PUBLICATION ETHICS

Anatolian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences adheres to the guidelines of several organizations, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (joint statement by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME), and the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, promoting transparency, integrity, and best practices in scholarly publishing.

Medical research involving human subjects must comply with the WMA Declaration of Helsinki (2013), ensuring informed consent, privacy protection, and participant safety. The journal also follows WAME’s Recommendations on Publication Ethics for Medical Journals, addressing conflicts of interest, research misconduct, and the peer review process to maintain integrity and transparency.

Ethics Committee Approval and Informed Consent

Ethical standards are upheld in both human and animal experiments. Authors must provide evidence of approval from a local Ethics Committee when required. Animal research should be conducted humanely, with clear reporting of anesthetics and analgesics used. Ethical standards must align with the WMA’s Code of Ethics (Declaration of Helsinki) for human studies and EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal research. A statement of ethics committee approval must be included in the ‘Materials and Methods’ section, in accordance with the ICMJE Recommendations. The journal will not consider any manuscript deemed ethically unacceptable.

If a manuscript is submitted to Anatolian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences without ethics committee approval, the journal will review it according to COPE's Research, Audit, and Service Evaluations guideline. This guideline helps the journal assess the risks and ethical concerns of publishing research lacking ethics committee approval, ensuring that the manuscript meets ethical standards despite the absence of formal approval.

Authors must provide detailed information on the ethical treatment of animals in their manuscript, including measures taken to prevent pain and suffering. The ARRIVE checklist can be used to help authors present this information clearly and comprehensively.

• For research involving human subjects, a statement confirming that written and/or verbal informed consent was obtained from all participants must be included. Informed consent forms should be retained for future reference.
• For studies involving children under 18, consent must be obtained from a parent or guardian, as children may not fully understand the risks and benefits of research.
  
• In cases of surveys or interviews, authors must confirm that participants gave informed consent for participation and, if applicable, for recording personal details. Any identifiable quotations or statements must be de-identified unless explicit consent for attribution is provided.
• Details of informed consent should be provided in the Methods section, along with other relevant research procedures. Authors must protect participants' anonymity and privacy, particularly regarding photographs that may reveal identities. Signed consent releases for photographs should be obtained, and the approval for publication must be documented in the Methods section.

Authors of submissions reporting research findings must meet all four criteria established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE):

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

Before submission, authors should determine who qualifies for authorship and in what order authors will be listed. The editors of the Anatolian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciencesdo not resolve authorship disputes. Any changes to the number or order of authors after the initial submission must be explained in writing to the Editor-in-Chief. The editors reserve the right to refer any authorship irregularities to the research officer or appropriate academic ethics authority at the institution or employer of the first or corresponding author.

Authors may use CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to provide information about individual contributions at the time of submission.

PLAGIARISM AND ETHICAL MISCONDUCT

All submissions undergo multiple screenings during the peer review and/or production processes using similarity detection software. When citing previous works, ensure that all material is properly referenced. Copying text, tables, or illustrations from any source (journal articles, books, theses, electronic media, etc.) and presenting them as one's own is considered plagiarism, even if a reference is provided. Listing the source in the 'References' section does not absolve authors of responsibility for plagiarism.

Authors are strongly encouraged to avoid any form of plagiarism or ethical misconduct, as illustrated below:

• Citation Manipulation: Refers to inflating citation counts through self-citation, excessive citation of the same journal, or citation stacking, which distorts academic recognition.
• Self-Plagiarism (Text Recycling): Involves reusing sections or sentences from an author's prior work without proper citation, constituting a form of plagiarism.
• Salami Slicing: The unethical practice of publishing multiple articles using the same data set, hypotheses, and methods from a single study.
• Data Fabrication: The creation of false data not supported by actual research or experiments, considered a serious breach of research integrity.
• Data Manipulation/Falsification: Involves altering data, such as modifying images or removing outliers, to mislead or misrepresent findings.

In cases of suspected misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, citation manipulation, or data falsification), the Editorial Board will follow COPE guidelines to ensure fair, transparent, and consistent handling of allegations.

GENERATIVE AI AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) USE POLICY

Anatolian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences adopts the principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) regarding the use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in academic publishing. The following guidelines clarify the acceptable and ethical use of such technologies in manuscript preparation, authorship, visual content, and editorial processes.

1. Use of AI Tools in Manuscript Preparation
Authors must explicitly disclose any use of AI tools in the preparation of their manuscripts. This includes specifying the tool’s name, version, and the precise purpose for which it was used—such as language editing or data analysis. These disclosures must appear in appropriate sections of the manuscript (e.g., Acknowledgments or Methods). AI tools may assist in improving grammar, style, or clarity, but only under human supervision. The scientific content, originality, and conclusions must remain the sole responsibility of the authors.

Authors are expected to critically evaluate and verify any AI-generated suggestions or outputs to ensure that they do not introduce errors, misrepresent data, or compromise academic integrity.

2. Authorship and Accountability
Authorship represents a set of intellectual and ethical responsibilities that AI tools cannot fulfill. Only individuals who meet established authorship criteria—such as contributing to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study—can be listed as authors. The use of AI does not justify authorship, and AI tools must never be credited as co-authors.

Authors must also confirm that all content in the manuscript is original and free from plagiarism or inappropriate AI influence. They remain fully accountable for the accuracy, validity, and integrity of the entire work, including any content generated or modified using AI technologies.

3. AI-Generated Images and Visual Content
Anatolian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences maintains a cautious approach to the inclusion of AI-generated visual material, primarily due to ongoing legal, ethical, and scientific uncertainties. The use of such content is generally not allowed, except in two specific cases:

As Part of the Research Methodology, If AI tools are used in a study’s methodology (e.g., in AI-assisted medical imaging), the process must be documented in the Methods section, including the name, version, and technical parameters of the tool.

AI-Focused Content: Visual content directly related to articles discussing AI may be considered, subject to editorial review.

Any approved AI-generated visual content must be clearly labeled as “AI-generated” in figure captions. Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy, appropriateness, and legal compliance (including copyright considerations) of such materials.

4. Use of AI by Reviewers and Editors
To preserve confidentiality and maintain the integrity of the peer review process, reviewers and editors are strongly discouraged from using generative AI tools to read, summarize, or evaluate submitted manuscripts. If AI tools are used in any capacity, this must be transparently disclosed, and no confidential information should be shared with these systems.

All post-publication correction requests are subject to editorial review. The Editorial Board evaluates the necessity and appropriateness of corrections based on the nature of the error, its impact on the article, and the supporting evidence. If approved, the correction will be made in the journal’s archive. The journal follows the COPE guidelines.

Article Withdrawal (Pre-Publication)

Withdrawal applies only to articles in press, which are early versions of articles that may contain errors, accidental duplicate submissions, or ethical violations (e.g., multiple submissions, fraudulent data, or plagiarism). Withdrawn articles will have their HTML and PDF content removed, replaced by a statement indicating the withdrawal and linking to the journal’s withdrawal policy.

Article Retraction (Post-Publication)

Retractions are issued for serious ethical violations, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, authorship fraud, or publication without co-author consent. Retraction notices include:

• A formal retraction note titled “Retraction: [Article Title],” published in a subsequent issue.
• A watermark on the PDF of the original article, marking it as "Retracted."
• A removal of the HTML version, ensuring transparency in corrections while preserving academic integrity.

Article Removal (Legal & Safety Concerns)

In rare cases, an article may need to be permanently removed from the journal’s online database due to legal issues, court orders, defamation, or significant health risks. While the metadata (title and authors) will be retained, the article content will be replaced with a legal notice explaining the removal.

Article Replacement

If an article poses a serious health risk, authors may request a replacement with a corrected version. In such cases, a retraction notice will be published with a link to the revised article, ensuring a transparent record of updates.

ADVERTISING POLICY

Anatolian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences accepts digital advertisements on its website, provided they are approved by the journal's Editorial Board and management. All advertisements must be clearly labeled as such. Advertisers have no influence on editorial decisions or advertising policies.

For advertising inquiries, please contact the Editorial Office (inueditorial@inonu.edu.tr).

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Anatolian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences applies a rigorous and transparent double-anonymized peer-review process to uphold academic quality and integrity. In this system, both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. All manuscripts first undergo a technical evaluation by the editorial office to ensure compliance with the journal’s submission guidelines. Submissions that meet these requirements are assessed by the Editor-in-Chief for relevance and scientific merit. Suitable manuscripts are then assigned to Section Editors, who oversee the review process and invite at least two independent, external reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.

Reviewers are expected to provide timely, evidence-based, and constructive feedback to improve the quality of submissions. Revised manuscripts are reassessed—preferably by the original reviewers—and Section Editors submit a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision. Throughout the process, confidentiality is strictly maintained; all communications between editors and reviewers are considered confidential and must not be shared without permission. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment. Authors may suggest reviewers during submission, but the final decision on their selection rests with the editorial team.

To ensure impartiality, manuscripts submitted by editorial board members are handled by qualified external editors, who are also required to declare any conflicts of interest. If the peer-review process deviates from standard policy, the type of review will be clearly indicated in the published article to ensure transparency. Peer-review reports are shared anonymously with the authors but are not made publicly available. Any suspected misconduct or manipulation of the review process is addressed in line with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. In case of delays, authors are notified and given the option to withdraw their manuscript.

REVISION PROCESS
Manuscripts requiring "minor revision" or "major revision" will receive a decision letter from the Editor-in-Chief, outlining the reviewers’ and editors’ comments along with a deadline for resubmission.

Submission of Revised Manuscripts

Authors must submit a detailed "Response to the Reviewers" document along with the revised manuscript. This document should address each reviewer’s comment individually, explaining the revisions made and specifying the corresponding line numbers in the manuscript. Additionally, an annotated version of the main document highlighting the changes should be provided.

Timeliness

Revised manuscripts must be submitted within the deadline stated in the decision letter. Missing the deadline may result in the rejection of the revision. If additional time is required, authors must request an extension before the original deadline expires.

DISCLAIMER

The views and opinions expressed in published manuscripts belong solely to the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the editors, editorial board, or publisher. The editors, editorial board, and publisher are not responsible for the content of published manuscripts and do not endorse the views expressed within them.
Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of their work. While the journal serves as a platform for disseminating research to the scientific community, it does not guarantee the validity of the content.