Ethical standards
HN JOURNAL and its reviewers adhere to international ethical standards for scientific research, adopted at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity-Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. (2nd World Conference on Research Integrity-Singapore):
Singapore Declaration on Research Integrity
Preamble
The value and benefits of research depend substantially on the integrity with which it is conducted. While there are differences between countries and disciplines in the way research is organized and conducted, there are also professional principles and responsibilities that are fundamental to research integrity, wherever it is conducted.
Principles
- Honesty in all aspects of research.
- Responsibility for the execution of the investigation.
- Professional courtesy and impartiality in labor relations.
- Good management of research on behalf of others
Responsibilities
- Integrity: Researchers should be held accountable for the honesty of their research.
- Compliance: Researchers should be aware of and comply with research-related rules and policies.
- Research methods: Researchers should apply appropriate methods, base their conclusions on a critical analysis of the evidence, and report their results and interpretations in a complete and objective manner.
- Documentation of research: Researchers should maintain clear and accurate documentation of all research so that others can verify and reproduce their work.
- Research results: Researchers should share data and results openly and without delay, as soon as they have established priority over their use and ownership over them.
- Authorship: Researchers should take responsibility for their contributions to all publications, funding applications, reports, and other ways of presenting their research. Lists of authors should include all those who meet the applicable authorship criteria and only them (check here).
- Acknowledgments in publications: Researchers should mention in publications the names and roles of those who have made significant contributions to the research, including editors, sponsors, and others who do not meet the criteria for authorship.
- Peer review: When evaluating the work of others, researchers should provide impartial, prompt, and rigorous evaluations and respect confidentiality.
- Conflicts of interest: Researchers should disclose any conflicts of interest, whether financial or otherwise, that compromise the reliability of their work, in research proposals, publications, and public communications, as well as in any evaluation activities.
- Public communication: When engaging in public debates about the application and significance of research results, researchers should limit their professional comments to the areas of expertise in which they are recognized and make a clear distinction between professional comments and opinions based on personal views.
- Reporting irresponsible research practices: Researchers should report to the appropriate authorities any suspected research misconduct, including fabrication, forgery, plagiarism, or other irresponsible practices that compromise its reliability, such as negligence, incorrect listing of authors, lack of information about contradictory data, or use of misleading analytical methods.
- Responding to irresponsible research practices: Research institutions, journals, organizations, and professional agencies that have research commitments should have procedures in place to respond to allegations of unethical or other irresponsible research practices, as well as to protect those who in good faith report such behavior. If professional misconduct or other irresponsible conduct is confirmed in the investigation, appropriate action should be taken immediately, including correction of the investigation documentation.
- Research Environment: Research institutions should create and maintain conditions that promote integrity through education, clear policies, and reasonable standards for the advancement of research, while fostering a work environment that includes integrity.
Social considerations: Researchers and research institutions should recognize that they have an ethical obligation to weigh the social benefits against the risks inherent in their work.
The Singapore Declaration on Research Integrity was developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, 21-24 July 2010, in Singapore, as a global guide for responsible conduct in research. This is not a regulatory document nor does it represent the official policies of the countries and organizations that funded and/or participated in the Conference. To access official policies, guidelines and regulations related to research integrity, the relevant national bodies and organizations should be consulted.
Complaints and appeals policy
HN JOURNAL follows a procedure for handling complaints and appeals, based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). https://publicationethics.org/appeals
In the event that an author wishes to appeal an editorial decision or file a complaint, the following procedure should be followed:
The author should send a formal letter of appeal to mail: editor@humannetworksjournal.org explaining the reasons for his/her disagreement with the decision made, either in relation to peer review or editorial policy. the journal will follow the flowchart process detailed in the (COPE) guidelines. https://publicationethics.org/node/34586.
Erratum and retraction policy
HN JOURNAL publishes corrections and retractions following the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be consulted at https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines.
When in the editorial process - before or after publication - an author identifies an error in the text, he/she must request the pertinent correction. Depending on the seriousness of the error, the Journal may opt for an erratum or a retraction.
- Erratum: allows correction of the error, as long as it does not prevent the article from continuing to be published.
- Retraction: corrective measure following the recognition of: a) serious errors in the research that invalidate the findings and conclusions of the article derived therefrom, b) faults against the ethics of the Journal.
Retraction consists of declaring that a published article has violated good practices in research, writing or publication. When an article is retracted, the word RETRACTED is superimposed on all its pages, as a notice to all persons who may have used it or who may consult it; in no case is the article withdrawn or removed from the journal. For PROSPECTIVE, a correction or retraction is an action intended to safeguard the integrity of the publication and should not be understood as a punitive action against the authors, or be taken as a fact to punish the authors. It will be the function of the institutions to which the authors belong to investigate potential misconduct and take action according to their regulations or policies.
In the case of a significant error, the author must present to the editor a detailed justification for its retraction; in the case of a minor error, the author must report the error and present a new version with the correction. According to the author's report, the Editorial Committee will determine if it is necessary to resubmit the document for evaluation.
When the Committee considers that the error is unintentional -such as the miscalculation of a figure- but implies a change in the findings, a retraction with republication may be made. This requires a new evaluation and informing readers of the changes in the text.
Similarly, the editorial board of HN JOURNAL will issue a retraction as soon as possible in case any of the following situations are verified:
- Redundant publication, i.e., when authors present the same data in different publications.
- It constitutes plagiarism.
- Results have been previously published in another resource without proper attribution of sources or communication to the publisher, permission to republish, or justification (e.g., cases of redundant publication).
- Contains material or data without permission to use.- Copyright has been infringed or there are other significant legal issues (e.g., defamation, privacy).- Contains unethical research
- Publication is the result of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
- The author/authors failed to declare a major conflict (i.e., conflict of interest) that, according to the editor, would have affected the interpretations, work, or recommendations of the editors and peer reviewers.
Retraction notices shall include the following:
- They will be clearly identified as a retraction.- They will be linked to all electronic versions of the article.- The heading of the retraction will clearly identify the author and title of the article.- State who is retracting the article, the author or the journal editor, and state the reasons for the retraction.- Potentially defamatory statements shall be avoided.Likewise, to process requests for errata or retraction, the author must report the case and submit the proper support through the mail editor@humannetworksjournal.org
The editor and the Editorial Committee should carefully study the requests in order to make the pertinent decisions. If necessary, they may request help from experts in the subject of the article or in the research methodology used. It will be the editor's responsibility to ensure the immediate correction of the text, its dissemination, and the communication of changes by means of an explanatory note that should be published in a timely manner on the journal's web page. Responses to reports or requests for errata will also be made public. In case of errata, the following should be informed: title of the article, error and correction. In case of retraction: title of the article and error. In the case of retraction with republication, the correction made shall be made visible in addition to the above.
Conflict of interest policies
HN JOURNAL in accordance with ICMJE recommendations, if applicable, should declare conflict of interest:• “Authors' relationships and activities; and • Sources of support for the work, including sponsor names along with explanations of the role of those sources if any in study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; any restrictions regarding the submission of the report for publication; or a statement declaring that the supporting source had no such involvement or restrictions regarding publication; and • Whether the authors had access to the study data, with an explanation of the nature and extent of access, including whether access is ongoing.” (https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf)
That means all authors and editorial team members are required to declare (if applicable) explicitly any potential or actual conflict of interest that could influence the content, publication, or evaluation of the work.
- Authors: Authors should declare any financial, personal, academic, or professional interests that could influence the interpretation of their research results. This declaration should include, among others, financial support from institutions, company affiliations, patents or any relationship with third parties that could generate a bias.If there is a conflict of interest, the conflict of interest statement must be attached according to the model proposed by the ICMJE ( https://www.icmje.org/downloads/coi_disclosure.docx ). In cases where an undeclared conflict of interest is identified during the review process or after publication, the journal will investigate the matter and publish an erratum or retraction as appropriate.
- Editors/Reviewers: Editors and reviewers are required to declare any conflict of interest in relation to manuscripts they manage. If an editor has a conflict, the editorial process will be overseen by another member of the team with no related interests. At all times, the journal is committed to maintaining the integrity of the editorial process.
Data exchange and reproducibility policies
HN JOURNAL is guided by the recommendations of the Center for Open Science regarding data management: "the research data accompanying the publication will be made available when requested by the authors and as long as their quality and integrity are guaranteed and there are no restrictions. The set of data and codes (databases, forms, repositories and research procedures) that demonstrate the origin of the conclusions and results presented in the articles must comply with the principles of reproducibility and reusability" (https://www.cos.io/initiatives/top-guidelines). Informed consent and pertinent authorizations are very important for data managment and ethical process
Procedures to Ensure Ethical Aspects in Human Subjects Research
In the case of research involving human subjects, the research protocol must specify the following aspects:
- The known benefits and known risks or inconveniences for the subjects involved in the study.
- The precise description of the information to be provided to study subjects and when it will be communicated orally or in writing. Examples of such information include:
- The objectives and purposes of the study
- Any experimental procedures
- Duration of the study
- Anticipated benefits of the procedures applied
- Any known short- or long-term risks
- Possible discomforts
- Alternative methods available for treatment if the study is a trial of a treatment
- Discontinuation of the study when negative effects or sufficient evidence of positive effects are found that do not justify continuing with the study
- The freedom of subjects to withdraw from the study at any time they wish to do so.
Note: If applicable, indicate any special incentives or treatment that subjects will receive for their participation in the study. In case there is any type of remuneration, specify the amount, manner of delivery, time and the reason why the payment is required.
- Indicate how the confidentiality of the study participants' information will be maintained.
- List the drugs, vaccines, diagnosis, procedure or instrument to be used, regardless of whether it is registered, unregistered, new or in current use in the country.
Other ethical issues must also be addressed, such as:
- For studies where personal information will be obtained from subjects, indicate how the information will be kept confidential.
- For studies that involve the participation of subjects in an experiment (experimental trials, quasi-experimental, intervention studies, etc.), information should be provided about the free and informed consent of the participants and the strategy that will be used to obtain it.
- Brief outline of how the research findings will be reported and delivered to the subjects involved in the study or other interested parties.
- Indicate and justify the inclusion, as appropriate, of children, elderly, physically handicapped, and pregnant women. Justify the non-inclusion in the study group, if applicable, of women (of any age) or ethnic minority, racial group, etc.
Where appropriate, indicate how the appropriate balance of the two sexes will be ensured in the study groups. Also, when applicable, indicate how gender inequities and the condition of discrimination and disadvantage of the situation of women can affect the control over their involvement in the research.
Informed Consent
Attach the informed consent form to be signed by the persons participating as subjects in the study. This form should be prepared according to the following guidelines:
- Individual Informed Consent
In all biomedical research involving human subjects, the investigator should obtain the informed consent of the prospective subject or, if the individual lacks the capacity to give informed consent, proxy consent from a duly authorized representative.
- Essential Information for Prospective Research Subjects
Before seeking a person's consent to participate in research, in a language that the person can understand:
- The individual nature of the invitation to participate as a research subject, as well as the objectives and methods of the research;
- The anticipated duration of the subject's participation;
- The benefits, to the subject or to others, that could reasonably be expected to result from the research;
- Any foreseeable risk or discomfort to the subject resulting from participation in the research;
- Any alternative procedure or treatment that would be as advantageous to the subject as the procedure or treatment being tested;
- The extent to which the confidentiality of records in which the subject's identity is indicated will be maintained;
- The extent of the investigator's obligation, if any, to provide medical services to the subject;
- That treatment will be provided free of charge for certain types of research-related injuries;
- That the subject, the subject's family or dependents will be compensated in the event of disability or death resulting from such injuries;
- That the subject is free to refuse to participate and shall be free to withdraw from the research at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which he/she would be entitled.
- Obligations of the investigators
- Convey to the prospective subject all the information he/she needs to give properly informed consent;
- To provide the alleged subject with ample opportunity to ask questions and to encourage him/her to do so;
- To exclude any possibility of unwarranted deception, undue influence, or intimidation.
- Ask for the subject's consent only when the subject has full knowledge of the relevant facts and the consequences of participation, and has had sufficient opportunity to decide whether to participate in the research;
- As a general rule, have the alleged subject sign some document attesting to his or her informed consent; and
- Renew the informed consent of each subject if the conditions or procedures of the research undergo major changes.
- Incentives for participation
Subjects may be paid for inconvenience and time lost and may be reimbursed for expenses incurred in connection with their participation in the research; they may also be provided with free medical care. However, the payments should not be so large or the medical services so extensive as to induce the alleged subjects to consent to participate in the research against their better judgment ('undue inducement'). All payments, reimbursements and medical services to be provided to research subjects must be authorized by an ethics review committee.
- Investigations involving minors
Before undertaking research with minors, the investigator should ensure that:
- Minors are not involved in research that could equally well be conducted with adults.
- The purpose of the research is to obtain knowledge applicable to the health needs of minors.
- The parent or guardian of each minor has given consent by proxy.
- The consent of each minor has been obtained to the extent that his or her capacity permits;
- The minor's refusal to participate in research is always respected unless, in accordance with the relevant protocol, the minor must receive treatment for which there is no medically acceptable alternative;
- The risk posed by interventions that are not undertaken for the purpose of benefiting the individual child-subject is low and proportionate to the importance of the knowledge to be gained; and
- Interventions that are undertaken for the purpose of providing therapeutic benefit are likely to be at least as advantageous to the child-subject as any other available alternative.
- Research Involving Persons with Mental Health Conditions or Behavioral Disorders
Before undertaking research with persons who, because of mental or behavioral disorders, are incapable of giving sufficiently informed consent, the investigator should ensure that:
- Such persons are not subjects of research that could equally well be conducted with persons who are of sound mind;
- The purpose of the research is to acquire knowledge applicable to the specific health needs of persons with mental health conditions or behavioral disorders;
- The consent of each subject has been obtained to the extent that his or her capacity permits, and the refusal of the alleged subjects to participate in non-clinical research is always respected;
- Informed consent is obtained from the guardian or other duly authorized person in the case of incapacitated subjects;
- The degree of risk assigned to interventions whose purpose is not to benefit the individual subject is low and proportionate to the importance of the knowledge to be gained; and
- Interventions intended to produce a therapeutic benefit are likely to be at least as advantageous as any other option.
- Prisoner Research
Prisoners with serious diseases or at risk of contracting them should not be deprived of drugs, vaccines or other experimental agents with promising therapeutic or prophylactic effects.
- Research with Subjects from Underdeveloped Communities
Before undertaking research with subjects from underdeveloped communities, whether in developed or developing countries, the investigator should ensure that:
- Subjects from underdeveloped communities do not regularly participate in research that could reasonably be conducted in developed communities;
- The research is responsive to the health needs and priorities of the community in which it is conducted;
- Every effort is made to safeguard the ethical imperative of informed consent for each subject; and
- The research project has been reviewed and approved by an ethical review committee whose members or consultants include persons who are knowledgeable about the customs and traditions of the community.
- Informed consent in epidemiological studies
In several types of epidemiological research, personal informed consent is impracticable or inadvisable. In such cases, the ethics review committee must determine whether it is ethically acceptable to proceed without individual informed consent, and whether the investigator's plans to safeguard the subjects' safety, respect their right to privacy, and maintain the confidentiality of the data are appropriate.
(Selection cited from Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences / CIOMS in collaboration with the World Health Organization, International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, Scientific Publication 563, Pan American Health Organization / World Health Organization [PAHO/WHO], Washington, 1996).
