Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics of SHIFRA

Published by Peninsula Press

By submitting a manuscript to SHIFRA, all authors affirm that they have carefully reviewed and accepted the journal's editorial, ethical, and publication policies. Submission further confirms that the manuscript satisfies the journal's requirements regarding originality, integrity, ethical oversight, authorship responsibility, and transparency in research conduct.

SHIFRA upholds the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including the COPE Code of Conduct and relevant COPE Flowcharts for editorial decision-making and the resolution of ethical concerns. The journal is dedicated to safeguarding the scholarly record and to employing fair, evidence-based procedures when evaluating submissions, addressing concerns, and making publication decisions.

SHIFRA expects all submitted work to be original, accurate, properly attributed, and prepared in accordance with established academic and professional standards. Ethical responsibilities extend to all participants in the publication process, including authors, editors, reviewers, guest editors, and staff.

1. Introduction and Ethical Framework

SHIFRA is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, editorial accountability, research integrity, and professional conduct. The journal applies internationally recognized ethical principles to the submission, review, editing, and publication of scholarly work.

Editorial decisions are rendered independently and are not influenced by the nationality, ethnicity, political views, race, religion, institutional affiliation, or other personal characteristics of the authors. All editorial judgments are based on scholarly merit, relevance to the journal's scope, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and the integrity of the submission.

Where research involves human participants, animals, plants, biological materials, protected or non-public data sources, collections, or restricted sites, authors must demonstrate that the work was carried out in accordance with applicable institutional, national, and international ethical requirements. The journal may request supplementary documentation or further clarification regarding any ethical aspect of a submission at any stage of the editorial process.

1.1 Research Ethics and Consent Requirements

SHIFRA rigorously adheres to the ethical standards set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All investigations involving human participants, human tissue, or human-derived data must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and must receive prior approval from an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board.

Submissions reporting research with human participants must include, within the manuscript, clear ethics and consent information, specifically:

  • The name of the relevant ethics committee, institutional review board (IRB), or comparable approval body.
  • The ethics approval number, code, reference, or identifier, as applicable.
  • A statement affirming that informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study, where required.
  • A statement confirming that the privacy rights of participants were respected throughout the study and the publication process.

The editorial team reserves the right to seek additional clarification concerning the ethical dimensions of any study. Research determined to violate ethical standards may be rejected, and the journal may contact relevant institutions or regulatory bodies when investigating potential misconduct.

Ethics approval should be secured before the research is commenced. Retrospective ethics clearance is generally not acceptable. Where retrospective studies are submitted, authors must provide a written statement from the relevant ethics authority confirming that the study was conducted in accordance with applicable ethical principles and requirements.

1.2 Studies Involving Humans

When research entails the involvement of human participants, the author must ascertain that the study has been conducted in adherence to the ethical principles outlined in The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) pertaining to experiments involving human beings. The manuscript should also adhere to the guidelines presented in the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals issued by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authors should strive to incorporate diverse human populations that are representative in terms of sex, age, and ethnicity, as recommended by these guidelines. The terms “sex” and “gender” must be used accurately and appropriately.

In order to ensure compliance with national and international standards, approval must be obtained from the author's institutional or other applicable ethics body (such as an Institutional Review Board, IRB) for all study protocols. The submission must include specific details pertaining to the approval process, including the institution's name, the review board's designation, and the relevant approval number(s). It is essential to secure ethics approval prior to commencing the research, as retrospective approval is generally not obtainable and may prevent the publication of findings.

Authors must include a declaration within the publication affirming that informed consent was obtained before conducting experiments involving human subjects. The privacy rights of human participants must be consistently upheld throughout the study and in any published reports.

1.3 Studies Involving Animals

All experiments involving animals must adhere to the ARRIVE guidelines and must be conducted in accordance with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 and its associated guidelines, EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments, or the National Research Council's Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Authors must explicitly state in their manuscript that they have followed these standards.

Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international standards pertaining to animal welfare, ethical review, and humane treatment. Authors must confirm that appropriate approval was obtained from the ethics review committee affiliated with the institution or establishment where the research was conducted. The submission must furnish comprehensive information regarding the approval process, the identities of the ethics committee(s) or institutional review board(s) involved, and the corresponding ethics approval number or identification.

Authors should provide a rationale for the use of animals and the selection of specific species. Manuscripts must present comprehensive details regarding housing, feeding, and environmental enrichment practices, as well as measures implemented to minimize suffering. Information regarding the mode of anaesthetic and euthanasia must be included. The sex or gender of animals under investigation must be specified, and where relevant, the influence or correlation of sex or gender on the study outcomes should be acknowledged. Any research that fails to comply with these criteria on ethical approval and animal care will be declined.

Experiments involving vertebrates or regulated invertebrates must be conducted in accordance with the ethical standards established by the authors' institution and applicable national or international regulations. In every instance, authors must affirm that comprehensive measures were undertaken to mitigate any distress experienced by animals, accompanied by a thorough description of the specific strategies employed to achieve this objective.

1.4 Studies Involving Plants, Biological Materials, and Sensitive Sources

Research involving plants should adhere to the guidelines established by the authors' institution as well as any relevant national or international regulations. Where appropriate, authors should include a declaration specifying any permissions, approvals, or licenses obtained. Authors are expected to comply with the requirements of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

Research involving biological materials, protected collections, non-public databases, restricted sites, or other sensitive research resources must include appropriate statements regarding authorization, ethical oversight, and lawful access where applicable.

1.5 Accuracy, Originality, and Author Responsibility

Authors of research reports are expected to furnish a precise account of the work performed, together with an objective analysis of its significance. The underlying data must be represented faithfully and accurately in the article. Authors should be prepared to offer public access to raw data in connection with a scholarly article and must maintain said data for a minimum duration of two years following its publication. Engaging in fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitutes unethical conduct and is strictly unacceptable.

Authors must ensure that their submissions are entirely original and that all borrowed ideas, wording, data, images, tables, and other materials are properly acknowledged and attributed. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. The simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is likewise unacceptable and constitutes unethical publishing behavior.

1.6 Standards of Reporting

Research should be communicated in a manner that facilitates verification and reproducibility. Authors are encouraged to provide comprehensive descriptions of their research rationale, study protocol, methodology, and analysis to ensure that readers can assess and replicate the reported findings.

2. Editorial Screening, Peer Review, and Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to SHIFRA undergo a rigorous editorial screening process prior to peer review. This process ensures that submissions are aligned with the journal's aims and scope, satisfy quality and ethical standards, and comply with all policy requirements. The editorial team may request clarifications or supplementary documentation regarding any aspect of the submission at any stage.

SHIFRA applies a structured research integrity workflow encompassing both pre-review screening and post-publication monitoring. This includes similarity checking (using plagiarism-detection software), editorial scope and methodological consistency review, and screening for terminology integrity and structured content. The journal also examines submissions for indicators of manipulated or AI-generated text, such as atypical phrasing patterns (sometimes referred to as “tortured phrases”), semantic drift, or citation anomalies, alongside similarity screening and editorial assessment.

2.1 Pre-Review Editorial Assessment and Desk Review

The manuscript is initially subjected to an editorial review conducted within the editorial office, with the aim of determining its compatibility with the journal's focus and scope, as well as identifying any significant methodological deficiencies, ethical problems, or integrity risks. During initial screening, editors evaluate manuscripts for relevance, compliance, organization, clarity, methodological soundness, ethical adherence, completeness of disclosures, and integrity indicators.

Desk rejection may occur for reasons including, but not limited to:

  • The topic or scope of the study is not relevant to the field of the journal.
  • There are publication ethics problems, non-adherence to international standard guidelines, or evidence of plagiarism (similarity index exceeding 20 percent).
  • The topic does not possess sufficient impact or does not contribute adequate new knowledge to the field.
  • There are flaws in the study design.
  • The objective of the study is not clearly articulated.
  • The organization of the study is problematic and/or certain required components are missing.
  • There are significant problems in writing, grammar, or style.
  • The manuscript does not follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

2.2 Similarity Screening and Integrity Review

All submissions are screened for similarity using professional plagiarism-detection software such as Turnitin. Editors review similarity findings in context and may request clarification from authors where necessary.

SHIFRA applies pre-review integrity screening, including checks for indicators of potentially manipulated or AI-generated text, such as atypical or distorted phrasing patterns sometimes referred to as “tortured phrases,” alongside similarity screening and editorial assessment.

In addition, SHIFRA utilizes a publisher-developed integrity screening tool (PaperGuard) to support editorial evaluation:

https://paperguard.peers.ae

The tool assists editors by providing analytical indicators that may require further human review, including:

  • Tortured Phrase Detection — identification of distorted or non-standard scientific terminology and atypical phrasing patterns.
  • Citation Network and Cartel Detection — abnormal citation clustering, unusual citation patterns, and coordinated citation behavior.
  • Author Reputation Analysis — author integrity signals such as publicly available retraction history and related integrity indicators.
  • Reference Integrity Suite — DOI validation, metadata consistency, citation-context alignment, and detection of fabricated or unverifiable references.

These checks supplement — and do not replace — editorial and peer-review judgment. Final publication decisions remain the responsibility of the Editorial Board in accordance with COPE principles.

Manuscripts are treated as confidential throughout the screening process. Integrity screening is performed under controlled editorial access, and outputs generated by screening tools are treated as analytical indicators requiring human evaluation, not as automated determinations of misconduct.

2.3 Peer Review Process and Editorial Responsibility

SHIFRA employs a single-blind peer review process: reviewers are aware of the authors' identities, but the identities of reviewers remain undisclosed to the authors. Each manuscript is evaluated by a minimum of two independent experts. Editors ensure impartiality and recuse themselves when conflicts of interest arise.

Reviewers are selected on the basis of their expertise, impartiality, and prior performance. Authors may suggest potential reviewers but must refrain from nominating collaborators or individuals with conflicts of interest. The comments provided by reviewers are forwarded to the responsible author, who is expected to take appropriate actions and provide responses accordingly. The proposed recommendation is then evaluated during an editorial board meeting, and the editor provides the final determination to the corresponding author.

2.4 Confidentiality of Submissions and Review Materials

A manuscript that has been submitted is regarded as confidential. SHIFRA maintains stringent confidentiality protocols to safeguard the privacy of submitted papers, limiting access solely to individuals involved in the manuscript's processing and preparation for future publication. These individuals include the editorial team, corresponding authors, potential reviewers, actual reviewers, and editors.

Confidential material must not be disclosed or used for personal advantage. Unpublished information or ideas acquired through the process of peer review must not be utilized for personal gain or in the research endeavors of an editor, reviewer, or any other reader without explicit written permission from the author.

However, in cases where misconduct is suspected, it is permissible for a manuscript to be shared with the ethical committees of the journal and relevant institutions or organizations for the purpose of investigating the alleged misconduct. SHIFRA will conform to the applicable COPE Flowcharts as necessary throughout such processes.

2.5 Appeals, Complaints, and Ethical Investigations

SHIFRA follows COPE guidelines on appeals to editorial decisions and complaints about the journal's editorial management of the peer review process. The journal welcomes genuine appeals to editorial decisions. However, appellants must provide strong evidence or new data and information in response to the editor's and reviewers' comments.

SHIFRA is committed to upholding academic integrity. Allegations of research or publication misconduct are investigated in accordance with COPE Flowcharts and follow a structured process:

  • Preliminary editorial assessment and documentation of concerns.
  • Author notification and opportunity to respond.
  • Institutional communication where necessary.
  • Formal Editorial Board review and recorded decision.

Outcomes may include rejection, correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction depending on the severity and evidentiary findings. Where investigations are ongoing and concerns are credible, an Expression of Concern may be issued to maintain transparency.

2.6 AI, Editorial Integrity, and Human Oversight

AI and related screening technologies may support editorial workflows (e.g., similarity checking, completeness verification, integrity-risk screening, and identification of potential reviewers), but all editorial decisions, peer review assessments, and misconduct evaluations remain under qualified human oversight and judgment. These AI tools must conform to identity-protected technologies and respect the confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy rights of all involved parties.

Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts, peer review reports, decision letters, or any part thereof into generative AI systems. Such tools cannot guarantee the confidentiality, security, or privacy of the materials, which could lead to unauthorized access, storage, or misuse of the manuscript's content. These actions could violate the confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy rights of the authors, as well as the terms of use of the AI tool.

Outputs from screening tools are treated as analytical indicators requiring human evaluation; their presence does not, by itself, constitute a determination of misconduct.

3. Authorship, Acknowledgments, and Affiliations

Listing the names of authors in an article serves as a crucial means of acknowledging individuals who have made substantial contributions to the research. Additionally, it ensures transparency and accountability for all persons tasked with upholding the integrity of the published content.

3.1 Authorship Criteria

Authorship on SHIFRA publications is reserved for individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions. In accordance with the standards of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), all authors must fulfill each of the following criteria:

  1. The individual has made a substantial contribution to the research project, encompassing aspects such as conceptualization, study design, execution, data collection, analysis, and interpretation.
  2. The individual has engaged in drafting or writing the manuscript, making significant revisions, or conducting a critical evaluation of the work for important intellectual content.
  3. The selection of the journal to which the article will be submitted has been finalized, and the individual has given final approval of the version to be published, including careful examination of all versions during the revision process and scrutiny of any noteworthy modifications at the proofreading stage.
  4. The author agrees to assume responsibility and be held accountable for the content of the article and to collaborate in addressing any inquiries regarding the accuracy or integrity of the published work.

The allocation of authorship credit should be contingent solely upon significant contributions made to each of the three core components:

  • The conceptualization and design of the study, as well as the collection and analysis of data.
  • The initial composition of the article or its critical revision to ensure the inclusion of significant intellectual contributions.
  • Granting final approval for the publication of the article in its current form.

Authorship cannot be justified purely based on participation in funding procurement or data collection alone. Merely providing general oversight to a research group does not satisfy the criteria for authorship. Every individual listed as an author must have made substantial contributions to warrant their public accountability for the relevant sections of the work.

The sequencing of authorship should be determined by the respective contributions made by each individual towards the research and composition of the work. The order, once submitted, is immutable until all authors provide explicit agreement for any modifications. The maximum number of authors is determined by the journal, taking into consideration factors such as the type of manuscript, its breadth, and the number of institutions involved. If the number of authors exceeds the specified boundaries, the authors must provide an explanation.

3.2 Contribution Details

All individuals involved in the project are expected to furnish a comprehensive account of their respective contributions. The description should be organized into the following categories, as appropriate:

  • Concept
  • Design
  • Intellectual content definition
  • Literature review
  • Clinical studies
  • Experimental studies
  • Data collection
  • Data analysis
  • Statistical analysis
  • Manuscript writing
  • Manuscript editing
  • Manuscript review

The authors' contributions will be included in the published version of the article. The responsibility for ensuring the integrity of the work as a whole, from its inception to the publication of the article, should be assigned to one or more authors who will be designated as “guarantors.”

3.3 Changes to Authorship

In order to modify the authorship of a publication, whether before or after its release, it is essential that unanimous consent be obtained from all authors involved, including those being added or removed. The corresponding author bears the responsibility of acquiring confirmation from all co-authors and delivering a comprehensive rationale for the necessity of the modification.

In the event that an authorship modification becomes necessary after the article has been published, it will be rectified by means of a post-publication notification. All modifications to authorship must adhere to the journal's established standards. If there are substantial changes to the author list after the article has been accepted, such requests may be declined unless compelling justifications and substantiating evidence regarding the contributions of the authors are supplied.

3.4 Handling Authorship Disputes

SHIFRA follows COPE guidelines for resolving authorship disputes. Disagreements that cannot be resolved among authors may be referred to the authors' institutions. Authorship disputes are typically not resolved through the issuance of retractions; the recommended course of action in such scenarios is to issue a corrigendum. A change in authorship can be justified provided that the authors obtain support from their respective institutions.

3.5 Deceased Authors

If an author passes away during the submission or review process, the corresponding author must promptly notify the editorial office. The deceased author's contributions will be recognized, and a note will be added to the publication to acknowledge their involvement and contribution.

3.6 Affiliations

All authors must provide a complete list of affiliations to acknowledge the institutions or organizations that approved, funded, and/or conducted the research or academic activity.

  • For non-research articles, authors should include their current institutional affiliation.
  • If an author has moved to a new institution before the publication of the article, they should list the affiliation where the research was conducted and note their current affiliation.
  • Authors without a current institutional affiliation should clearly state their independent status.

3.7 Unique Author Identifiers (ORCID)

SHIFRA encourages the use of the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) to uniquely identify and distinguish authors and to link them with their published work. The ORCID of the first and corresponding authors is mandatory.

3.8 Acknowledgments

Acknowledgment should be given to individuals who contributed to the creation of a manuscript but do not meet the criteria for authorship. Permission must be obtained from those acknowledged. It is essential to recognize the contributions of organizations that have offered financial assistance and/or other valuable resources. Financial and non-financial contributions must be disclosed in the Acknowledgments section.

4. Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

4.1 Conflicts of Interest

All authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could influence the publication process. It is essential for authors to disclose any affiliations with institutions or products referenced in the manuscript that could significantly influence the study's findings, as well as conflicts of interest with products that are in competition with those described in their work. Conflicts of interest may be:

  • Financial: Employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, or patents.
  • Non-financial: Personal relationships, intellectual beliefs, or institutional affiliations.

Authors must declare conflicts of interest in both the cover letter and the manuscript. If no conflicts exist, authors should include the statement: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

Editors and reviewers must also disclose conflicts of interest and, if applicable, recuse themselves from the review process.

4.2 Funding Disclosure

Authors are required to disclose all sources of funding, including any financial assistance, in their work. Authors should include a comprehensive account of the involvement of any sponsor(s), if applicable, throughout the various stages from study design through to the submission of the manuscript for publication. It is essential to include a statement indicating whether the sponsor(s) had no role in the matter. The information provided must be accurate and aligned with the guidelines set forth by the relevant funding organization.

5. Citations and Reference Integrity

In order to substantiate any assertions put forth in research and non-research articles, it is essential to include suitable citations to pertinent, up-to-date, and authenticated literature, with preference given to peer-reviewed sources. Citations must accurately reflect the sources of information. Authors should:

  • Cite primary sources rather than derivative works whenever possible.
  • Avoid excessive and inappropriate self-citation or coordinated self-citation arrangements with peers.
  • Ensure all cited references are accurate, verifiable, and current.
  • Avoid citing advertisements or non-peer-reviewed sources unless clearly justified.

Such practices as excessive self-citation or prearrangements among author groups with the intention of inappropriately citing each other's work constitute a form of misconduct known as citation manipulation. Please refer to the guidance provided by COPE on the manipulation of citations.

Authors of non-research articles, such as Review or Opinion pieces, must ensure that the references included are pertinent and offer an impartial and comprehensive summary of the existing body of research or scholarly work on the topic. References must be fair and avoid any undue bias towards a specific research group, organization, or journal.

In cases of uncertainty about the necessity of citing a particular source, authors are advised to seek guidance from the journal editorial office.

SHIFRA actively monitors for citation manipulation, including excessive self-citation, citation cartels, and coordinated citation behavior, and follows COPE guidance on citation ethics. Manuscripts found to contain citations primarily intended to artificially inflate the citation count of an author's work or articles published in a specific journal will be subject to penalties for citation manipulation.

6. Plagiarism, Duplicate Submission, and Data Integrity

6.1 Plagiarism and Text Recycling

SHIFRA maintains a stringent policy against plagiarism. The journal unequivocally disapproves of the utilization of others' concepts, language, or labor without proper attribution. SHIFRA uses professional plagiarism-detection software such as Turnitin to screen all submissions. Plagiarism includes:

  • Copying text, data, or images without proper attribution.
  • Reusing one's own previously published content without acknowledgment (self-plagiarism or text recycling).
  • Misrepresenting another person's work as one's own.

Any submissions that include plagiarism, whether in their entirety or partially, duplicate and repetitive publication, or self-plagiarism in the same or another language, will not be accepted. Manuscripts that exhibit an unacceptable similarity index due to plagiarism are promptly rejected. Post-publication detection of plagiarism may result in retraction.

The Preprint archive will not be regarded as a redundant publication. The primary author assumes responsibility for the work throughout the evaluation and publication process and is authorized to act on behalf of all co-authors.

6.2 Duplicate Submission and Publication

Authors are obligated to disclose during the submission process that their article is not concurrently being considered for publication elsewhere. The identification of a duplicate submission or publication is typically regarded as an intentional action. This encompasses articles that have been previously published in a different language.

In compliance with the guidelines set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), authors are required to obtain permission from the publisher and copyright holder of the original article for secondary submissions or publications, such as an article translated into English. Additionally, authors must inform the Editor of the receiving journal regarding the provenance of the original article. It is essential to explicitly indicate to readers that the article is a translated rendition, accompanied by a proper citation referencing the original source.

Manuscripts that are discovered to have been previously published or are currently under review elsewhere will be subject to penalties for duplicate submission and publication. In the event that authors incorporate their own previously published work or work that is presently under review into a submitted paper, it is imperative for them to appropriately acknowledge and cite the aforementioned work and explicitly clarify the unique contributions that the submitted manuscript presents beyond those of the previous work.

6.3 Data Falsification and Fabrication

Data falsification and fabrication refer to instances where intentional measures have been employed to inappropriately manipulate or manufacture data. Engaging in such behavior is regarded as a grave instance of misconduct, as it is specifically intended to deceive others and undermine the credibility of the academic body of knowledge, resulting in significant and enduring repercussions.

Authors are required to verify the accuracy and fidelity of all data presented in their publication before submitting it, ensuring that it faithfully represents their research. In order to facilitate the journal's evaluation process, authors are required to maintain all original data included in their papers and make it available upon request.

If the primary data cannot be provided upon request, the acceptance of a manuscript or published work may be refused or withdrawn. Manuscripts found to contain fabricated or falsified experimental results, including the inappropriate modification of images, will be subject to sanctions for data fabrication and falsification.

7. Open Access and Copyright Policy

7.1 Open Access Policy

SHIFRA is an Open Access journal, providing unrestricted access to all published content under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This ensures that research is freely available to the public without subscription fees, promoting the global exchange of knowledge.

Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles under the terms of this license. This license allows readers to copy, distribute, and transmit the work; to alter, transform, or build upon the contribution; and to use the article for commercial purposes — provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the source.

7.2 Eligibility to Submit

Individuals may submit an authentic manuscript for potential publication in SHIFRA, on the condition that they possess the copyright to the submitted work or have obtained authorization from the copyright owner(s) to do so.

7.3 User Rights

As an open-access journal, SHIFRA grants users the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles under the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

7.4 Author Rights

Authors will retain copyright alongside scholarly usage rights. The Publisher (Peninsula Press) will be granted non-exclusive publishing and distribution rights. Use of third-party material requires proper permission and attribution.

7.5 Copyright Statement

The copyright statement is embedded in each published article to ensure transparency and proper attribution of rights.

8. Consent for Publication and Patient Privacy

8.1 Consent for Publication

In order to include any specific information or visuals pertaining to an individual in a manuscript, it is essential to obtain written informed consent from that individual. In the case of minors under the age of 18, consent must be sought from their parent or legal guardian. In order to publish details under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), it is necessary to obtain their authorization, as their information will be freely accessible on the internet. In the event of an individual's demise, it is required to secure approval from their closest living relative for the purpose of publication.

The manuscript must incorporate a statement indicating that written informed consent for publication was obtained. Authors have the option to use a consent form provided by their own institution or one appropriate to their location. The consent form should explicitly indicate that the specific details and images will be made accessible on the internet without restriction. The consent form should be sent to the Editor upon request and will be handled in a confidential manner.

8.2 Protection of Patients' Rights to Privacy

The publication of identifying information, including textual descriptions, photographs, sonograms, CT scans, and pedigrees, should generally be avoided unless it is necessary for scientific purposes and the patient (or their parent or guardian, if applicable) has provided informed consent for publication. It is recommended that authors exclude patients' names from figures unless they have obtained explicit informed consent from these patients. The journal adheres to the guidelines set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

In order to ensure ethical publication practices, it is the responsibility of authors, rather than the journal or publisher, to secure patient consent forms prior to publication and to appropriately archive these forms. The consent forms should not be included in the cover letter or transmitted by email to the editorial or publisher offices.

If the manuscript includes patient photographs that make it impossible to maintain anonymity or a description that clearly reveals the patient's identity, it is necessary to include a statement in the paper acknowledging that informed consent was obtained from the patient.

9. Images, Figures, and Media Integrity

In order to incorporate photographs, video, or audio recordings that may disclose the identity of patients or research participants, it is essential to obtain Consent to Publish from the individuals themselves or from their next of kin in the case of deceased participants, or from parents or guardians if the participants are minors or regarded as vulnerable.

Authors must be aware of cultural sensitivities and constraints pertaining to the inclusion of photographs in their manuscripts. In certain cultural contexts, the display or depiction of human remains or deceased individuals is subject to restrictions. Authors are expected to observe accepted ethical protocols by taking into account the perspectives and approval procedures of the associated groups.

Experimental photographic images, particularly those obtained using microscopy, should strive to faithfully represent the original image. It is essential to include a comprehensive explanation within the manuscript and figure legend when images have been altered or enhanced in any manner, to ensure that readers are not misled regarding the content depicted. Authors must be prepared to provide the journal editorial office with the original, unaltered, unannotated, and unprocessed images if requested.

Any modifications made should be limited in scope and uniformly applied over the entire image. In accordance with academic conventions, authors must include comprehensive information regarding the methods employed for image acquisition, as well as any alterations made to the images, including specific details about the software utilized along with its corresponding version number. Any alterations that have the potential to change the scientific interpretation of the image are strictly prohibited.

Image modifications must be disclosed and justified. Permitted changes include:

  • Adjusting brightness, contrast, or color uniformly across the entire image.
  • Indicating spliced images with clear dividing lines.

The utilization of images or figures sourced from previously published materials is contingent upon the authors securing proper authorization from the copyright owner for their re-use. A remark affirming this authorization must be incorporated within the legend of the figure. Proper citation of the original source of an image must be provided, regardless of whether the image is copyrighted or its re-use is permitted under a license that allows unrestricted re-use.

10. Data Sharing and Reproducibility

SHIFRA encourages authors to share datasets in publicly accessible repositories whenever possible, provided this complies with ethical and legal requirements. Data sharing promotes transparency and supports the reproducibility of research findings.

Authors should provide sufficient detail in their methods, protocols, and analysis to support the verification and reproducibility of results. Authors are expected to be prepared to offer public access to raw data related to their scholarly articles and to maintain said data for a minimum duration of two years following publication.

11. Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Notes

Occasionally, following the publication of an article, it may become necessary to effect modifications to its final edited version. The Editor will undertake this task following a thorough evaluation, with the cooperation of the journal team, to ensure that any required modifications adhere to the guidelines provided by COPE. Any required modifications will be accompanied by a permanent post-publication notification that will be permanently linked to the original article. The primary objective of maintaining permanent and visible modifications is to uphold the integrity of the scholarly record.

The various forms of rectifying an academic publication include a Correction notice (Corrigendum or Erratum), an Expression of Concern, a Retraction, or, in exceptional cases, a Removal.

11.1 Corrections (Corrigenda and Errata)

A Correction notice will be published in instances where it is deemed necessary to rectify an error or omission that has the potential to affect the interpretation of the article while ensuring that the scholarly integrity of the article remains unharmed. Examples of such errors include the misidentification of a graphical representation, the omission of pertinent details regarding financial support, or potential conflicts of interest among the authors.

The journal employs two distinct forms of correction notice:

  • Corrigendum: Typically employed to rectify errors that have been introduced by the authors themselves.
  • Erratum: Typically utilized to address issues that have been introduced by the publisher.

11.2 Retractions

A notice of retraction will be issued in cases where a significant error, such as in the analysis or methods, renders the conclusions of the article invalid. Retraction notices will also be issued in instances of research misconduct or publication misconduct, such as conducting research without obtaining necessary ethical approvals, fabricating data, manipulating images, engaging in plagiarism, or publishing duplicate content. The determination to publish a retraction will be conducted in accordance with the rules established by COPE. Authors and institutions may also request the retraction of their papers when their reasons align with the established grounds for retraction.

All retractions published in SHIFRA will adhere to the following guidelines:

  • The retraction and the original article will be linked in both directions.
  • The retracted article will be clearly identified.
  • The original HTML version of the article will be retained, with both the HTML and PDF versions digitally marked as “Retracted.”
  • A comprehensive explanation, detailing the reason for the retraction, will be provided.
  • The individual(s) responsible for requesting the retraction (such as the authors and/or the Editor) will be clearly indicated.

The goal of a retraction, as acknowledged by the journal, is to rectify the existing literature and uphold the integrity of the published record. The primary purpose of these measures is not to serve as a punitive tool against authors. In order to mitigate the consequences of inaccurate or deceptive publications, utmost efforts will be made to issue retractions promptly.

11.3 Expressions of Concern

In certain instances, the issuance of an Expression of Concern notification may be deemed appropriate when significant concerns, such as instances of severe research or publication misconduct, have been raised. This measure is typically employed when the investigation's findings are inconclusive or when the investigation is expected to require a substantial amount of time due to various complexities. Upon the conclusion of the investigation, a Retraction or Correction notice may be issued subsequent to the Expression of Concern. These notices, along with the original article, will continue to be included in the enduring public record.

11.4 Removal Notices

In exceptional cases, a Removal notice may be issued when the issues at hand cannot be effectively resolved through a Retraction or Correction notice. Such instances may arise when the material contained within the article is deemed defamatory, infringing upon legal rights, or subject to a court-issued directive. If an article is withdrawn from the journal online, a notification of removal will be published in its place.

11.5 Withdrawal and Post-Publication Updates

  • Errata: For minor corrections to the published record.
  • Retractions: For significant errors or confirmed misconduct.
  • Commentary Additions: To provide post-publication updates or clarifications.
  • Editorial Notes: To clarify concerns about published work.

11.6 Authorship Disputes in the Context of Corrections

Authorship disputes are typically not resolved through the issuance of retractions. The recommended course of action is to issue a corrigendum. Changes in authorship can be justified provided that the authors can obtain support from their respective institutions.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

12. AI-Assisted Writing, Generative AI, and Integrity Risks

SHIFRA recognizes the evolving role of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools in research and scholarly writing. Please note that this policy refers to the writing process, and not to the use of AI tools to analyze and draw insights from data as part of the research process.

12.1 AI-Assisted Writing Policy

In alignment with COPE guidance, the following principles apply:

  • AI tools cannot be credited as authors. Authorship entails responsibilities and tasks that can only be fulfilled by humans.
  • Any use of generative AI (including text generation, paraphrasing, translation, code generation, or image creation) must be clearly disclosed in the manuscript. A statement to this effect will be included in the published work.
  • Authors retain full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and validity of all submitted content.
  • Authors who incorporate AI and AI-assisted technologies into their writing process should do so with the intention of enhancing readability and language, rather than substituting essential authoring tasks such as generating scientific, pedagogic, or medical insights, drawing scientific conclusions, or offering clinical recommendations.
  • The application of AI technology should always be under human oversight and control, and all work should be subjected to careful review and editing. AI has the potential to produce content that sounds authoritative but may be incorrect, incomplete, or biased.
  • Authors should refrain from listing AI as a co-author. Each author is responsible for addressing inquiries regarding the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work and for approving the final version. Authors also have a duty to ensure the originality of the work, that stated authors meet authorship criteria, and that the work does not infringe upon the rights of third parties.

Such transparency fosters trust among authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors and ensures compliance with the terms of use for the relevant tools or technologies.

12.2 Use of AI in Peer Review

SHIFRA maintains that the responsibilities involved in reviewing a scientific paper require human judgment, critical thinking, and assessment. As such, the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the peer-review process is subject to the following policies:

  • Human Responsibility: The peer-review process demands a level of critical thinking and nuanced evaluation that is beyond the capabilities of generative AI technologies. The responsibility for reviewing scientific papers lies solely with human reviewers and editors.
  • Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors must not upload the manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool. Such tools cannot guarantee the confidentiality, security, or privacy of the materials, which could lead to unauthorized access, storage, or misuse of the manuscript's content. Such actions could violate the confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy rights of the authors, as well as the terms of use of the AI tool.
  • Peer Review Report: The confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report and any related communications, including notification or decision letters. These documents may contain sensitive information about the manuscript and the authors and should not be uploaded into a generative AI tool for any purpose, including language improvement or readability enhancement.
  • AI in Decision-Making: Generative AI should not be utilized to assist in the review, evaluation, or decision-making process of a manuscript. The final judgment regarding the quality, validity, and impact of a submitted manuscript must be made by qualified human reviewers and editors.
  • Ethical AI Use: SHIFRA embraces AI technologies that support the editorial process, provided they adhere to ethical standards. These technologies may be used during initial screening processes, such as for plagiarism checks, completeness verification, and identifying potential reviewers. These AI tools must conform to identity-protected technologies and respect the confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy rights of all involved parties.

12.3 AI-Related Integrity Risks

SHIFRA monitors for indicators that may be associated with inappropriate AI-assisted manipulation or automated text generation. These indicators may include, but are not limited to:

  • Distorted or misleading terminology sometimes referred to as “tortured phrases,” where established scientific terms are replaced with inaccurate or non-standard expressions.
  • Semantic drift caused by automated paraphrasing tools.
  • Fabricated, irrelevant, or unverifiable references.
  • Inconsistent methodological descriptions that may suggest automated or synthetic content generation.

The presence of such indicators does not automatically imply misconduct but may trigger additional editorial assessment.

Where concerns are substantiated following editorial review, actions may include rejection, correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction in accordance with COPE standards.

13. Misconduct Policies and Investigations

SHIFRA takes all forms of research and publication misconduct seriously and will take all necessary action, in accordance with COPE Flowcharts and guidelines, to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

13.1 Types of Misconduct

Examples of misconduct include, but are not limited to:

  • Affiliation misrepresentation
  • Breaches in copyright or use of third-party material without appropriate permissions
  • Citation manipulation
  • Duplicate submission or publication
  • “Ethics dumping”
  • Image or data manipulation and fabrication
  • Peer review manipulation
  • Plagiarism
  • Text recycling and self-plagiarism
  • Undisclosed competing interests
  • Unethical research
  • Redundant publications (inappropriate division of study outcomes into multiple articles)
  • Improper author contribution or attribution

13.2 Specific Misconduct Categories

Duplicate Submission: Manuscripts that are discovered to have been previously published or are currently under review elsewhere will be subject to penalties for duplicate submission and publication. Authors who incorporate their own previously published work into a submitted paper must appropriately acknowledge, cite, and explain the unique contributions of the new submission.

Citation Manipulation: Manuscripts found to contain citations primarily intended to artificially inflate the citation count of a particular author's work or papers published in a specific journal will be subject to penalties for citation manipulation.

Data Fabrication and Falsification: Manuscripts that are discovered to contain fabricated or falsified experimental results, including the inappropriate modification of photographs, will be subject to sanctions for data fabrication and falsification.

Improper Author Contribution or Attribution: All authors listed in the publication must have made substantial scientific contributions to the research and must have given their approval for all claims made within the document. To ensure comprehensive recognition of key scientific contributions, it is essential to include all those involved, including students and laboratory personnel.

Redundant Publications: Redundant publications involve the inappropriate division of study outcomes into multiple articles.

Image Manipulation: Any modifications to images that contravene the editorial policy, journal policies, publishing ethics, or any relevant guidelines established by COPE, WAME, ICMJE, and STM will be treated as misconduct.

13.3 Investigation Process

Alleged instances of misconduct will be investigated in accordance with established protocols and COPE Flowcharts. The investigation process includes:

  • Preliminary editorial assessment and documentation of concerns.
  • Author notification and opportunity to respond.
  • Institutional communication where necessary.
  • Formal Editorial Board review and recorded decision.

13.4 Outcomes

Outcomes of misconduct investigations may include rejection, correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction, depending on the severity and evidentiary findings. Suspected cases may be reported to the authors' institutions. Where investigations are ongoing and concerns are credible, an Expression of Concern may be issued to maintain transparency.

Misconduct includes actions that contravene the editorial policy, journal policies, publishing ethics, or any relevant guidelines outlined by COPE, WAME, ICMJE, and STM. Any activities that pose a risk to or undermine the integrity of the research and publication process may be considered as potential instances of misconduct.

14. Publication Ethics — Duties of Editors, Reviewers, and Authors

The journal and its editorial board fully adhere to and comply with the policies and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

14.1 Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions: The responsibility for determining the papers to be published in the journal lies with the editorial board. The decision-making process involves consulting reviewer recommendations while adhering to legal obligations pertaining to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The origins of a manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political opinions, race, or religion of the authors, do not influence editorial judgments.

Confidentiality, Disclosure, and Conflicts of Interest: During the article review process, editors must maintain strict confidentiality by refraining from sharing any information pertaining to the submitted manuscript with individuals other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers. The utilization of unpublished materials revealed in a submitted manuscript is strictly prohibited in the research endeavors of an editor, reviewer, or any other reader unless explicit written permission is obtained from the author. Readers must be provided with comprehensive information regarding the funding sources for research, including any potential involvement of the funders in the study process and publication.

Author Relations: Editors make efforts to ensure that the peer review process is characterized by fairness, impartiality, and timeliness. The journal has implemented specific protocols to manage submissions from members of the editorial board, thereby ensuring an unbiased review process. The guidelines provided by the author instructions offer direction for the criteria that determine authorship.

Reviewer Relations: The journal strongly encourages reviewers to provide feedback on ethical concerns and potential misconduct that may arise from submitted manuscripts, such as unethical research design and inappropriate manipulation of data. Reviewers are also expected to remain vigilant in identifying instances of repetitive publication and plagiarism. The complete reviewers' comments should be transmitted to the authors unless they include offensive or defamatory statements. The journal continuously recognizes the contributions made by reviewers and discontinues the utilization of reviewers who consistently provide evaluations that are discourteous, of poor quality, or submitted after the designated deadline.

Quality Assurance: Editors must undertake appropriate measures to uphold the caliber of the content they disseminate while acknowledging that distinct sections of the journal may possess varying objectives and criteria. Editors must ensure that the research they publish has obtained approval from a suitable governing authority, such as a research ethics committee or institutional review board, if applicable. Editors must remain vigilant on matters pertaining to intellectual property and collaborate closely with the publisher to effectively address any potential violations of legal and ethical standards. Errors, inaccuracies, or misleading statements must be swiftly rectified and given appropriate prominence.

14.2 Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Reviewers play a crucial role in aiding the editorial board in making editorial decisions. The review process should adhere to principles of objectivity, with observations expressed clearly and accompanied by supporting arguments. This approach enables authors to utilize the feedback provided to enhance the quality of their articles. Engaging in personal criticism of the author is deemed unacceptable.

Qualification of Reviewers: If any chosen referee deems themselves inadequately equipped to assess the research presented in a submission or anticipates being unable to conduct a timely assessment, the reviewer is expected to inform the editor and withdraw from the review process. Reviewers must refrain from evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competing, collaborative, or other affiliations or associations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the respective articles.

Confidentiality: All manuscripts submitted for evaluation must be regarded as confidential materials. Privileged information or ideas acquired through the process of peer review must not be utilized for personal gain.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ascertain pertinent scholarly literature that has not been referenced by the authors. Appropriate citations should be provided when referring to the concepts or thoughts of other individuals. In addition, a reviewer must notify the editor of any significant resemblance or duplication between the article being evaluated and any other previously published work of which the reviewer possesses firsthand knowledge.

14.3 Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards: Authors of research reports are expected to provide a precise depiction of the work conducted, together with an impartial analysis of its importance. The underlying data must be correctly represented in the article. Authors are expected to be prepared to offer public access to unprocessed data related to a scholarly article and to maintain said data for a minimum duration of two years following publication. Engaging in fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements is considered unethical and constitutes unacceptable behavior.

Originality, Plagiarism, and Concurrent Publication: Authors must guarantee that their work is completely original and that they have duly recognized any borrowed work or words from others. Plagiarism, in its various forms, represents unethical conduct in the realm of publication and is deemed unacceptable. The simultaneous submission of an identical manuscript to multiple journals is considered unethical publishing conduct and is likewise inappropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors must provide a comprehensive disclosure of any financial or substantive conflicts of interest in their manuscript, as these conflicts have the potential to impact the outcomes or interpretation of their work. All sources of financial assistance for the project must be declared.

Authorship of the Paper: It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure that the manuscript includes all suitable co-authors and excludes any inappropriate co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and given their approval for the final version of the paper, as well as agreed to its submission for publication. Individuals who have made substantial contributions must be included as co-authors, and those who have actively participated in certain substantive components of the study should be acknowledged as contributors.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

15. Use of Third-Party Material

It is essential to acquire the necessary authorization for the utilization of third-party content in scholarly manuscripts. The materials encompassed in this requirement may consist of various forms, including but not limited to text, illustrations, photographs, tables, data, audio recordings, video footage, film stills, screenshots, and musical notation.

The utilization of brief excerpts of textual content and certain other forms of material is generally acceptable, within limits, for the purposes of criticism and evaluation, without necessitating formal authorization. However, if authors intend to incorporate any content in their work that is not subject to their own copyright and falls outside the scope of this informal agreement, it is essential that they secure written consent from the copyright holder before submitting the material.

16. Preprints Policy

Authors may share their preprints anywhere and at any time. If a preprint is accepted for publication in SHIFRA, authors are encouraged to link from the preprint to their formal publication via its Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Authors may update their preprints on platforms such as arXiv, RePEc, or other preprint servers with their accepted manuscript.

The Preprint archive will not be regarded as a redundant publication by the journal.

17. Special Issues and Editorial Appointments

17.1 Special Issue Topics

Special issue topics are determined by the editorial team of SHIFRA. Special issue submissions follow the same process and author guidelines as any regular issue submission. Potential authors are encouraged to review all submission guidelines and follow the process as outlined. A call for submissions for special issues is typically included in the current year's special issue release.

17.2 Appointment of Guest Editors

Guest Editors for special issues are selected based on their expertise, academic reputation, and previous editorial experience. Potential Guest Editors may be nominated by the journal's editorial board, existing editors, or through self-nomination. Nominations are reviewed by the journal's editorial board and approved by the Editor-in-Chief.

Guest Editors are responsible for defining the scope of the special issue, drafting the call for papers, managing manuscript submissions, overseeing the peer review process, ensuring quality and originality, and making final decisions on manuscript acceptance in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief.

17.3 Setup of Special Issues

To initiate a special issue, a detailed proposal must be submitted, including the theme, objectives, target audience, potential Guest Editors, and a timeline. The proposal is reviewed and approved by the journal's editorial board and the Editor-in-Chief. Once approved, a call for papers is announced and promoted through various channels. A clear timeline is established for manuscript submission, peer review, and publication to ensure the special issue aligns with the journal's regular publication schedule.

17.4 Editorial and Review Process for Special Issues

Manuscripts for special issues are submitted through the journal's online submission system and undergo an initial screening by the Guest Editors to ensure they fit the scope and meet basic quality standards. The manuscripts then undergo the standard peer review process, with reviewers selected based on their expertise. Authors revise their manuscripts based on reviewer feedback, and final publication decisions are made in accordance with the journal's editorial policies.

17.5 Publication Timing

Submissions to SHIFRA are accepted on an ongoing basis and should follow the requested submission types and adhere to the full author guidelines. Submissions are considered for publication in a pending issue once deemed ready for publication, not necessarily based on the date of submission. All issues of SHIFRA, including special issues, follow the same editorial and review process and adhere to the guidelines included herein. The journal encourages and welcomes submissions.

18. Publisher and Journal Information

SHIFRA is published by Peninsula Press. The journal is dedicated to the ethical dissemination of research findings and follows international standards to maintain publication integrity.

SHIFRA and its editorial board fully adhere to and comply with the policies and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including the COPE Code of Conduct.

For more information, please visit: COPE Guidelines | COPE Flowcharts | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)

© SHIFRA — Peninsula Press — All rights reserved. Published in adherence to COPE principles.