. Image, Data, and Reporting Misrepresentation

Inappropriate manipulation of images, selective or misleading reporting of findings, and other practices that materially undermine the accuracy or reliability of the research record.

j. Undeclared Use of Artificial Intelligence

Failure to disclose the use of artificial intelligence tools when disclosure is required by NJK policy, or the use of such tools to generate fabricated data, false references, misleading research content, or other material that compromises research integrity.

The use of an AI tool is not automatically misconduct. Its acceptability depends on the applicable journal policy, the nature of the use, and the authors' responsibility for the submitted work.

Allegations may be raised before or after publication and may originate from authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, or other individuals who provide relevant information.

3. Principles for Handling Allegations

NJK applies the following principles when handling allegations of misconduct:

a. Commitment to Investigation

All credible allegations within the journal's scope will be assessed seriously and handled in accordance with relevant publication ethics guidance.

b. Confidentiality

Information relating to allegations and investigations will be shared only with individuals who need it to assess or resolve the matter, subject to applicable legal or institutional requirements.

c. Fairness and Objectivity

The journal will evaluate available evidence impartially. Individuals concerned will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond before a final editorial conclusion is reached, where appropriate.

d. Protection Against Unwarranted Accusations

An allegation will not automatically be treated as proof of misconduct. Editorial actions will be based on the available evidence and the seriousness of the concern.

e. Timeliness

NJK will seek to assess and address allegations without unnecessary delay, recognizing that complex cases may require additional evidence or institutional investigation.

f. Protection of Good-Faith Reporting

NJK does not tolerate knowingly malicious allegations or the deliberate misuse of the reporting process. The journal will handle good-faith reports responsibly and limit unnecessary disclosure of the reporter's identity.

g. Institutional Cooperation

Where an allegation concerns research conduct, ethical approval, or matters beyond the journal's authority, NJK may contact the relevant institution, research ethics committee, or other appropriate body.

4. Procedures for Handling Allegations

4.1 Reporting an Allegation

Allegations of research or publication misconduct should be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief of NJK through the journal's official contact channels.

Reports should include as much relevant information as possible, such as:

The title of the manuscript or published article.
The manuscript identification number or article DOI, if available.
A clear description of the suspected misconduct.
Supporting evidence, documents, data, or relevant references.
The reporter's contact information, if they wish to provide it.

Anonymous reports may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information to permit a meaningful assessment.

4.2 Initial Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate editor will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the allegation is sufficiently specific, credible, and relevant to the journal's responsibilities.

The journal may request clarification or additional supporting information where necessary. Reports that lack a reasonable evidentiary basis or fall outside the journal's scope may be closed after an appropriate assessment.

Where the allegation concerns the Editor-in-Chief or presents a conflict of interest, the matter should be referred to an independent and appropriate editorial representative or the journal's publisher for consideration.

4.3 Investigation

When the initial assessment identifies a credible concern, NJK may conduct further examination of relevant materials, including:

The submitted manuscript or published article.
Similarity reports and relevant source publications.
Research data, statistical analyses, images, or other supporting materials, where available and appropriate.
Ethical approval documentation and consent-related information, where relevant.
Editorial correspondence and peer review records.
Explanations and evidence provided by the individuals concerned.

The individual or individuals concerned will normally be informed of the allegation and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. The identity of the reporter will not be disclosed unnecessarily, subject to applicable requirements and the circumstances of the case.

For complex matters, NJK may seek independent expert advice or consult relevant publication ethics guidance. The journal may also refer the matter to the authors' institution, research ethics committee, or other appropriate body when a formal investigation into research conduct is necessary.

NJK may take appropriate interim measures while an investigation is ongoing, including delaying an editorial decision or publication, or issuing an Expression of Concern when a published article presents substantial unresolved concerns.

4.4 Outcomes and Editorial Actions

Following an assessment or investigation, NJK will determine the appropriate action based on the available evidence, the nature of the misconduct, and its potential effect on the reliability of the research record.

Possible actions include:

a. No Evidence of Misconduct

If the allegation is not substantiated, the matter may be closed. Relevant parties may be informed of the outcome as appropriate.

b. Request for Clarification or Correction

If a concern can be resolved through clarification or correction without undermining the overall validity of the work, NJK may request an explanation, revised manuscript, correction, or other appropriate action.

For published articles, a correction notice may be issued when necessary to maintain the accuracy of the scholarly record.

c. Rejection of a Manuscript

A manuscript may be rejected if misconduct is established or if the authors cannot adequately address significant concerns affecting its ethical acceptability, originality, or reliability.

d. Retraction of a Published Article

NJK may retract a published article when there is reliable evidence that its findings or publication record are seriously compromised, including cases involving fabricated or falsified data, substantial plagiarism, unethical research, or other serious breaches of publication ethics.

A retraction notice will explain the reasons for the action and be linked to the original article, with appropriate steps taken to maintain transparency in the scholarly record.

e. Expression of Concern

NJK may publish an Expression of Concern when there are substantial unresolved questions about an article's reliability or research ethics and the available evidence does not yet permit a final conclusion.

f. Notification to Relevant Institutions

Where appropriate, NJK may notify the authors' institution, research ethics committee, funding organization, or other relevant body so that the matter can be considered within its proper authority.

g. Restrictions on Future Submissions

In serious cases, NJK may consider proportionate restrictions on future submissions in accordance with its editorial procedures and applicable publication ethics guidance. Any such action should be based on documented findings and communicated appropriately to the parties concerned.

Editorial actions will be proportionate to the seriousness of the case. The journal will not use retraction solely as a punishment for authors; its primary purpose is to correct the scholarly record when necessary.

4.5 Appeals

Individuals directly affected by a decision may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, explaining the grounds for the appeal and providing relevant new information or evidence.

An appeal should identify a substantive concern about the assessment or decision. Where feasible, it will be considered by an editor or independent person who was not directly responsible for the original decision and who has no relevant conflict of interest.

The journal will communicate its decision on the appeal to the relevant parties.

4.6 Record Keeping and Communication

NJK will maintain appropriate confidential records of allegations, relevant evidence, correspondence, assessments, and decisions, subject to applicable retention requirements.

Information about the outcome will be communicated to relevant parties as appropriate. Where a public correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction is necessary, NJK will publish a notice that clearly explains the editorial action and its reasons, while respecting privacy and applicable confidentiality requirements.

5. Research Ethics in Nursing and Health Research

Because NJK publishes nursing and health-related research, authors are expected to comply with applicable research ethics requirements and protect the rights, dignity, safety, and confidentiality of research participants.

Concerns may include, but are not limited to:

Conducting research without required ethics approval.
Inadequate or improperly obtained informed consent.
Unauthorized disclosure of identifiable patient or participant information.
Inappropriate use of medical records, clinical photographs, or other sensitive data.
Misrepresentation of participant recruitment, research procedures, or study results.
Failure to comply with applicable ethical safeguards for vulnerable populations.

When such concerns arise, NJK may request relevant documentation or explanations and may refer the matter to the responsible institution or research ethics committee. The journal's editorial assessment does not replace a formal institutional investigation where one is required.

6. Prevention of Misconduct

NJK seeks to reduce research and publication misconduct through clear author and reviewer guidance, appropriate editorial screening, peer review, and the use of similarity-checking or other verification tools where available.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted work is original, accurately reported, ethically conducted, and appropriately attributed. Reviewers and editors are expected to maintain confidentiality, disclose relevant conflicts of interest, and report credible concerns about research integrity.

The use of screening tools does not by itself establish misconduct. Findings must be interpreted in context and assessed fairly.

7. Policy Review

NJK may review and update this policy when necessary to reflect changes in publication ethics guidance, journal procedures, or applicable requirements. The current version will be made available on the journal's website.