All articles published in JPHPMResearch receive a DOI and are permanently published. This applies regardless of the outcome of the peer review that follows after publication.

Authors can revise, change and update their articles by publishing new versions, which are added to the article’s history; however, the individual versions, once published, cannot be altered or withdrawn and are permanently available on the JPHPMResearch website. JPHPMResearch participates in the CrossMark scheme, a multi-publisher initiative that has developed a standard way for readers to locate the current version of an article. By applying the CrossMark policies, JPHPMResearch is committed to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.

Clicking on the CrossMark logo (at the top of each JPHPMResearch article) will give you the current status of an article and direct you to the latest published version; it may also give you additional information such as new peer review reports.

In order to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record, the following policies will be applied when published content needs to be corrected; these policies take into account current best practice in the scholarly publishing and library communities:

1. Correction to an Article

In traditional journals, where articles are peer reviewed before publication, Corrections (or Errata) are published to alert readers to errors in the article that became apparent following the publication of the final article.

By contrast, articles in JPHPMResearch undergo peer review post publication and publication is not ‘final’ as new versions can be added at any stage. Possible mistakes that come to light during the peer review process may be highlighted in the published peer review reports, which are part of the article. Authors can publish revised versions, and any errors that become apparent during peer review or later can be corrected through the publication of new versions. Corrections and changes relative to the previous version are always summarized in the ‘Amendments’ section at the start of a new version.

2. Retraction

A retraction will be issued where a major error (e.g., in the methods or analysis) invalidates the conclusions in the article, or where it appears research or publication misconduct has taken place (e.g., research without required ethical approvals, fabricated data, manipulated images, plagiarism, duplicate publication, etc.).

The decision to retract an article will be made in accordance with JPHPM policies and COPE guidelines. The decision will follow a full investigation by our editorial staff. Authors and institutions may request a retraction of their articles if they believe their reasons meet the criteria for retraction.

Retractions are issued to correct the scholarly record and should not be interpreted as punishments for the authors.

The COPE guidance can be found here.

Retraction will be considered in cases where:

• There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication or image manipulation) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error).
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper referencing, permission, or justification (e.g., cases of redundant or duplicate publication).
• The research constitutes plagiarism.
• There is evidence or concerns of authorship for sale.
• Citation manipulation is evident within the published paper.
• There is evidence of compromised peer review or systematic manipulation.
• There is evidence of unethical research, or there is evidence of a breach of editorial policies.
• The authors have deliberately submitted fraudulent or inaccurate information, or breached a warranty provided in the Author Publishing Agreement (APA).

Where the decision has been taken to retract an article, JPHPM will:

• Add a “retracted” watermark to the published Version of Record of the article.
• Issue a separate retraction statement, titled ‘Retraction: [article title]’, that will be linked to the retracted article on JPHPM.
• Paginate and make available the retraction statement in the online issue of the journal.

3. Editorial Note 

If there is a potential, not yet resolved, problem with an article, it may be appropriate to alert readers with an Editorial Note. Such an Editorial Note may be added, for example, if JPHPMResearch receives information that research or publication misconduct might have taken place, or that there is a serious dispute between authors or between the authors and third parties. The Editorial Note will usually be posted while further investigations take place and until a more permanent solution has been found (e.g. the publication of a revised ‘corrected’ version, or a Retraction).

4. Expression of Concern

In rare cases, JPHPMResearch may decide to publish an Expression of Concern, which is linked to the problematic article, if there are serious concerns about an article but no conclusive evidence can be obtained that would unequivocally justify a Retraction. This may include:

• if there is inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct.
• there is evidence that there are problems with the article, but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case.
• an investigation into alleged misconduct has not been impartial or conclusive.

 

This policy page has been assigned a DOI: 10.64904/jphpm.crossmark.policy. This DOI will be embedded in the Crossmark metadata of all articles.