Publishing ethics & research integrity
Ethical, rigorous and transparent research is essential for safe patient care and trustworthy medical science. This page sets out how IUMS journals expect authors, editors, reviewers and the publisher to protect research participants, research animals, data integrity and the scholarly record.
1 Overview & scope
Why ethics and integrity matter for IUMS journals.
Publication in a peer-reviewed medical journal goes far beyond simply sharing data: it can shape clinical guidelines, inform health policy, influence patient care and affect academic careers. Because of this impact, everyone involved in the publication process at IUMS – authors, editors, reviewers, editorial staff and the publisher – is expected to follow clear, written standards of ethical behaviour and research integrity.
This policy covers both research ethics (responsible conduct of studies involving humans, animals and in vitro models) and publication ethics (authorship, peer review, editorial decisions, conflicts of interest, data management, patient consent and post-publication updates). It is informed by international frameworks such as the 2024 revision of the Declaration of Helsinki and ICMJE Recommendations for human research, as well as COPE guidance and good-practice documents from major scholarly publishers.
Individual IUMS journals may publish additional, more detailed policies. Where journal-specific rules are stricter than this page, the stricter standard applies.
2 Core ethical principles in medical & health research
Broad principles that apply across human, animal and laboratory research.
Ethically sound research combines strong scientific design with respect for people, animals and communities. Across study types, IUMS journals emphasise:
- Scientific rigour: research questions, methods and analyses should be appropriate and robust enough to generate useful, interpretable knowledge. Exposing humans or animals to risk without a realistic prospect of benefit to science or health is not acceptable.
- Respect for persons: including respect for dignity, autonomy, cultural context and privacy, with special care for those who may be vulnerable or have limited capacity to consent.
- Beneficence and non-maleficence: maximising potential benefits and minimising foreseeable harms, while maintaining a favourable risk–benefit balance throughout the project.
- Justice and fairness: fair selection of participants, equitable access to potential benefits, and avoidance of exploitation in low-resource settings.
- Integrity and accountability: honest design, conduct, analysis and reporting; willingness to correct the record when necessary; and openness to scrutiny by peers.
These principles also apply to professional conduct in publishing. Authors, editors and reviewers must treat one another with courtesy, avoid discrimination and harassment, and use formal channels (not personal attacks) to raise concerns and resolve disagreements.
3 Responsibilities of IUMS journals & the publisher
How IUMS supports integrity and editorial independence.
IUMS serves as the host and publisher for a portfolio of peer-reviewed medical and health journals. In that role, IUMS aims to safeguard the scholarly record by:
- providing reliable submission, peer-review and production systems;
- supporting editors with training and tools for plagiarism screening, image integrity checks and other research-integrity safeguards;
- maintaining clear policies that align with COPE guidance and internationally recognised good practice; and
- ensuring that confidential information (manuscripts, reviews, personal data) is handled securely and used only for legitimate editorial purposes.
Each journal retains editorial independence. Editors make decisions based on the scientific quality, ethical soundness and relevance of submissions, not on authors’ affiliations, nationality, commercial considerations or predicted citation impact. Where journals are owned or sponsored by external organisations (societies, institutions, funders), governance arrangements should protect this independence.
IUMS journals cooperate with institutions, funders and other publishers when investigating suspected misconduct or serious ethical concerns, following fair, proportionate processes that respect due process and confidentiality as far as possible.
4 Research involving human participants, data or biological materials
Ethics review, risk–benefit and responsible conduct of human research.
All submissions that involve human participants, identifiable personal data or human biological specimens must demonstrate appropriate ethical oversight. Manuscripts should clearly state:
- the name of the responsible ethics committee or institutional review board;
- the approval number or written waiver (where applicable); and
- the main ethical frameworks or regulations followed (for example, the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant national regulations).
Ethical review is usually required not only for interventional clinical trials, but also for observational studies, registries, retrospective chart reviews, surveys, qualitative studies, and secondary analyses of identifiable data. Multi-centre projects must ensure that all relevant committees approve the protocol, or that a central review has been accepted by participating sites.
When formal ethics review was not required under local rules (for example, because data were fully anonymised before the research team received them), authors must explain the basis for this in the Methods section and describe how fundamental ethical principles – including respect for persons, confidentiality and fairness – were upheld in practice.
5 Informed consent, privacy & vulnerable groups
Consent is a process, and privacy protection extends beyond de-identification.
Informed consent should be viewed as an ongoing conversation between researchers and participants, not as a one-time signature. Participants should receive concise, understandable information about:
- the purpose of the study, procedures and expected duration;
- foreseeable risks and burdens, potential benefits and alternatives;
- data handling, including who will have access and how long data will be stored; and
- their rights, including the right to refuse or withdraw without negative consequences for clinical care or other entitlements.
Consent materials and discussions should be appropriate to local language, literacy and cultural norms, allowing time for questions. Where capacity is limited – for example in minors, adults lacking decision-making capacity or other vulnerable groups – legal requirements for surrogate consent and participant assent must be followed. Research with such groups requires strong scientific and ethical justification, particularly when risks are more than minimal or direct benefit is uncertain.
Protection of privacy involves more than removing obvious identifiers. Authors should minimise collection of identifiable data, use coding or pseudonymisation where possible, and describe who had access to identifiable information and under what safeguards. When data cross borders, authors must respect applicable data-protection laws and institutional policies.
6 Patient images, case reports & consent for publication
Case narratives and clinical images can be highly identifiable and require explicit consent for publication.
Case reports and image-based articles contribute valuable clinical insight but often include details that could allow a patient, or those close to them, to recognise the individual. Whenever an article contains identifiable information – including photographs, videos, voice recordings or detailed descriptions of rare conditions – authors must obtain specific written consent for publication in a scientific journal.
Consent for clinical care or for participation in research does not automatically cover publication. A separate publication consent should explain in plain language:
- what information and images will be published and in what formats;
- that publication may occur online and in print, potentially indexed by search engines and archived long-term;
- that complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed, even when identifiers are removed; and
- under which licence (for example, Creative Commons) the material will be shared.
Signed consent forms should be stored securely by the authors’ institution and be available to the journal on request. They should not normally be uploaded with the manuscript to avoid unnecessary exposure of personal data.
Simple masking (such as placing a bar over the eyes) is usually insufficient to guarantee anonymity and should not be relied upon alone. If there is any reasonable chance of recognition, written consent is required.
7 Clinical trials, registration & transparency
Prospective registration and transparent reporting are conditions for publication.
Interventional clinical trials must be registered in a publicly accessible registry before enrolment of the first participant. IUMS journals accept registries that meet WHO and ICMJE criteria, including ClinicalTrials.gov, IRCT and other primary registries within the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
Manuscripts reporting clinical trials should:
- include the registration number in the abstract and Methods section;
- describe primary and secondary outcomes, eligibility criteria and planned analyses consistent with the registered protocol; and
- explain and justify any substantial deviations from the registered design, including changes to outcomes or analysis plans.
Selective reporting of favourable outcomes or suppression of unfavourable results is unethical and can mislead clinicians and patients. IUMS journals encourage use of established reporting guidelines (such as CONSORT and extensions) and require an explicit statement about data-sharing plans for clinical trials, in line with ICMJE data-sharing recommendations.
8 Research involving animals
Animal studies must comply with law, welfare standards and the “3Rs”.
Manuscripts reporting studies with live vertebrate animals (and other organisms covered by local regulations) must state:
- the ethics committee or regulatory body that approved the work;
- licence or permit numbers, where applicable; and
- the main welfare frameworks or laws followed.
Authors should design animal experiments according to the “3Rs”: replacement (use non-animal alternatives whenever they can answer the research question), reduction (use the minimum number of animals necessary for robust conclusions) and refinement (minimise pain, distress and lasting harm). Descriptions should include species, strain, sex, age, housing conditions, anaesthesia and analgesia, monitoring and humane endpoints.
IUMS journals encourage adherence to the ARRIVE reporting guidelines or discipline-specific equivalents, including transparent reporting of randomisation, blinding, sample size calculations, inclusion and exclusion criteria and management of missing data. Inadequate description of animal welfare or experimental design may lead to requests for major revision or rejection.
9 In vitro, ex vivo & laboratory models
Ethical and high-quality use of cell lines, tissues and other laboratory systems.
In vitro and ex vivo studies involving cell lines, primary cells, tissue explants, organoids or similar systems must be described with enough detail for readers to judge both scientific quality and ethical compliance. Where materials are derived from humans or animals, authors should explain:
- how materials were obtained and under which consent or licence;
- whether an ethics committee reviewed and approved their use; and
- any restrictions on storage, reuse or sharing.
Good cell and tissue culture practice includes regular authentication of cell lines, checks for contamination (including mycoplasma), appropriate passage numbers and clear documentation of culture conditions. Misidentified or contaminated lines can undermine entire projects; editors may request evidence of authentication where concerns arise.
Research involving stem cells, embryo-related models, gene editing or other sensitive technologies must comply with applicable professional guidelines and local oversight mechanisms, which should be explicitly acknowledged in the manuscript.
10 Data integrity, analysis & reproducibility
Honest data handling and transparent reporting are central to research integrity.
Ethical research requires accurate and complete reporting of what was done and what was found. Authors should describe their methods with enough detail that a suitably skilled researcher could understand and, where appropriate, repeat the work. This includes recruitment and sampling, data collection procedures, instruments or assays, pre-processing steps, statistical methods, software and version numbers.
Serious breaches of data integrity include:
- fabrication – inventing data or results that were never obtained;
- falsification – manipulating materials, equipment, processes or data (including images) so that the research record no longer reflects the underlying observations; and
- intentional omission of data or analyses that would materially change the interpretation of the findings.
Questionable practices such as selective outcome reporting, unacknowledged “p-hacking”, undisclosed post-hoc subgroup analyses or excessive image enhancement also undermine trust. IUMS journals may request access to original data, unprocessed images or audit trails when integrity concerns arise.
Where possible, authors are encouraged to deposit de-identified datasets, analytic code and related materials in trusted repositories with persistent identifiers and clear licences. When legal, ethical or contractual constraints prevent open sharing, authors should explain these constraints and describe how qualified researchers might request access under controlled conditions.
12 Ethical responsibilities of editors
Editors steward the peer-review process and uphold the journal’s standards.
Editors are responsible for ensuring that only work that is scientifically sound, ethically conducted and relevant to the journal’s scope is accepted for publication. Decisions must be based on the manuscript’s content, not on authors’ personal characteristics, institutional affiliation, nationality, political views or commercial considerations.
Editors must:
- manage conflicts of interest by declining to handle manuscripts where their judgment could reasonably be questioned (for example, due to recent collaboration, institutional ties or financial interests);
- organise fair and timely peer review, typically involving at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise;
- treat manuscripts, reviews and correspondence as confidential, sharing them only with those directly involved in the editorial process or in an authorised investigation; and
- avoid using unpublished information obtained through editorial work for personal research advantage or for others’ benefit without explicit permission.
Editors should not pressure authors to cite the journal’s content unless such citations are clearly justified on scholarly grounds. Journal metrics must not override considerations of research quality and integrity.
13 Ethical responsibilities of peer reviewers
Peer review is a professional service that depends on expertise, fairness and confidentiality.
Reviewers should accept invitations only when they have suitable expertise and can commit to providing a thorough, unbiased review within a reasonable timeframe. If they feel unqualified, have insufficient time or identify a significant conflict of interest, they should decline promptly.
Manuscripts sent for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers:
- must not share manuscripts with colleagues or students without the editor’s permission and appropriate acknowledgement;
- must not use unpublished data or ideas obtained through review for their own research or for others’ benefit without explicit consent from authors and the editor; and
- should focus their comments on the scientific content, clarity and ethical aspects of the work, avoiding personal or inflammatory language.
Reviewers should declare any relationships or interests that could be perceived as influencing their assessment (for example, recent collaboration with the authors, institutional links, competing research programmes or financial interests). Use of AI tools in peer review must follow the IUMS AI policy: in particular, confidential manuscripts and reports must not be uploaded to public AI services.
14 Allegations of misconduct & questionable practices
How IUMS journals respond to concerns about integrity.
Misconduct can occur at any stage of the research and publication process. Examples include, but are not limited to:
- fabrication or falsification of data, including inappropriate image manipulation;
- plagiarism, text or figure reuse without proper citation, or undisclosed translation of previously published work;
- improper authorship (guest, gift or ghost authorship) and undisclosed conflicts of interest;
- duplicate or redundant publication without transparency;
- manipulation of peer review (for example, fake reviewer identities, paper mills or inappropriate influence on reviewers); and
- unethical treatment of human participants, research animals or sensitive biological materials.
Concerns may be raised by editors, reviewers, readers, institutions or other stakeholders. Editors will first assess whether the concerns are specific and credible. Depending on the case, they may:
- seek clarification or additional information from the authors;
- request original data, unprocessed images or documentation (for example, ethics approvals, consent forms);
- consult additional reviewers or subject-matter experts; and/or
- contact institutional research-integrity or ethics offices for formal investigation.
Investigations should be conducted fairly, without presuming misconduct, and should respect confidentiality as far as possible. IUMS journals aim to follow COPE-aligned procedures and flowcharts when handling such cases. Outcomes may include rejection of the manuscript, publication of a correction, expression of concern or retraction, and in serious or repeated cases, restrictions on future submissions or reviewer roles.
15 Corrections, retractions & post-publication updates
Maintaining the integrity of the published record over time.
IUMS journals have a duty to correct the record when errors or integrity issues are identified. The chosen approach depends on how seriously the problem affects the reliability of the work:
- Corrections (errata or corrigenda) are issued when a specific error is identified that does not invalidate the main findings but may mislead readers if left unaddressed.
- Retractions are used when results or conclusions are no longer reliable, when serious misconduct is confirmed, or when ethical problems make continued availability inappropriate.
- Expressions of concern may be published when credible concerns exist but investigations are ongoing or evidence is incomplete.
- Addenda or updates can be used when important additional information becomes available that does not alter the main conclusions but is important for readers.
Correction and retraction notices should clearly explain what is being corrected or retracted and why, indicate who is taking the action (authors, editor, publisher) and be freely accessible and linked to the original article. In most cases, the original article remains available with a clear notice; complete removal is reserved for exceptional circumstances (for example, serious legal or privacy concerns).
16 Education, training & oversight
Sustained integrity depends on culture, training and shared responsibility.
High standards of research and publication ethics cannot be achieved by rules alone. IUMS encourages institutions, research groups and journals to provide regular training on topics such as research ethics, responsible authorship, peer review, data management, conflicts of interest, patient privacy and responsible use of new technologies, including AI-based tools.
Editors and reviewers are encouraged to keep up to date with guidance from COPE, ICMJE and discipline-specific professional societies, and to participate in workshops and other educational activities. Journals should periodically review how well their policies function in practice and revise them when gaps or new challenges are identified (for example, systematic manipulation of the publication process, evolving AI tools, or new data-protection frameworks).
17 Contact & reporting concerns
How to raise questions or integrity concerns related to IUMS journals.
Questions about this publishing ethics and research integrity policy, or concerns about specific manuscripts or published articles, can be directed to:
- Research ethics & integrity: journals@iums.ac.ir
- Journal-specific questions: please contact the editorial office using the email address listed on the journal’s home page.
Policy version: v1.1 – last updated April 2025. This page will be revised periodically to reflect developments in international standards, regulations and community expectations.