Cerasus Journal of Medicine (CJM) is an international, peer-reviewed medical journal that operates on a double-anonymized evaluation system and publishes high-quality research across all fields of medicine. The journal adheres to the highest ethical and scientific standards, following the guidelines of COPE, ICMJE, Declaration of Helsinki, and WAME to ensure integrity, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing.

Authors must:

Submit only original, unpublished manuscripts that are not simultaneously under consideration elsewhere.

Provide documented ethical approval and informed consent for studies involving human participants, animals, biological materials, or sensitive data.

Avoid all forms of research and publication misconduct, including plagiarism, duplication, data fabrication, falsification, and redundant publication.

Meet the ICMJE authorship criteria; honorary, guest, or ghost authorship is strictly prohibited.

Provide valid ORCID iDs for all authors.

Disclose all actual or potential conflicts of interest transparently.

Acknowledge all funding sources, institutional contributions, and relevant support.

Ensure the accuracy, reliability, and reproducibility of the research data.

Revise manuscripts promptly and thoroughly in accordance with editorial and reviewer comments.

Editors are responsible for:

Ensuring an impartial, unbiased, and scientifically robust evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.

Declining to handle any manuscript for which they have actual or potential conflicts of interest.

Maintaining strict confidentiality regarding all submitted materials, including manuscript content, author identities, and reviewer reports.

Selecting highly qualified reviewers and ensuring the integrity and transparency of the double-anonymized peer-review process.

Providing clear, consistent, and well-substantiated justifications for all editorial decisions.

Addressing ethical concerns or allegations of misconduct through fair, transparent, and systematic procedures aligned with international best editorial practices.

Reviewers must:

Conduct objective, constructive, and timely evaluations based solely on scientific merit.

Maintain complete confidentiality and refrain from sharing or using manuscript content for personal or professional gain.

Decline review invitations when conflicts of interest exist or when they lack the necessary expertise to provide a qualified assessment.

Provide evidence-based, respectful, and improvement-oriented feedback to support the advancement of scientific quality.

Report any suspected ethical violations—such as plagiarism, data manipulation, or duplicate publication—directly and promptly.

Cerasus Journal of Medicine (CJM) employs a rigorous double-anonymized peer-review system, ensuring anonymity for both authors and reviewers throughout the evaluation process.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the preliminary editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent experts with relevant academic competence.

Editorial decisions—accept, revise, or reject—are based on reviewer reports, scientific merit, methodological soundness, and overall contribution to the field.

The average peer-review duration is 40–45 days, although this may vary depending on the reviewer's availability and the revision requirements.

All manuscripts submitted to CJM are screened for originality as part of the editorial evaluation process. The journal follows strict guidelines to prevent plagiarism and unethical text reuse. Detailed procedures, similarity thresholds, and author responsibilities are outlined in the CJM Plagiarism Policy. Authors are required to review and comply with the full policy, available on the journal’s dedicated plagiarism policy page.

Studies involving humans must have ethics committee approval, comply with the Declaration of Helsinki, and include informed consent procedures.

Clinical trials must provide registry details.

Animal studies must adhere to recognized international standards of animal welfare.

Authors must be prepared to provide raw data to the editors upon request for verification.

Any form of data manipulation—such as fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting—is considered serious scientific misconduct.

All authors, reviewers, and editors are required to disclose any financial, personal, institutional, or professional conflicts of interest that may influence the research or evaluation process.

Individuals with declared conflicts must be recused from the editorial decision-making or review process to ensure impartiality and integrity.

CJM acknowledges the increasing importance of AI tools in academic workflows. To protect research integrity and ensure transparency, the following rules apply:

AI tools may be used for:

Language editing and grammar improvement.

Statistical assistance or computational support.

Non-manipulative image processing.

Coding, data visualization, or technical formatting.

AI tools must not be used to:

Generate scientific content, results, hypotheses, or interpretations.

Fabricate, falsify, or manipulate data, images, or references.

Write substantial portions of the manuscript.

Perform any action that compromises the integrity or originality of the work.

Authors must explicitly disclose all AI tool usage in the Methods or Acknowledgments section, specifying the tool and purpose.

Failure to disclose constitutes academic misconduct.

Example disclosure:

“ChatGPT (OpenAI) was used for language editing only; no AI tool was used to generate scientific content or interpret findings.”

AI cannot be an Author.

AI tools cannot meet authorship criteria and, therefore, may not be listed as authors.

Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of all submitted content.

Retraction may occur when:

Plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification is confirmed.

Duplicate publication is detected.

Major errors fundamentally affect the study’s conclusions.

Ethical violations compromise scientific reliability.

Retracted articles remain publicly accessible with a “RETRACTED” watermark and an explanatory retraction notice.

Withdrawal requests must include a formal written justification.

Unjustified withdrawal requests submitted after peer review has begun may be classified as unethical publishing behavior.

Corrections (corrigenda, errata, or addenda) are issued when minor errors do not invalidate the overall findings but require clarification.

CJM investigates all allegations of ethical misconduct through a structured process involving:

Initial editorial review of the concern

Request for author clarification or supporting documentation

Consultation with reviewers or external experts, if needed

Implementation of appropriate actions, including revision requests, rejection, correction, retraction, or institutional notification

All formal correspondence—including initial editorial screening, clarification requests, authorship verification, ethical inquiries, notifications regarding suspected misconduct, and decisions related to revisions, acceptance, rejection, or withdrawal—will be conducted through the official communication address kubilayissever@gmail.com.

Authors are responsible for monitoring this address for updates and responding promptly to ensure the smooth progression of the editorial process.

All emails sent to or received from this address constitute part of the official editorial record. Authors are expected to respond promptly, as delays may impact the editorial timeline or result in administrative action.