Publication Ethics | The Journal of the Turkish Society of Algology

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use and Disclosure Policy

The journal recognizes the potential benefits of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in manuscript preparation, while prioritizing transparency, scientific integrity, and accountability.

Permitted Use of AI Tools

AI tools are permitted only for language editing, proofreading, formatting, or improving readability of the manuscript. Examples include:

Grammar correction
Sentence restructuring
Clarity enhancement

Disclosure Requirements

Authors must disclose any AI tools used during manuscript preparation. The disclosure should include:

Name of the AI tool (e.g., ChatGPT, Gemini, etc.)
Specific purpose of its use (e.g., language editing, summarization, translation)
Extent of use (e.g., “used for grammar and readability only”)

This information should be included in the manuscript, typically in a “Methods” or “Acknowledgements” section, or in a dedicated AI disclosure statement.

Restrictions on AI Use

AI tools must not be used for:

Generating or fabricating data
Performing statistical analysis or interpreting results
Creating or manipulating figures, images, or graphs
Drafting scientific content or making substantive intellectual contributions
Writing or rewriting substantial parts of the manuscript without human oversight

Authorship and Accountability

AI tools must not be listed as authors, as they cannot take responsibility for the content. Authors remain fully accountable for:

Accuracy and validity of the research
Originality and proper attribution of all content
Integrity of data, analyses, and conclusions
Ensuring that all AI-generated text is reviewed and approved by the authors

Non-Disclosure and Misuse

Failure to disclose AI use or misuse of AI tools may lead to corrective actions, including:

Requesting revisions or additional disclosure
Publication of a correction or editorial notice
Rejection of the manuscript or retraction of the article
Notification to the authors’ institutions in cases of serious ethical violation

Authorship Criteria and Responsibilities

Authorship Criteria

Authorship criteria are defined in accordance with the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authorship credit should be based on meeting all four of the following conditions:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
Final approval of the version to be published
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved

All individuals designated as authors must meet all four criteria. Contributors who do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged in an Acknowledgements section rather than listed as authors.

Author Responsibilities

Authors are expected to:

Ensure the work is original and all data are accurately and honestly reported
Disclose any conflicts of interest and sources of funding
Provide access to data, materials, and protocols upon reasonable request, when applicable
Ensure that all authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript before submission
Agree on the order of authorship and contribution of each author prior to submission

Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is responsible for:

Ensuring all listed authors meet authorship criteria
Confirming that no qualified contributor has been omitted
Managing communication with the journal and ensuring all co-authors are informed of the submission and any revisions
Submitting a complete and accurate author contribution statement when required

Contributor Acknowledgement

Individuals who contributed but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged, including:

Technical support or data collection assistance
Writing assistance or language editing
General supervision or administrative support
Provision of materials or resources without intellectual contribution

Unacceptable Authorship Practices

The journal does not accept the following practices:

Guest authorship (individuals who did not contribute significantly but are listed due to reputation or status)
Ghost authorship (unacknowledged contributors who meet authorship criteria)
Gift authorship (honorary authorship without contribution)
Changes in authorship after submission without a valid reason and without approval of all authors

Changes in Authorship

Any changes to the authorship list after submission (addition, removal, or rearrangement) require:

A written request explaining the reason
Signed consent from all authors, including those being added or removed
Approval from the Editor-in-Chief

Author Contribution Statements

When applicable, the journal may require a detailed author contribution statement describing each author’s role in the study. This ensures transparency and accountability in authorship.

Clinical Trial Registration Policy

Prospective registration of all clinical trials in a publicly accessible registry acceptable to the World Health Organization (WHO) or the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) is required.

Trial Registration Requirements

Clinical trials must be registered prior to enrollment of the first participant.
The manuscript must clearly state the name of the registry and the registration number.
Examples of acceptable registries include, but are not limited to, ClinicalTrials.gov and other WHO-recognized primary registries.

Manuscripts reporting unregistered or retrospectively registered clinical trials may be rejected unless a justified explanation is provided and accepted by the editorial team. Authors are encouraged to comply with these requirements to ensure the integrity and credibility of clinical research published in the journal.

Conflict of Interest Policy

The journal requires full transparency regarding any relationships or activities that could influence, or be perceived to influence, the design, conduct, reporting, or interpretation of research. The journal is committed to ensuring that all potential conflicts of interest are disclosed, evaluated, and managed appropriately to maintain the integrity of the publication process.

Author Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial conflicts of interest related to the submitted work. Disclosures should include, but are not limited to:

Employment or consultancy relationships
Financial interests, including share ownership
Grants, sponsorships, or other funding sources
Intellectual property rights (e.g., patents, royalties)
Personal, professional, or institutional relationships
Advisory roles or participation in boards/committees
Any other relationships that could be perceived to influence the work

Authors are required to provide a Conflict of Interest statement at the time of submission. If no conflicts exist, authors should explicitly state: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

Editorial and Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers are expected to act impartially and transparently. They must declare any potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling or reviewing manuscripts when such conflicts exist. Potential conflicts may include:

Personal or professional relationships with the authors
Direct competition or collaboration with the authors
Financial interests related to the manuscript topic
Institutional affiliations or conflicts of institutional policies

Management and Disclosure of Conflicts

All disclosed conflicts will be reviewed and evaluated by the editorial team. When relevant, conflicts will be published alongside the article to ensure transparency for readers. Additional measures may include:

Requesting clarification or additional disclosure from authors
Assigning alternative reviewers or editors
Including an editorial note or statement in the published article

Failure to Disclose

Failure to disclose relevant conflicts of interest may result in corrective actions, including but not limited to:

Publication of a correction or erratum
Retraction of the article
Notification to the authors’ institutions
Restriction on future submissions to the journal

Data Sharing and Research Transparency Policy

The journal is committed to promoting transparency, reproducibility, and openness in research. Authors are encouraged to make the underlying data, materials, and protocols that support their findings available to readers whenever possible, while fully adhering to ethical, legal, and privacy considerations. This approach helps ensure that research is credible, verifiable, and contributes effectively to the broader scientific community.

Data Availability

Authors should include a Data Availability Statement in their manuscript, describing whether and how the data supporting the study’s findings can be accessed. Data may be shared through:

Public repositories
Institutional databases
Upon reasonable request to the authors

When data cannot be shared due to confidentiality agreements, legal restrictions, ethical considerations, or privacy concerns, authors must clearly state the reason for the restriction and provide, if possible, guidance on how researchers might access aggregated or anonymized data.

Transparency and Reporting

Authors are expected to present research methods, analyses, and results transparently and comprehensively to enable replication and critical appraisal. This includes:

Clearly describing study design and methodology
Reporting all prespecified outcomes
Disclosing deviations from study protocols or unplanned analyses
Avoiding selective reporting of results

Undisclosed modifications or omissions that could compromise the integrity of the research are strongly discouraged. By adhering to these principles, authors contribute to the reliability and reproducibility of scientific knowledge.

Encouraging Open Practices

The journal supports the use of open research practices, including:

Sharing code, software, and analysis scripts
Providing access to supplementary materials and protocols
Using standardized reporting guidelines appropriate for the study design (e.g., CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE)

Such practices enhance the transparency, credibility, and overall impact of the published research.

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Policy

Commitment to DEIA Principles

The journal is firmly committed to promoting diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) throughout all stages of the editorial, peer review, and publication processes. Scientific excellence is strengthened by the inclusion of diverse perspectives, experiences, and voices from the global research community. DEIA principles are integral to the journal’s mission and guide editorial decision-making, reviewer selection, and author engagement.

Equity and Fairness in Editorial Evaluation

All submitted manuscripts are evaluated solely on scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, ethical soundness, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Editorial decisions are made without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, age, disability, nationality, socioeconomic status, institutional affiliation, political beliefs, or religious background. All authors are afforded equal opportunity for fair and unbiased consideration of their work.

Inclusive Authorship and Submissions

The journal actively encourages submissions from researchers across diverse geographic regions and from groups historically underrepresented in scholarly publishing. Manuscripts addressing health disparities, social determinants of health, equity in healthcare delivery, and access to care are particularly welcomed, provided they align with the journal’s scientific focus and standards.

Diversity in Editorial Board and Peer Review

Efforts are made to foster diversity and inclusion within the editorial board, reviewer pool, and advisory bodies. Representation across disciplines, geographic regions, career stages, and perspectives is prioritized. Editorial and reviewer team compositions are periodically reviewed to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement.

Responsibilities of Editors and Reviewers

Editors and reviewers are expected to uphold DEIA principles by conducting their duties with objectivity, professionalism, and cultural sensitivity. Awareness of unconscious bias is encouraged, and any form of discriminatory behavior or biased evaluation is considered unacceptable.

Accessibility of Published Content

Accessibility is recognized as a core component of inclusive scholarly communication. The journal aims to make published content accessible to readers with disabilities by adhering, where feasible, to recognized digital accessibility standards. Clear language, appropriate formatting, and inclusive communication practices enhance readability and access for a broad audience.

Addressing Concerns and Complaints

All concerns related to diversity, equity, inclusion, or accessibility are treated seriously. Complaints or reports of potential violations are handled confidentially and investigated in accordance with COPE principles. Appropriate actions are taken when DEIA principles are found to have been compromised.

Alignment with International Standards

This policy aligns with international best practices and ethical standards promoted by organizations such as COPE and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), as well as broader international scholarly publishing initiatives that support equity, inclusion, and accessibility.

Ongoing Commitment

DEIA is an evolving process. Policies and practices are periodically reviewed and refined to reflect emerging standards, community feedback, and global developments in equitable scholarly publishing.

Duplicate and Redundant Publication Policy

Manuscripts that have been previously published or are under consideration elsewhere are not accepted. Commitment is maintained to prevent duplicate, redundant, and fragmented publications in order to preserve the integrity of the scientific record.

Definitions

Duplicate publication refers to the publication of the same research findings in more than one journal without appropriate cross-referencing or valid justification.
Redundant publication involves substantial overlap in data, results, or interpretations with previously published work, even when the wording differs.
Salami slicing refers to the division of a single research project into multiple smaller publications with minimal additional scientific value, often to increase publication output.

Author Responsibilities

Authors must disclose any related or potentially overlapping publications at the time of submission, including:

Previously published articles or conference proceedings
Manuscripts under review elsewhere
Preprints or earlier versions of the manuscript
Related studies that share data, methods, or results

Authors are expected to provide copies or links to such materials and clearly explain the relationship between the submitted manuscript and any prior work.

Permissible Overlap

In certain cases, secondary publications may be considered acceptable (e.g., translations, extended analyses, or follow-up studies), provided that:

The overlap is fully disclosed and justified
The original publication is properly cited
The new manuscript provides substantial new data, analysis, or insight

Editorial Actions

If duplicate or redundant publication is suspected or confirmed, one or more of the following actions may be taken:

Request clarification, revision, or additional documentation from the authors
Reject the manuscript
Issue a correction, retraction, or expression of concern
Notify the authors’ affiliated institutions, employers, or funding bodies

Ethical Approval and Informed Consent Policy

All submitted manuscripts must comply with internationally accepted ethical standards. The requirement for ethics committee or Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval depends on the nature of the study and the type of data used.

Studies Requiring Ethics Approval

Ethics committee or IRB approval is mandatory for studies involving humans or animals, including but not limited to:

Clinical or experimental studies involving human participants
Prospective or retrospective studies using patient data or medical records
Survey, questionnaire, interview, or focus group studies
Research involving human biological materials (e.g., blood, tissue, cells)
Animal studies

For such studies, authors must clearly state the name of the approving ethics committee, the approval number, and the date of approval in the manuscript.

Studies Not Requiring Ethics Approval

Ethics approval is not required for studies that do not involve the collection of new data from humans or animals and are based solely on previously published or publicly available data, including:

Systematic reviews
Meta-analyses
Narrative reviews
Scoping reviews
Bibliometric analyses
Theoretical, conceptual, or methodological studies
In silico or bioinformatic studies using only publicly accessible databases

In such cases, authors must include a clear statement in the manuscript explaining why ethics approval was not required.

Example statement:
“Systematic reviews and meta-analyses that synthesize data from previously published studies and publicly accessible sources are exempt from ethical approval, as they do not involve new data collection or direct contact with human participants.”

Case Reports

Ethics committee approval is generally not required for single case reports. However, written informed consent must be obtained from the patient, and all identifying information must be fully anonymized. For case series involving multiple patients, ethics approval may be required.

Author Responsibilities

Authors are solely responsible for ensuring that ethical approval requirements are appropriately assessed and fulfilled. Manuscripts lacking adequate ethical statements may be rejected or returned during the editorial review process.

Funding Disclosure Policy

Full transparency regarding all sources of financial support for the research and manuscript preparation is required. Authors must disclose any funding received for the conduct of the study, data analysis, or preparation of the manuscript. This information is essential to ensure transparency and to enable readers to assess potential influences on the research.

Funding Information

Funding disclosures must include:

The name of the funding organization(s)
Grant numbers or project identifiers (if applicable)
The role of the funder in study design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation of data, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions
Any financial support for open access fees or publication charges

No Funding Statement

If no funding was received, authors must explicitly state:

“The authors declare that no funding was received for this study.”

Additional Considerations

In-kind support (e.g., provision of equipment, materials, software, or services) must also be disclosed
Funding provided to an institution rather than directly to the authors should be disclosed if it supported the study
If multiple funding sources exist, all sources must be listed and their specific contributions clearly described

Editorial Actions

Failure to disclose funding sources or inaccurate reporting may result in one or more of the following actions:

Request for correction or clarification
Publication of an erratum or correction notice
Retraction of the article in cases of serious nondisclosure

Handling of Misconduct

Commitment is maintained to the highest standards of publication ethics, and all allegations of research and publication misconduct are taken seriously. The investigation and resolution of suspected misconduct follow the principles and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Definition of Misconduct

Publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism)
Data fabrication or falsification
Duplicate or redundant publication
Unethical research practices
Inappropriate authorship (guest, gift, or ghost authorship)
Undisclosed conflicts of interest
Manipulation of the peer review process

Investigation Process

Allegations of misconduct may be identified by editors, reviewers, readers, or third parties at any stage, before or after publication. When a concern is raised, an initial assessment is conducted to determine whether the allegation has merit.

If further investigation is warranted, the corresponding author will be contacted and asked to provide an explanation and, where appropriate, original data or supporting documentation. All investigations are conducted confidentially, fairly, and without prejudice.

Outcomes and Actions

Depending on the severity and outcome of the investigation, one or more of the following actions may be taken:

Request clarification or correction from the authors
Publish a correction (erratum or corrigendum)
Issue an expression of concern
Retract the article
Notify the authors’ affiliated institutions or relevant authorities

Retractions and corrections are clearly identified and permanently linked to the original article to ensure transparency and maintain the integrity of the scientific record.

Author Cooperation

Authors are expected to cooperate fully with investigations into alleged misconduct. Failure to respond to editorial inquiries or to provide requested information may result in editorial actions, including rejection or retraction of the manuscript.

Editorial Independence

Decisions regarding misconduct are made solely on the basis of ethical principles and available evidence. The publisher does not interfere with editorial decisions related to investigations, corrections, or retractions.

Human and Animal Rights Policy

All research involving human participants or animals must be conducted in accordance with internationally accepted ethical standards. Commitment is maintained to ensure that studies uphold the highest standards of ethical conduct, participant safety, and animal welfare.

Human Subjects

Studies involving human participants must respect the dignity, rights, safety, and well-being of all individuals. Vulnerable populations must be afforded special protection, and measures taken to safeguard confidentiality and privacy should be clearly described.

Ethical approval from an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board must be obtained and documented in the manuscript.

Animal Studies

Research involving animals must comply with national and international guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals. Authors must clearly state that animal welfare regulations were followed and that the study received approval from a recognized ethics committee or institutional review board.

Editorial Oversight

AĞRI reserves the right to request additional documentation regarding ethical approval, informed consent, or compliance with animal welfare standards when necessary to ensure adherence to ethical principles.

Image Integrity and Manipulation Policy

All images submitted must accurately represent the original data. Any form of image manipulation that alters, misrepresents, or could potentially mislead readers regarding the results is strictly prohibited.

Acceptable adjustments include uniform modifications to brightness, contrast, or color balance, provided that these changes do not distort or obscure the scientific content and are applied to the entire image. Such adjustments should be disclosed when appropriate.

Editorial Actions

Suspected cases of inappropriate image manipulation will be evaluated in accordance with ethical standards and the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Such cases may result in:

Request for original, unprocessed image data
Request for clarification or correction
Rejection of the manuscript
Retraction of the article if concerns are identified after publication

Plagiarism and Similarity Check Policy

Commitment is maintained to the highest standards of publication ethics. All submitted manuscripts undergo plagiarism and similarity screening using recognized detection software (e.g., iThenticate) prior to peer review. This process ensures originality, proper attribution, and compliance with ethical publishing standards.

Definition of Plagiarism

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

Direct copying of text, tables, or figures without proper citation
Substantial similarity to previously published works
Self-plagiarism or redundant publication without appropriate acknowledgment
Paraphrasing without attribution or presenting others’ ideas as original

Similarity Screening and Thresholds

Manuscripts are evaluated for similarity against published literature and other sources. Some overlap may be acceptable (e.g., methods sections, standard terminology, or properly cited text). Manuscripts exceeding acceptable similarity levels are subject to editorial action.

Similarity reports are assessed based on:

Overall similarity percentage
Nature and location of similar text (e.g., introduction vs. results)
Proper citation and justification of overlapping content
Whether similarity reflects legitimate reuse (e.g., methods) or constitutes plagiarism

Editorial Actions

Depending on the severity of similarity, one or more of the following actions may be taken:

Request revisions and proper citation
Return the manuscript for rewriting
Reject the manuscript
Require additional documentation or explanation

Severe Cases

Severe or intentional plagiarism may result in:

Rejection of the manuscript
Notification to the authors’ institutions, employers, or funding bodies
Publication of a retraction or expression of concern in accordance with COPE guidelines

Author Responsibility

Authors are responsible for ensuring all content is original and properly cited. All sources must be acknowledged, and any reuse of previously published material must be clearly indicated and permitted.

Publication Ethics and Ethical Standards

Commitment is maintained to the highest standards of publication ethics and scientific integrity. All stages of the publication process are conducted in accordance with principles of transparency, honesty, and accountability.

The journal adheres to the guidelines and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and other internationally accepted ethical standards.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are expected to:

Submit original work that has not been published or submitted elsewhere
Ensure the accuracy, integrity, and reproducibility of the presented data
Disclose all sources of funding and potential conflicts of interest
Ensure that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and no eligible contributors are omitted
Obtain approval from an appropriate ethics committee and informed consent from participants when required, in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki
Protect patient confidentiality and obtain explicit consent for publication of identifiable clinical data or images

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are required to:

Treat all manuscripts as confidential
Provide objective, constructive, and unbiased evaluations
Declare any conflicts of interest and decline the review if necessary
Refrain from using unpublished information for personal or professional advantage

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for:

Ensuring a fair, unbiased, and confidential peer-review process
Making editorial decisions based solely on scientific merit, originality, and ethical compliance
Managing conflicts of interest transparently
Taking appropriate action in cases of suspected misconduct, including issuing corrections or retractions when necessary

Publication Misconduct

Any form of publication misconduct is unacceptable, including but not limited to:

Plagiarism or self-plagiarism
Data fabrication or falsification
Duplicate or redundant publication
Salami publication
Improper authorship practices
Undisclosed conflicts of interest
Inappropriate image or data manipulation

Handling of Misconduct

Allegations of misconduct are investigated according to COPE flowcharts. Depending on the outcome, the journal may:

Request explanations from authors
Contact relevant institutions
Take appropriate actions such as rejection, correction, retraction, or publication of an expression of concern

Corrections and Retractions

When errors or ethical issues are identified, corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern may be issued to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

Data Transparency

Authors are encouraged to:

Provide data availability statements
Share underlying data whenever possible
Register clinical studies in publicly accessible trial registries

Reporting Guidelines Policy

Authors are required to adhere to internationally recognized reporting guidelines relevant to their study design. Following appropriate reporting standards ensures transparency, reproducibility, and quality of scientific reporting.

Applicable Reporting Guidelines

Authors should follow the guidelines corresponding to their study type, including but not limited to:

CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) for randomized controlled trials
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) for systematic reviews and meta-analyses
STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) for observational studies
CARE (Case Report Guidelines) for case reports

Checklist and Supporting Documents

When applicable, authors must submit the relevant checklist and flow diagram alongside the manuscript. These documents should be accurately completed and correspond to the content of the manuscript. Examples include:

CONSORT checklist and flow diagram for clinical trials
PRISMA checklist and flow diagram for systematic reviews
STROBE checklist for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies
CARE checklist for case reports

Editorial Assessment

The editorial team may request additional information or clarification if reporting is incomplete or unclear. Manuscripts that do not adhere to required reporting guidelines may be returned to authors for revision or rejected.

Authors’ Responsibility

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all required reporting standards are followed and that the manuscript includes all necessary information for readers to evaluate the study design, methods, results, and conclusions.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts are original, accurate, ethically conducted, and prepared in accordance with the journal’s policies and internationally accepted standards of scientific publishing.

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must present an accurate and complete account of the work performed and results obtained, followed by an objective discussion of the findings’ significance.
Manuscripts must include sufficient methodological detail and appropriate references to allow others to replicate the work.
Review articles must be accurate, objective, and comprehensive. Editorials, opinion pieces, or perspective articles must be clearly identified as such and not misrepresented as original research. Misclassification or misrepresentation of article types is unethical.
Manuscripts must comply with applicable reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, CARE) as recommended by the EQUATOR Network.

Originality and Plagiarism

Manuscripts must be entirely original. Use of others’ work must be appropriately cited.
All publications influencing the reported work must be acknowledged.
Plagiarism—including presenting others’ work as one’s own, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts without proper attribution, or claiming others’ results—is unethical and unacceptable.

Multiple, Duplicate, or Redundant Publication

Manuscripts describing essentially the same research must not be published in more than one journal or primary publication.
Authors must not submit a manuscript that has been published elsewhere or simultaneously to multiple journals.
Secondary publication (e.g., translations or clinical guidelines) may be acceptable under specific conditions: agreement of both journals’ editors and authors, accurate reflection of original data and interpretation, and clear citation of the primary publication.

Authorship Criteria

Authorship should be limited to individuals who meet all of the following and can take public responsibility for the manuscript content:

Substantial contributions to study conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis and interpretation;
Drafting or critically revising the manuscript for important intellectual content;
Final approval of the version to be published and agreement to submission.

Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria (e.g., technical assistance, writing or editing support, general supervision) must be acknowledged with permission. The corresponding author ensures all eligible coauthors are included, no ineligible individuals are listed, and all coauthors approve the final manuscript and submission.

Data Access, Availability, and Retention

Authors may be asked to submit raw data, study protocols, or supporting documentation.
Where practicable, data should be made publicly available via institutional or subject-based repositories.
Underlying data must remain accessible to qualified professionals for at least 10 years post-publication, with participant confidentiality and legal/proprietary restrictions observed.
A Data Availability Statement should be included when applicable.

Ethical Approval and Informed Consent

Studies involving humans or animals must comply with relevant laws and institutional guidelines, with approval from the appropriate ethics committee(s).
Human studies must confirm informed consent was obtained. Participants’ privacy, confidentiality, and welfare must always be protected.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence results or interpretation.
Financial relationships (grants, honoraria, employment, consultancies, stock, patents) and non-financial relationships (personal or professional affiliations/beliefs) must be declared.
All sources of financial support must be fully disclosed, including grant or reference numbers.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

AI tools may be used in research, data analysis, or manuscript preparation.
Authors must disclose AI use, specify its purpose, and include this information in the “Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest” section.
Authors remain fully responsible for the integrity, originality, and accuracy of the content.
Principles, limitations, and acceptable uses of AI-assisted tools are detailed in the journal’s Publication Ethics – AI Use and Disclosure Policy.

Responsibilities During Peer Review

Authors are expected to cooperate fully with editors and reviewers.
Reviewer comments must be addressed promptly, professionally, and respectfully, with a point-by-point response and corresponding manuscript revisions, maintaining scientific integrity.

Post-Publication Responsibilities

Authors must assist in addressing questions or concerns related to the published work.
Raw data, protocols, or supporting documentation may be requested.
Significant errors or inaccuracies must be promptly reported to the journal.
Authors must cooperate in issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern when necessary.

Fundamental Errors and Consequences of Non-Compliance

Significant errors discovered post-publication must be promptly reported, and authors must cooperate to correct or retract the article.
Failure to adhere may result in editorial actions, including: manuscript rejection, corrections or retractions, notification to authors’ institutions, or restrictions on future submissions to AĞRI Dergisi.