Post-Publication Discussion

1. Purpose and Philosophy
Our journal believes that peer review does not end at the moment of publication. We are committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. We welcome robust, evidence-based scientific debate and provide formal channels for readers to critique, question, or comment on published research articles.
 
2. Formats for Post-Publication Discussion
Substantive critiques regarding a published article must be submitted formally through the journal’s submission system as a Letter to the Editor or Commentary.
  • Linking: If accepted, the post-publication critique will be assigned a unique DOI and permanently linked to the original article.
  • Right of Reply: To ensure a fair and balanced debate, the original authors of the target paper will be formally invited by the Editors to submit a single Author Response.
  • Finality: The debate will generally be closed after the Author Response to prevent endless back-and-forth, unless new, critical evidence emerges.
 
3. Submission Rules and Standards
To ensure academic rigor and prevent misuse of this forum, all post-publication submissions must adhere to the following criteria:
  • Evidence-Based: Critiques must be strictly rooted in data, methodology, or statistical verification. Unsupported opinions or speculative arguments will be rejected.
  • Professional Tone: Submissions must maintain an objective, academic tone. The journal maintains a zero-tolerance policy for personal attacks, defamatory remarks, harassment, or unverified accusations of misconduct.
  • Constraints: Submissions must be written in English, must not exceed 1,000 words (excluding references), and must be submitted within six (6) months of the target article's publication date.
  • Exclusions: This channel cannot be used to dispute rejected manuscripts, air commercial grievances, or pitch new, unrelated research.
 
4. Editorial Assessment & Outcomes
Upon receiving a post-publication critique, the Editor-in-Chief will assess its validity. The Editors may consult the original reviewers or invite independent statistical experts to evaluate the claim. If a critique reveals legitimate issues or errors in a published paper, the journal will strictly follow COPE guidelines to issue one of the following official notices:
  • Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum): Issued for honest, inadvertent errors (e.g., typos in formulas, mislabeled chart axes, or missing funding acknowledgments) that do not alter the paper's core findings or conclusions.
  • Expression of Concern: A temporary warning notice published alongside the paper if an ongoing investigation into potential research misconduct is highly complex or inconclusive.
  • Retraction: Total withdrawal of the paper from the scientific record if the investigation uncovers fatal flaws that invalidate the conclusions, or uncovers severe research misconduct (e.g., data fabrication, duplicate publication, or plagiarism).
 
5. Transparency and Version Control
The journal strictly prohibits silent alterations. The originally published PDF and HTML "Version of Record" will remain intact. Any changes made to correct the record will be explicitly detailed in a permanent, public, and citable Correction or Retraction notice linked directly to the original article page.
 
6. Contact and Submission Information
If you wish to submit a post-publication critique or report a technical error in a published manuscript, please utilize our formal submission system or contact our Editorial Office directly: