Journal of Cukurova Anesthesia and Surgical Sciences (J Cukurova Anesth Surg )

1. Guiding Principles

The Journal of Cukurova Anesthesia and Surgical Sciences is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. All parties involved in the publication process — authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher — are expected to comply with the principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE; https://publicationethics.org), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE; https://www.icmje.org), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME; https://www.wame.org).

In cases of suspected misconduct, the journal follows COPE guidelines and flowcharts for handling complaints and allegations: https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts

2. Responsibilities of Authors

2.1. Scientific Responsibility

All submitted manuscripts must represent original work that complies with research and publication ethics. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their submissions. By submitting a manuscript, all authors confirm that:

• The work has not been published previously in any language, in whole or in part
• The work is not currently under consideration or review at any other journal
• All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript
• The corresponding author acts as the representative of all authors in all editorial correspondence and is responsible for the accuracy of the final submitted version

2.2. Authorship

Authorship must be based on all four ICMJE criteria:

1. Substantial contributions to conception or design, or acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data
2. Drafting or critically revising the manuscript for important intellectual content
3. Final approval of the version to be published
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work

All individuals listed as authors must meet all four criteria. Contributors who do not meet all criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section. Guest authorship, gift authorship, and ghost authorship are forms of misconduct and will not be tolerated. Any changes to authorship after submission must be approved in writing by all authors and justified to the editor.

2.3. Ethical Approval for Human Studies

All research involving human participants must be conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki/). Authors must state in the Materials and Methods section that:

• The study was approved by an institutional ethics committee
• The name of the ethics committee, the approval number, and the date of approval are provided
• Written informed consent was obtained from all participants (or their legal guardians)

Retrospective studies, audits, and studies using anonymized data are not exempt from ethics review. If a study was granted an exemption, this must also be stated with the relevant committee details.

2.4. Ethical Approval for Animal Studies

Studies involving animals must comply with the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines (https://arriveguidelines.org) and the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/guide-for-the-care-and-use-of-laboratory-animals.pdf). Authors must state that institutional ethics committee approval was obtained and that animal welfare was upheld throughout the study.

2.5. Informed Consent for Case Reports

For case reports or any manuscript containing identifiable patient information (including images, clinical histories, or genetic data), written informed consent from the patient or their legal guardian must be obtained for publication. Authors must confirm this in the manuscript. If consent could not be obtained, the reason must be stated and the editor's approval sought.

2.6. Clinical Trial Registration

All clinical trials must be prospectively registered in a publicly accessible registry approved by the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; https://www.who.int/clinical-trials-registry-platform) before recruitment begins (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN). The trial registration number must be included at the end of the abstract. The journal will not consider unregistered clinical trials for publication.

2.7. Reporting Guidelines

Authors are expected to follow relevant reporting guidelines:

• Randomized controlled trials: CONSORT (https://www.consort-statement.org)
• Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA (https://www.prisma-statement.org)
• Observational studies: STROBE (https://www.strobe-statement.org)
• Diagnostic accuracy studies: STARD (https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard/)
• Case reports: CARE (https://www.care-statement.org)

Completed checklists should be uploaded as supplementary files at the time of submission.

2.8. Conflict of Interest

All authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could be perceived to influence the work. This includes but is not limited to: employment, consultancy fees, stock ownership, honoraria, expert testimony, research funding, travel grants, patents, and board memberships. Disclosures must be made on the title page and in a dedicated Conflict of Interest section at the end of the manuscript. If no conflicts exist, authors must state: "The authors declare no conflict of interest."

2.9. Funding Disclosure

All sources of financial support must be disclosed, including grant names and numbers. If the study received no funding, authors must state: "This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors." Funders must not have had any role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or the decision to publish unless explicitly stated.

2.10. Data Availability

Authors are encouraged to make their underlying research data publicly available in an appropriate repository (e.g., Zenodo, Figshare, OSF) and to include a Data Availability Statement at the end of the manuscript. Where data cannot be shared, a brief explanation must be provided.

2.11. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

The use of AI-based language tools (e.g., large language models such as ChatGPT) for the preparation or editing of manuscripts must be disclosed in the cover letter and in the Methods or Acknowledgments section, specifying the tool used and the nature of its use. AI tools may not be listed as authors under any circumstances, as they cannot fulfill the ICMJE authorship criteria and cannot be held accountable for the work.

2.12. Duplicate Publication and Salami Slicing

Submitting a manuscript that substantially overlaps with previously published work — in any language — constitutes duplicate publication and is a form of research misconduct. Dividing the findings of a single study into multiple manuscripts to artificially increase the number of publications (salami slicing) is similarly prohibited. Authors who have published related work must disclose this at the time of submission and provide copies of the related publications for editorial review.

2.13. Simultaneous Submission

Submitting a manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is not permitted. Authors must confirm that the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere. If the manuscript is based on a thesis or conference presentation, this must be disclosed.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

3.1. Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript are based solely on the manuscript's scientific merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope. Decisions are not influenced by the authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, race, gender, religious beliefs, or political views, nor by commercial interests or relationships with the publisher.

3.2. Confidentiality

Editors treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. The content, status, and reviewer identities of submitted manuscripts must not be disclosed to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, and relevant editorial staff. Editors must not use unpublished material from submitted manuscripts in their own research without the explicit written consent of the authors.

3.3. Handling Conflicts of Interest

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest (e.g., manuscripts submitted by their own students, collaborators, or institutional colleagues). In such cases, editorial responsibilities are delegated to another member of the editorial team.

3.4. Timeliness

Editors are committed to processing manuscripts in a timely manner. Authors are informed of the editorial decision within approximately 6–8 weeks of submission. If a decision is delayed beyond this period, the corresponding author will be notified.

3.5. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who wish to appeal a rejection decision may do so by submitting a formal written appeal to the editorial office, providing a detailed rebuttal of the reviewers' and editors' comments. Appeals are considered at the discretion of the editor-in-chief. Complaints regarding editorial conduct, reviewer behavior, or publication ethics may be submitted to the editorial office and will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.

4. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

4.1. Confidentiality

Peer reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose the content of manuscripts under review with any third party. Manuscripts must not be retained after the review is complete; all copies (digital and physical) must be deleted or destroyed.

4.2. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must immediately notify the editor if they have any conflict of interest with the authors, institutions, or content of the manuscript and must decline to review in such cases.

4.3. Objectivity and Constructiveness

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, evidence-based, and constructive evaluations. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate. Reviews should clearly identify the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript and provide specific suggestions for improvement.

4.4. Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to respond to review invitations promptly and to submit their evaluations within the agreed timeframe (typically 3–4 weeks). If a reviewer is unable to complete the review within this period, they should notify the editor immediately so that an alternative reviewer can be appointed.

4.5. Recognition of Reviewers

The journal acknowledges the contribution of peer reviewers. A list of reviewers who have contributed to each volume is published on the journal website at the end of each calendar year.

5. Plagiarism Policy

J Cukurova Anesth Surg Sci is committed to publishing only original work. All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using dedicated similarity detection software prior to peer review.

5.1. Thresholds and Actions

• Similarity below 15%: Manuscript proceeds to peer review
• Similarity between 15–25%: Manuscript is returned to authors for revision before further processing
• Similarity above 25%: Manuscript is rejected without peer review; authors are notified and advised to resubmit only after substantial revision

These thresholds apply to overall similarity excluding references, quoted material, and boilerplate text. The editorial board reserves the right to exercise judgment beyond these thresholds based on the nature and distribution of overlapping text.

5.2. Self-Plagiarism

Reproducing substantial portions of one's own previously published work without appropriate citation and without the permission of the original copyright holder constitutes self-plagiarism. This includes recycling of Methods sections, Introduction text, or Results from prior publications. Authors must obtain permission from the original publisher and clearly indicate when previously published text is being reused.

5.3. Plagiarism Detected Before Publication

If plagiarism is detected at any stage before publication, the corresponding author will be notified and given an opportunity to respond. Depending on the severity of the overlap, the manuscript may be returned for revision or rejected outright. If the plagiarism is deliberate and extensive (>25%), the authors' institution and relevant funding agencies may be informed.

5.4. Plagiarism Detected After Publication

If plagiarism is identified after publication, the journal will conduct a formal investigation in accordance with COPE guidelines. If misconduct is confirmed, the article will be retracted, a retraction notice will be published, and the authors' institution and funding bodies will be notified.

6. Research Misconduct

The journal treats the following as serious forms of research misconduct:

• Fabrication: Inventing data, results, or findings that were not obtained
• Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, or data such that the research is not accurately represented
• Image manipulation: Altering figures or images in ways that misrepresent the original data
• Undisclosed duplication: Submitting the same work to multiple journals simultaneously or publishing the same data in more than one article without disclosure
• Improper authorship: Guest, gift, or ghost authorship

Allegations of research misconduct will be investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines. The journal reserves the right to contact authors' institutions, funding agencies, and relevant professional bodies.

7. Corrections and Retractions

7.1. Corrections (Erratum/Corrigendum)

If a published article contains a significant error that does not affect the integrity of the findings, a correction notice will be published. Erratum notices address errors made by the journal; Corrigendum notices address errors made by the authors.

7.2. Retractions

An article will be retracted if:

• There is clear evidence of fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism
• The findings have been previously published without proper acknowledgment
• The study was conducted without required ethical approvals
• The authorship is disputed and cannot be resolved

Retraction notices will clearly state the reason for retraction and will remain permanently linked to the original article. The retracted article will be watermarked on all pages of the PDF but will remain accessible for the scientific record.

7.3. Expressions of Concern

In cases where an investigation is ongoing or where evidence is inconclusive, the editor may publish an Expression of Concern to alert readers while the matter is being resolved.

8. Post-Publication Discussion

The journal welcomes Letters to the Editor in response to published articles. Authors of the original article will be invited to respond. This correspondence will be published in a subsequent issue to foster scientific dialogue and transparency.

This policy was last updated in 2025 and will be reviewed annually. For questions regarding publication ethics, please contact the editorial office through the journal's contact page on DergiPark.