Publication Ethics

HIGIENE: Environmental Health Journal is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity, transparency, accountability, fairness, and ethical conduct throughout the scholarly publishing process.

The journal's editorial and publication practices are guided by internationally recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing, including relevant recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

These principles apply to authors, reviewers, editors, members of the Editorial Board, and the publisher.

1. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for safeguarding the integrity and quality of the scholarly record and for ensuring that editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, methodological quality, originality, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal's scope, and contribution to environmental health knowledge.

Editors shall:

  • evaluate manuscripts fairly and objectively without discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, institutional affiliation, academic seniority, political belief, or other characteristics unrelated to scholarly merit;

  • maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and editorial correspondence;

  • ensure that manuscripts are evaluated by reviewers with appropriate expertise;

  • disclose and appropriately manage any actual or potential conflicts of interest;

  • recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned;

  • consider reviewer recommendations while retaining responsibility for the final editorial decision;

  • investigate credible concerns regarding research or publication misconduct;

  • take appropriate post-publication action when errors or misconduct affecting the scholarly record are identified; and

  • protect editorial decisions from inappropriate commercial, institutional, personal, or other external influence.

Manuscripts submitted by editors, Editorial Board members, or individuals with close relationships to the editorial team must be handled independently by an editor who has no relevant conflict of interest.

2. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers contribute to editorial decision-making and to improving the scientific quality and clarity of manuscripts.

Reviewers must:

  • evaluate manuscripts objectively, constructively, and respectfully;

  • accept review assignments only when they have sufficient expertise and can complete the review within the requested period;

  • maintain strict confidentiality regarding manuscripts and associated materials;

  • not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal, professional, financial, or competitive advantage;

  • disclose any financial, professional, institutional, academic, or personal relationship that could reasonably influence their judgment;

  • decline the review when an important conflict of interest exists;

  • identify relevant published work that has not been appropriately acknowledged when possible; and

  • inform the editor of suspected plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, unethical research, or other serious concerns discovered during review.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final decision regarding publication remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or delegated handling editor.

3. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and transparency of their submitted work.

Authors must ensure that:

  • the manuscript represents original work and has not been published previously or submitted simultaneously to another journal;

  • data and results are presented honestly and have not been fabricated, falsified, selectively manipulated, or misleadingly presented;

  • the work of others is appropriately acknowledged and cited;

  • all individuals listed as authors meet the journal's authorship criteria;

  • all authors have approved the submitted version and agree to its submission;

  • relevant sources of funding and financial or non-financial competing interests are disclosed;

  • ethical approval and informed consent are obtained and reported when applicable;

  • underlying data and research records are retained appropriately and can be made available when reasonably required to address questions concerning the integrity of the research; and

  • any substantial errors discovered after submission or publication are promptly reported to the journal.

Authors must cooperate with reasonable editorial requests relating to research integrity, corrections, clarification of data, authorship, ethical approval, or investigation of potential misconduct.

4. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should reflect substantial intellectual contribution and accountability for the published work.

All authors should have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; participated in drafting or critically reviewing the manuscript; approved the final version; and agreed to be accountable for the integrity of their contribution and the work as a whole.

HIGIENE encourages transparent reporting of individual author contributions using the CRediT Contributor Role Taxonomy where applicable.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately with their permission.

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must be supported by a clear explanation and agreement from all affected authors. Changes to authorship after acceptance or publication will be considered only in exceptional circumstances and may require formal correction.

5. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, identifiable human data, or identifiable human biological material must comply with applicable ethical and legal requirements and internationally recognized principles for research involving humans.

Authors must obtain approval or an appropriate exemption from a competent Research Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board before conducting the research where such review is required.

The manuscript must state, where applicable:

  • the name of the approving ethics committee;

  • the institutional affiliation of the committee;

  • the ethical approval or reference number; and

  • the process used to obtain informed consent.

Research involving human participants should be conducted in accordance with the current version of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki and applicable national and institutional requirements.

If ethical approval was not required, authors should provide an appropriate explanation.

6. Informed Consent, Privacy, and Confidentiality

The privacy and confidentiality of research participants must be protected.

Information that can identify an individual, including names, identification numbers, photographs, pedigrees, detailed case information, or other identifiable material, must not be published unless its inclusion is scientifically necessary and appropriate consent for publication has been obtained.

Non-essential identifying information should be removed.

Authors are responsible for obtaining and securely retaining appropriate documentation of informed consent where required.

7. Animal Research

Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional, national, and internationally recognized standards for animal welfare and ethical research.

Authors must report relevant ethical approval and provide sufficient information regarding the institution or committee responsible for approving the study.

Studies involving animals should be reported in accordance with appropriate reporting standards, including ARRIVE 2.0, where applicable.

Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts when the ethical justification, animal welfare standards, or reporting of animal research is considered inadequate.

8. Plagiarism and Text Recycling

Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable.

This includes presenting another person's words, ideas, data, images, or other intellectual contributions as one's own without appropriate attribution.

Inappropriate reuse of an author's own previously published material may constitute text recycling or redundant publication when substantial duplication occurs without transparent citation or justification.

Submitted manuscripts may undergo similarity screening. Similarity reports are interpreted by editors in context and are not used as the sole basis for determining plagiarism or misconduct.

9. Fabrication, Falsification, and Data Manipulation

HIGIENE does not tolerate fabrication or falsification of data, results, research procedures, images, or other research records.

Images must not be manipulated in a manner that changes, obscures, removes, introduces, or misrepresents scientifically relevant information.

Where concerns regarding data integrity arise, the journal may request original data, analytical outputs, laboratory records, images, ethical documentation, or other relevant materials necessary to assess the concern.

10. Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Authors must not submit substantially the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously.

Duplicate publication, redundant publication, and inappropriate fragmentation of a single study into multiple publications (“salami publication”) are not acceptable when they result in substantial overlap without adequate scientific justification and transparent cross-reference.

Related manuscripts, previous reports, conference papers, preprints, or other publications that may overlap with the submitted work should be disclosed to the editor where relevant.

11. Citation Integrity

References must be selected because of their relevance to the work.

Authors, reviewers, and editors must not engage in inappropriate citation practices intended primarily to increase citations to particular authors, journals, institutions, or publications.

Reviewers should not require authors to cite their own work unless the suggested references are genuinely relevant to the manuscript.

12. Competing Interests

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their work or judgment.

Competing interests may include, but are not limited to:

  • employment;

  • consultancy;

  • honoraria;

  • research funding;

  • patents or intellectual property;

  • financial investments;

  • professional relationships;

  • institutional relationships; and

  • significant personal or academic relationships.

The existence of a competing interest does not automatically preclude publication or participation in peer review, but it must be disclosed and appropriately managed.

13. Confidentiality and Peer-Review Integrity

Submitted manuscripts are confidential scholarly communications.

Editors and reviewers must not disclose, distribute, discuss, reproduce, or use unpublished manuscript content except as necessary for legitimate editorial and peer-review purposes.

HIGIENE does not tolerate manipulation of the peer-review process, including false reviewer identities, fabricated reviews, inappropriate reviewer suggestions, undisclosed conflicts of interest, coercive citation practices, or attempts to improperly influence editorial decisions.

14. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors because authorship requires human accountability for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and ethical conduct of the work.

Authors must transparently disclose substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation, analysis, programming, image generation, or other relevant scholarly activities.

Authors remain fully responsible for all submitted content, including its accuracy, originality, citations, confidentiality, and compliance with copyright and research-integrity requirements.

AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or conceal research data or findings.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, or unpublished research material into external generative AI systems where confidentiality and data protection cannot be assured.

15. Research Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

  • plagiarism;

  • data fabrication or falsification;

  • inappropriate image manipulation;

  • duplicate or redundant publication;

  • undisclosed competing interests;

  • unethical research;

  • inappropriate authorship;

  • citation manipulation;

  • peer-review manipulation; and

  • other deliberate practices that compromise the integrity of the scholarly record.

Allegations of misconduct will be assessed fairly and confidentially.

When appropriate, the journal may request clarification or supporting documentation from authors and may contact relevant institutions or other responsible bodies when an institutional investigation is required.

Editorial action will be based on the available evidence and the need to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

16. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

HIGIENE is committed to correcting the scholarly record when significant errors or concerns are identified after publication.

A correction may be published when an error affects the accuracy or interpretation of part of an article but does not invalidate its main findings.

An expression of concern may be issued when serious questions arise regarding the integrity of an article but the available evidence is inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing.

A retraction may be considered when findings are no longer reliable because of major error or misconduct, when substantial plagiarism or redundant publication is identified, when unethical research is demonstrated, or when other serious circumstances invalidate the integrity of the publication.

Notices of correction, expression of concern, or retraction will be linked transparently to the original publication.

17. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, or other stakeholders may raise concerns regarding editorial procedures, publication ethics, or published content.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant scientific, procedural, or ethical issue was overlooked.

Appeals should provide a clear and evidence-based explanation and will be evaluated by an editor who was not directly involved in the disputed decision whenever practicable.

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original editorial decision.

Complaints concerning editorial conduct, conflicts of interest, or publication ethics will be handled confidentially and fairly by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately independent authority where necessary.

18. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently on the basis of scientific and ethical considerations.

The publisher, sponsoring institution, journal owner, advertisers, funders, or other parties must not interfere with individual manuscript decisions or compromise editorial independence.

Commercial considerations and institutional relationships must not determine whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected.

19. Post-Publication Discussion

HIGIENE supports responsible scholarly discussion after publication.

Readers may contact the Editorial Office regarding substantive concerns, errors, or scientific questions relating to published articles.

Where appropriate, the journal may invite authors to respond and may publish corrections, responses, or other notices required to maintain an accurate scholarly record.

20. Commitment to Publication Integrity

HIGIENE is committed to continuously improving its editorial policies and publication practices in accordance with developments in research ethics, scholarly communication, publication integrity, and responsible environmental health research.

All participants in the publication process—including authors, reviewers, editors, Editorial Board members, and the publisher—share responsibility for protecting the reliability, transparency, credibility, and integrity of the scientific record.