Publication Ethics

COPE Ethics – COMMITTEE ON PUBLICATION ETHICS Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct

Duties and Responsibilities of the Editor of Vachira Phuket Health and Public Health Sciences Journal (VCHPK Health and Public Health Sciences Journal) (Updated 25 February 2025)

The Editor-in-chief should be responsible for everything published in the journal under his/her responsibility, namely:

Reviewing and screening articles and research methods submitted for publication by academic principles
Providing recommendations for clarity according to the wishes of readers and authors
Revising, reviewing, controlling, and listening to suggestions from the editorial board to develop the journal regularly
Assuring the quality of published research
Supporting academic freedom in expressing opinions on research articles
Maintaining the accuracy of academic work and the publication standards of the journal editorial board
Protecting and defending the standards of intellectual property from business demands
Willing to edit, improve, and provide friendly advice
Coordinating and organizing regular editorial board meetings

Duties of the Editor to Readers

The readers should be informed about the sponsors of the research and the role of the sponsors in conducting the research.
Maintain the standards of publication of academic articles and research in accordance with the journal's requirements and international standards.

The editor's duties to authors

Take every step to ensure the quality of published articles to ensure the quality of published research.
The editor's decision to accept or reject a research article for publication depends on the academic accuracy, significance, novelty, and clarity of the research article or academic article.
The peer review process is explained or provided.
The journal provides an avenue for authors to appeal if they differ from the editor's decision.
Publish advice to authors on all issues that the editor expects and on all matters that the author should be aware of, and should include references or links to these regulations.
The editor does not change the decision to accept a rejected article, unless serious problems arise during the submission of the article for consideration, and strictly adheres to publication ethics.
Consider qualified experts with expertise in the field of the article and send the article to reviewers without the reviewers knowing the names of the authors and the authors without the reviewers knowing the names of the reviewers. (Double-blind)

Editors' Duties to Reviewers

Guidance for reviewers should be published on all issues that editors expect and should be updated regularly, with references or links to the Code.
Systems should be in place to protect reviewer privacy unless the journal has an open-access journal that has notified authors and reviewers in advance.

Article Evaluation Process

There is a system to ensure that articles submitted to the journal will be kept confidential during the evaluation process. The reviewers will not know the names of the authors and the authors will not know the names of the reviewers (Double-blind).
There is a system for reviewing articles that follows the criteria and guidelines specified by the journal.

Complaints

Editors should follow the procedures set out in the flow chart by the journal's editorial board and ethics committee.
Editors should promptly respond to complaints and should assure complainants that they can file a complaint if they are not satisfied.

Promoting debate

Reviews of articles published in the journal should be disclosed unless the editor has good reason to withhold them.
Allow authors of articles that have been criticized by others to respond to the journal's library.
Research studies that report negative findings should be included in the article; this section should not be omitted.

Supporting academic integrity

Editors should ensure that all details in research articles published in the journal comply with internationally accepted ethical principles.
Editors should seek evidence to ensure that all research to be published has been approved and endorsed by a competent body. Authors should provide the ethics number, the ethics agency, and the date of the ethical approval in the research ethics section of the article.

Protection of personal information

Editors should protect the confidentiality of personal information, such as patient-physician relationships.
Editors should obtain written consent from patients if their names or images appear in reports or articles. However, articles can be published without a consent form if the article is of public health importance or there is difficulty in obtaining a consent form and the person does not object to publication.

Monitoring misconduct

Monitoring misconduct in cases of suspicion, including both published and unpublished research articles.
Research articles that may have misconduct issues should not be rejected immediately.
The editor should seek answers from the accused person, but if not satisfied with the answer, ask the supervisor or relevant group to verify the facts.
Act as specified in the workflow chart of the Publication Ethics Committee when necessary.
Efforts should be made to ensure that the fact-finding process is properly conducted and based on reason.

Certification of the accuracy of the academic work

When it is known that there are inaccuracies in a published research or academic article, including sentences that lead to misunderstanding or distortion of the facts, the editor must correct them immediately and clearly.
If misconduct is found after the investigation, the article must be retracted with a clear and verifiable basis.

Relationships with journal owners and publishers

The relationship between editors, publishers, and journal owners is often complex. However, it should be based on editorial independence.
Editors should base their decisions about accepting articles for publication on quality and readership rather than financial returns or other factors that affect the quality of the research and other benefits.

Commercial considerations

The policy on advertising should be announced that emphasizes content that is relevant to the content of the journal.
Do not publish advertising that may cause misunderstanding. Be willing to publish criticism.
When republishing an original article, it must maintain the original format in all respects, except if there is an addition or a correction.

Conflict of interests

There should be a system for managing conflicts of interest of the editors themselves, as well as of the journal staff, authors, reviewers and members of the editorial board.
There should be a transparent and verifiable management and auditing system.

Process for handling complaints against the editors that are sent to the Publication Ethics Committee

Complaints from authors, readers, and reviewers may be sent to the Publication Ethics Committee for consideration.
When making a complaint against a journal editor, the complaint must be made in writing directly to the editor. The first step is to make a complaint in writing directly to the journal editor. If the complaint is not resolved satisfactorily, the complaint can be submitted to the editor's board or any reviewers.
Only complaints that have passed the complaints process against the journal can be forwarded to the Publication Ethics Committee, and all relevant documents must be attached.
The Publication Ethics Committee will accept complaints within 6 months after the journal has considered the complaint.
The Publication Ethics Committee will not consider complaints about the content of the editorial decision (but will consider the process) or comments about the editorial content.
The Publication Ethics Committee will not consider events that occurred before the publication of this Ethical Standard document.

When a complaint is forwarded to the Editorial Board:

The complainant submits the complaint to the journal’s Editorial Board staff.
The journal’s Editorial Board staff will verify the complaint based on the following points and forward it to the Hospital’s or the accrediting institution’s Research Ethics Committee:

- The complaint is against a member of the journal’s Editorial Board.

- The complaint falls within the scope of the journal’s Editorial Board’s work.

- The complaint is not resolved after being forwarded to the journal for consideration according to the process.

The complainant must submit all relevant supporting documents, including supporting documents related to the complaint, to the journal so that the journal is aware of such complaint and so that the journal's editorial board is aware.
The Chair of the Ethics Committee of Vachira Phuket Hospital shall inform the Journal Editor of the complaint forwarded to the Ethics Committee.
Cases that may occur:

The editor does not cooperate. In this case, the chairman of the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee will notify the complainant and the journal owner.

The editor responds to the complaint. The issues are as follows:

- The Chair of the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee and one representative, nominated by the members of the Publication Ethics Committee, jointly determine that the journal has satisfactorily handled the complaint, and has informed the complainant and the editor.

- The Chair of the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee and one representative, nominated by the members of the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee, jointly determined that further investigation is necessary, and informed the complainant and the journal editor, and submitted a report of its action to the relevant subcommittee of the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee.

- The subcommittee considering the complaint should consist of one Chair and at least three members of the Publication Ethics Committee, two of whom must not be the editor, and none of whom is a member of the same publisher (or affiliate) as the editor against whom the complaint is filed.

If the Chair is in the same publishing house (or parent company) as the editor who is complained about, the Chair will appoint an appropriate Vice Chair to oversee the documents.
When a complaint is submitted to the Subcommittee, the Subcommittee may:
- Withdraw the complaint and inform the complainant and the editor of the reasons; - Conclude that there has been a violation of the regulations;
When the Subcommittee concludes that there has been a violation of the regulations, it shall submit a report to the Publication Ethics Committee, explaining the nature of the violation and recommending what action to take. The Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee shall consider the report, which may be revised. The Committee shall then inform the complainant, the editor, and the publisher (journal) of the final recommendations, which may include:
- The editor shall apologize to the complainant for the complaint received; - The editor shall publish the statement received from the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee in its journal;
- The journal shall improve its procedures;
- The editor shall resign from the Ethics Committee for a period of time, or the editor shall take any other action that the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee deems appropriate in the circumstances;

Appeal Procedures

The complainant may appeal against the recommendations of the Vachira Phuket Hospital Ethics Committee. Contact details can be requested from the Office of the Editor and the Ethics Committee of Vachira Phuket Hospital.

Misconduct Monitoring

Monitoring of misconduct in cases of suspicion, including both published and unpublished research articles.
Research articles that may contain misconduct should not be rejected immediately.
Editors should seek answers from the accused person first, but if they are not satisfied with the answers received, they should ask their supervisor or the relevant group of persons to verify the facts.
Take action as specified in the Publication Ethics Committee work flowchart when necessary.
Efforts should be made to ensure that fact-finding is properly conducted and based on reason.