Dahuder Medical Journal (Dahuder MJ) is an international, peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to internal medicine, clinical medicine, and related health sciences. The journal publishes articles in English, operates a double-blind peer-review system, and adopts a continuous publication model, whereby accepted manuscripts are published online once all editorial and production procedures have been completed. Dahuder Medical Journal is committed to the highest standards of scientific quality, publication ethics, and academic integrity, and follows the principles and recommendations of COPE, ICMJE, the Declaration of Helsinki, and WAME.

Author Responsibilities

• Authors must submit only original, unpublished manuscripts that are not simultaneously under review by another journal.
• When an editor submits an article to a journal, their access is restricted until the peer-review process is complete. The editor cannot see any screens related to the article's progress.
• For research involving human participants, animals, biological materials, personal data, or other sensitive content, all required ethics committee approvals and informed consent documents must be submitted completely and appropriately.
• Authors are expected to avoid all forms of research and publication misconduct, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, redundant publication, data fabrication, data falsification, excessive textual overlap, and any other breaches of publication ethics.
• The same study must not be submitted to or published in more than one journal or publication outlet.
• All listed authors must satisfy the ICMJE authorship criteria. Honorary, guest, and ghost authorship are not acceptable.
• Authors must provide valid ORCID IDs for all contributors.
• Any actual or potential conflicts of interest must be declared clearly and transparently.
• All sources of financial support, institutional assistance, and other contributions relevant to the study must be properly acknowledged.
• Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy, reliability, and reproducibility of the data and content they submit.
• All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous peer-review process involving at least two international reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are appointed by the Associate Editors and the Editor-in-Chief. In some cases, and for certain manuscript types, authors may be invited to suggest potential reviewers.
• During peer review, manuscripts are assessed in terms of relevance to the journal’s scope, originality, readability, methodological and statistical soundness, and language quality.
• At the conclusion of the evaluation process, a manuscript may be accepted, returned for minor revision, returned for major revision, or rejected.
• A request for revision does not imply or guarantee final acceptance.
• Authors must revise their manuscripts carefully, thoroughly, and within the requested timeframe, in accordance with the comments and recommendations of the editors and reviewers.
• Rejected manuscripts are not reconsidered for review.
• Final acceptance of a manuscript is also subject to compliance with all applicable legal and ethical requirements, including those relating to defamation, copyright infringement, plagiarism, and other relevant regulations.

Editor Responsibilities

• Editors must assess submitted manuscripts fairly, independently, and objectively on academic grounds while preserving confidentiality throughout the editorial process.
• Editorial decisions must be based on the originality of the work, its scientific contribution, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, ethical compliance, and relevance to the aims and scope of the journal.
• Editors must prevent conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers, editorial board members, and editorial staff, and they must refrain from handling manuscripts when an actual or potential conflict exists.
• Editors are responsible for appointing competent, suitable, and impartial reviewers for each submission.
• Editors must safeguard the integrity of the double-blind review process and ensure the confidentiality of authors, reviewers, and manuscript content at all stages of evaluation.
• Editors should make every effort to ensure that submissions are processed within a reasonable time and that the editorial workflow proceeds in a consistent, careful, and transparent manner.
• The Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors hold full responsibility and authority regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
• Editors should not reverse a decision unless there is a serious, justified, and documented reason; similarly, decisions made by previous editors should not be changed without compelling grounds.
• Editors must ensure that published material complies with internationally accepted ethical standards and, when necessary, should be adequately informed about the sources of research funding.
• Editors are responsible for maintaining the scientific quality of the journal, the scholarly value of published content, and the integrity of the academic record.
• Editors must take seriously all allegations of publication misconduct, ethical breach, or scientific unreliability, whether the manuscript is unpublished or already published, and they should make every reasonable effort to address such concerns appropriately.
• When required, editors should publish corrections, clarifications, editorial notices, retractions, or errata in order to preserve the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly literature.
• Editors should take into account the legitimate interests of both authors and readers while working to improve the journal’s academic and editorial standards.

Reviewer Responsibilities

• Reviewers must treat all manuscripts assigned to them as confidential documents and must not share, copy, reproduce, or discuss them with third parties.
• Review reports should be written in an objective, evidence-based, constructive, and respectful manner, without personal criticism of the authors.
• Reviewers should accept invitations only for manuscripts that fall within their field of expertise, and they should decline review requests when they are unable to provide a competent and informed evaluation.
• Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their neutrality, including financial, institutional, collaborative, or competitive relationships, and should withdraw from the process when appropriate.
• Reviewer evaluations should focus on the manuscript’s scientific merit, originality, clarity, ethical appropriateness, and contribution to the field.
• Reviewers should notify the editor of any important relevant references not cited by the authors, and of any substantial similarity or overlap with other published or submitted work known to them.
• If a reviewer suspects plagiarism, duplicate submission, data manipulation, or any other ethical problem, the matter must be reported promptly to the Editor or Editor-in-Chief.
• Reviewers are expected to complete their reports within the agreed time and to provide clear, justified, and understandable comments that support the editorial decision-making process.
• Reviewers must not upload manuscript files or any part of manuscript content to artificial intelligence tools, AI-supported platforms, or any external system that may compromise confidentiality.

Plagiarism and Similarity Check Policy

• All submissions to Dahuder MJ are screened for originality as part of the initial editorial assessment.
• The journal maintains a strict policy against plagiarism, unethical text recycling, duplicate publication, and all other forms of academic misconduct.
• Submitted manuscripts are evaluated using similarity-detection software during preliminary editorial review.
• For Dahuder Medical Journal, the total similarity rate must not exceed 20%, excluding the reference list.
• Similarity from any single source must not exceed 3%.
• In certain cases, similarity found in the methodology section may be assessed separately at the discretion of the editors.
• Manuscripts exceeding the journal’s similarity limits may be returned to the authors for revision, correction, or detailed explanation.
• Authors bear full responsibility for the originality of their work and for the correct citation and acknowledgment of all sources consulted.
• Authors are expected to review and comply with the journal’s full plagiarism and similarity policy before submission.

Research Ethics

• All research involving human participants must have received prior approval from an appropriate ethics committee.
• Research involving human subjects must be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.
• Where relevant, the manuscript must clearly state that informed consent was obtained from the participants.
• For clinical research, registration details and all relevant ethical approvals must be reported.
• Studies involving animals must be carried out in accordance with internationally accepted principles of animal welfare and research ethics.
• Authors must explicitly state that the study was conducted and reported in compliance with ethical standards.

Data Transparency

• Authors must be prepared to provide raw data, supporting materials, or further explanations to the editors upon request for verification purposes.
• Research data must be presented accurately, comprehensively, and transparently.
• Data fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, and related practices are regarded as serious violations of scientific ethics.

Conflict of Interest

• Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, personal, institutional, or professional conflicts of interest that could influence the research, review, or editorial decision-making process.
• Any potential conflict of interest must be managed in a manner that preserves transparency and trust in the editorial and peer-review process.
• Individuals who have a conflict of interest must not take part in the relevant review or editorial decisions in order to protect impartiality.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy

• Authors must clearly disclose any artificial intelligence tools used during manuscript preparation. Such disclosure should appear in the Methods section, Acknowledgments, or another appropriate part of the manuscript, and should specify the name of the tool, the version when applicable, and the purpose for which it was used.
• AI tools may be used only for limited technical assistance, such as language editing, spelling and grammar correction, formatting support, reference organization, coding assistance, data visualization, and statistical or computational support.
• The use of AI must not undermine the originality, scientific validity, accuracy, or reliability of the manuscript.
• AI tools must not be used to generate scientific arguments, original interpretations, hypotheses, results, discussions, or scholarly conclusions.
• AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, distort, or invent data, images, findings, references, or citations.
• AI systems cannot replace the researcher’s scientific reasoning, academic judgment, or ethical responsibility.
• AI tools cannot be credited as authors because they do not meet authorship criteria and cannot assume responsibility for the work.
• The authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and ethical compliance of the entire manuscript content.
• Editors and reviewers may use AI only for limited technical purposes that do not compromise confidentiality and that remain fully consistent with the journal’s policy. AI must not be used for editorial decision-making, reviewer report writing, or as a substitute for expert human evaluation.
• Editors and reviewers must not upload manuscripts, supplementary files, figures, data, or peer-review correspondence to external AI systems.

Retraction

• An article may be retracted in the following circumstances:
• Confirmed plagiarism, data fabrication, or data falsification,
• Confirmed duplicate publication,
• Serious errors that invalidate or substantially undermine the conclusions of the study,
• Ethical violations that compromise the reliability and integrity of the published work.
• Retracted articles remain accessible in the public record in order to preserve the transparency of scholarly communication. Such articles are clearly identified with a “RETRACTED” watermark and are accompanied by a formal retraction notice explaining the reason.

Withdrawal

• Requests for withdrawal must be submitted with a formal written explanation.
• Withdrawal requests submitted after the peer-review process has begun, without a valid and convincing justification, may be regarded as unethical publishing conduct.

Corrections

• Corrections, including corrigenda, errata, and addenda, are issued when minor errors or omissions do not invalidate the overall findings of the study but nevertheless require clarification or amendment.

Handling of Ethical Misconduct

• Allegations of ethical misconduct or concerns regarding the scientific reliability of a submission or publication are examined carefully and confidentially by the editorial office.
• When necessary, the editor initiates an investigation in accordance with COPE and ICMJE guidance and may request explanations, official documents, or supporting evidence from the authors.
• If the suspicion of misconduct is serious, the editor may consider notifying the relevant institution of the authors and, where appropriate, the relevant funding organizations.
• During an ongoing investigation, the editor may publish an expression of concern when there is substantial doubt about the integrity of the manuscript or article.
• If misconduct is confirmed, the manuscript may be rejected; if the article has already been published, a correction, expression of concern, or retraction may be issued.
• Retractions and expressions of concern are published in a clear, reasoned, and visible manner and are linked to the original article.
• Throughout this process, the journal maintains editorial impartiality, procedural confidentiality, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

Official Editorial Communication Address

• All formal correspondence concerning the editorial and peer-review process shall be conducted through the journal’s official communication address: selcukyaylaci@sakarya.edu.tr
• Such correspondence may include, but is not limited to, initial editorial screening, requests for clarification, authorship verification, ethical inquiries, notifications concerning suspected misconduct, and decisions regarding revision, acceptance, rejection, or withdrawal.
• Authors are responsible for monitoring this address regularly and for responding in a timely manner so that delays in the editorial process may be avoided.
• All messages sent to or received from this address constitute part of the journal’s official editorial record.
• Failure to respond within a reasonable period may disrupt the editorial workflow and may result in administrative action.