Ethical Principles

The authors, editors, section editors, editorial board members, and reviewers of the Journal of Health Sciences and Management / Sağlık Bilimleri ve Yönetimi Dergisi (JOHESAM) are required to comply with the principles of scientific publication ethics. In its publication ethics processes, the journal follows the principles and guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

All manuscripts submitted to JOHESAM must comply with research and publication ethics, human and animal rights, patient confidentiality, the protection of personal data, the principles of scientific integrity, and international academic publishing standards.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to JOHESAM are deemed to have accepted the responsibility to comply with the following ethical principles:

• The manuscript submitted by the author(s) must be an original work.
• The manuscript submitted to JOHESAM must not have been previously published elsewhere or submitted to another journal for publication.
• Authors must cite all sources used in the manuscript completely, accurately, and appropriately.
• Authors must have the necessary permissions for obtaining, using, and publishing the data used in the research.
• Ethics committee approval must be obtained for studies involving human participants, patient data, clinical information, survey/data collection processes, or animal experiments.
• In studies requiring ethics committee approval, the name of the ethics committee, approval date, and decision/protocol number must be clearly stated in the manuscript.
• The manuscript must state whether informed voluntary consent was obtained from the participants.
• When using patient information, clinical images, and personal data, confidentiality must be protected and identifying information must not be included.
• If the authors have derived the manuscript from a thesis, project, or a paper previously presented at a congress/symposium/conference, this must be clearly stated in the manuscript.
• Authors must not manipulate or falsify research data, must not use fabricated data, and must interpret the findings objectively.
• Authors must clearly declare all situations that may constitute a conflict of interest.
• If financial support was provided for the study, the supporting institution/organization, project number, and funding information must be stated.
• Individuals who have not made a scientific contribution to the manuscript must not be listed as authors.
• All researchers who contributed to the study must be appropriately listed as authors; all authors must be informed that the manuscript has been submitted to JOHESAM and must approve the submission.
• Author contribution rates or an author contribution statement must be clearly stated at the end of the manuscript.
• If authors identify a significant error in their work at any stage of the manuscript evaluation or publication process, they must immediately inform the editorial office for correction or withdrawal procedures.
• Authors must be able to provide raw data, ethics committee approval documents, permission letters, consent forms, and similar supporting documents if requested by the journal.

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors and Section Editors

JOHESAM editors are responsible for all content published in the journal and for ensuring that publication processes are conducted in accordance with ethical principles. Editors carry out their duties in line with the principles of impartiality, transparency, confidentiality, and scientific quality.

The ethical responsibilities of editors are as follows:

• Editors should strive to continuously improve the scientific quality, visibility, and publication quality of the journal.
• They should ensure that the content published in the journal complies with JOHESAM’s aim and scope, publication policy, and ethical principles.
• They should ensure that information regarding author guidelines, publication policy, peer review process, and ethical principles is up to date, clear, and accessible.
• In the evaluation of manuscripts, the academic title, institution, gender, nationality, religion, political opinion, or similar characteristics of the authors are not taken into consideration.
• Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript should be based on the scientific value, originality, methodology, clarity, ethical compliance of the study, and its relevance to the scope of the journal.
• Editors should ensure that the necessary ethics committee approvals have been obtained for studies involving human and animal rights.
• In cases that pose risks in terms of patient confidentiality, protection of personal data, and research ethics, editors should request the necessary corrections or reject the manuscript.
• Editors should protect the confidentiality of author and reviewer identities to ensure the proper functioning of the double-blind peer review process.
• Reviewers who will evaluate manuscripts should be selected by considering their areas of expertise and scientific competence.
• Editors should avoid situations that may give rise to conflicts of interest in reviewer selection.
• Editors should monitor whether reviewer reports are prepared in a scientific, ethical, impartial, constructive, and timely manner.
• Editors have the right to disregard or request revision of reviewer reports that are scientifically or ethically inadequate or contain personal or offensive statements.
• At the end of the preliminary evaluation or peer review process, editors should clearly communicate the requested revisions to the authors and allow a reasonable period for revision.
• Editors should respond to authors’ requests for information about the process in a manner that does not violate the principle of double-blind peer review.
• Editors should evaluate complaints and appeals regarding the journal in an impartial, clear, and constructive manner.
• Editors should conduct correction, withdrawal, or ethical review processes related to published articles in accordance with COPE guidelines.
• Editors should keep the records, reviewer reports, and correspondence related to each manuscript in electronic format.

 Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

JOHESAM evaluates manuscripts through a double-blind peer review process. Manuscripts that pass the preliminary evaluation are sent anonymously to at least two reviewers selected according to their areas of expertise. Reviewer reports are also forwarded to the authors anonymously.

The ethical responsibilities of reviewers are as follows:

• Reviewers should agree to evaluate only manuscripts related to their areas of expertise.
• The reviewer should conduct the evaluation personally and should not share the manuscript with third parties.
• Reviewers should comply with the principles of impartiality and confidentiality during the evaluation process.
• If any conflict of interest, academic closeness, competitive relationship, or any situation that may affect impartiality is noticed, the reviewer should inform the editor and withdraw from the evaluation.
• Reviewers should not use or share the content of the manuscript they are evaluating before it is published.
• Reviewer evaluations should be based solely on the scientific content, methodology, ethical compliance, originality, contribution to the literature, and suitability of the manuscript for the scope of the journal.
• Reviewers should complete the evaluation form fully and clearly.
• Particularly in negative evaluations, the reasons should be stated in a scientific, clear, and convincing manner.
• Reviewers should use guiding, academic, polite, and constructive language toward authors.
• Personal criticism, offensive statements, insulting comments, and evaluations that are not appropriate for academic style should be avoided.
• Reviewers should inform the editor of any suspicious situations such as ethical violation, plagiarism, data falsification, duplicate publication, conflict of interest, or missing citations.
• Reviewer reports should be prepared within the period specified by the journal.

 Plagiarism and Unethical Practices

Unethical practices such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, salami publication, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate authorship, concealment of conflicts of interest, and lack of ethics committee approval are not accepted in manuscripts submitted to JOHESAM.

For manuscripts to be submitted to the journal, it is mandatory to upload a similarity report obtained from Turnitin, iThenticate, or another valid similarity-checking program to the DergiPark system. In addition, manuscripts uploaded to the system may also be checked for similarity by the editorial office.

Manuscripts with a similarity rate exceeding 20% are not included in the evaluation process. However, a low similarity rate does not automatically mean that the manuscript is ethically appropriate. The editorial office may examine the similarity report in detail when deemed necessary and may reject manuscripts considered ethically problematic.

If content that does not comply with ethical principles, a suspicious situation regarding a published or under-review manuscript, or a violation of publication ethics is detected, it is kindly requested that the matter be reported to the JOHESAM editorial office by e-mail.

 Publication Policy of the Journal

• JOHESAM is a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic journal that publishes scientific studies prepared in the fields of health sciences, life sciences, and health management.
• The journal accepts original research articles, observational and experimental studies, clinical research, survey studies, case reports, reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses for evaluation.
• JOHESAM aims to support interdisciplinary scientific production in the fields of health sciences and health management.
• The journal publishes studies that contribute to the improvement of healthcare services, the protection of public health, the evaluation of health policies, the improvement of health management practices, and the dissemination of evidence-based healthcare practices.
• JOHESAM is funded by Marmara University and is published on the DergiPark platform as an open-access journal, free of charge and exclusively in electronic format.
• No fees are charged to authors for manuscript submission, evaluation, or publication processes.
• The author guidelines are explained in detail on the relevant page of the journal.
• Manuscripts that are not prepared in accordance with the author guidelines and article type may be returned to the authors before entering the editorial process.
• JOHESAM is a peer-reviewed journal.
• Manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process following preliminary evaluation by the Editorial Board.
• Manuscripts are sent anonymously to at least two reviewers selected by considering their level of knowledge and areas of expertise.
• If one positive and one negative opinion are received as a result of peer review, the manuscript may be sent to a third reviewer. The final decision is made in accordance with the third reviewer’s opinion and editorial evaluation.
• Reviewer evaluation forms are forwarded to the authors anonymously.
• When revisions are required in line with reviewers’ recommendations, authors are given sufficient time for revision.
• The publication languages of JOHESAM are Turkish and English.
• The journal is published three times a year, in January, May, and September.
• DOI numbers are assigned to articles published in the journal; no fee is charged to authors for this process.
• The publication of more than one article by the same author in the same issue is subject to editorial evaluation.
• The journal reserves the right to request revisions in manuscripts regarding language, format, citation style, ethical statements, and scientific reporting when deemed necessary.

 Manuscript Evaluation Process

Manuscripts submitted to JOHESAM are received through the DergiPark system and undergo the following evaluation process:

• The secretariat or editorial office checks whether the manuscript complies with the journal’s author guidelines, template, file format, and required documents.
• The similarity report, ethics committee approval document, author declaration form, copyright/transfer form, and other required documents are examined.
• Manuscripts with missing documents, inappropriate format, or a high similarity rate may be returned to the author.
• The Editorial Board conducts a preliminary evaluation of the manuscript in terms of the journal’s aim and scope, scientific quality, language adequacy, and ethical compliance.
• Manuscripts that are outside the scope of the journal, found to be scientifically insufficient, or considered ethically problematic may be rejected without being sent for peer review.
• Manuscripts that pass the preliminary evaluation are assigned to the relevant section editor.
• The section editor evaluates the manuscript’s suitability for the field, academic competence, and suitability for peer review.
• Following the approval of the section editor, the manuscript is sent anonymously to at least two reviewers selected according to their areas of expertise.
• Reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript in terms of scientific content, methodology, ethical compliance, originality, contribution to the literature, presentation of findings, discussion, and consistency of conclusions.
• Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
• Manuscripts requiring minor or major revision are sent back to the authors.
• Authors should submit their responses to reviewer and editor comments together with a detailed response file.
• When deemed necessary, the revised manuscript may be sent for peer review again.
• If one positive and one negative reviewer opinion are received, the manuscript may be sent to a third reviewer.
• The final decision is made by the editor based on reviewer reports, the section editor’s opinion, and editorial evaluation.
• Accepted manuscripts are prepared for publication after language and format checks.
• Manuscript evaluation forms are forwarded to the authors anonymously in accordance with the principle of double-blind peer review.
• Delays in reviewers’ responses, assignment of additional reviewers, or re-evaluation of revisions may extend the evaluation period.

 Manuscript Withdrawal Process

The JOHESAM Editorial Board conducts the manuscript withdrawal process in accordance with COPE guidelines and international publication ethics principles. Withdrawal requests are evaluated separately depending on whether the study is at the evaluation, early view, or publication stage.

Withdrawal of a Manuscript by the Author(s)

If authors identify a significant error, ethical issue, or any other situation requiring withdrawal in their work during the preliminary check, editorial evaluation, peer review, early view, or publication stage, they are obliged to cooperate with the JOHESAM Editorial Board.

• Authors who wish to withdraw their work should apply to the JOHESAM Editorial Board in writing.
• The manuscript withdrawal request should be submitted by the corresponding author.
• The reason for withdrawal should be stated clearly, in detail, and explicitly.
• The withdrawal request should include the knowledge and approval of all authors.
• If deemed necessary, the editorial office may request a signed manuscript withdrawal form from all authors.
• While the withdrawal request is under evaluation, the manuscript should not be submitted to another journal.
• The withdrawal request is evaluated by the JOHESAM Editorial Board, and the authors are informed of the result.

Withdrawal of a Manuscript by the Editor(s)

Editors may initiate a withdrawal, correction, or ethical review process if one or more of the following situations are detected in a published manuscript or a manuscript under evaluation:

• Clear evidence indicating that the findings of the publication are unreliable,
• Suspected data fabrication or data falsification,
• Detection of plagiarism or duplicate publication,
• Identification of a violation of publication ethics,
• Failure to obtain the required ethics committee approval,
• Absence of necessary legal or institutional permissions,
• Violation of principles regarding patient confidentiality or protection of personal data,
• Copyright infringement,
• Reliance on a manipulated or compromised peer review process,
• Failure to disclose conflicts of interest,
• Detection of an unethical situation regarding author contributions or authorship order.

The reason for withdrawal is clearly stated for withdrawn manuscripts. For published articles, the withdrawal notice is published visibly on the journal page. In cases that require correction but do not require withdrawal, the editorial office may publish a correction notice.