Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care

The Journal and MediHealth Academy strictly adhere to internationally recognized ethical guidelines, including those set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the Council of Science Editors (CSE), the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), the World Medical Association (WMA), and the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM).

Ethical Approval
All research studies submitted to the Journal must comply with the ethical principles outlined in:
• The WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects.
• The Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (8th Edition).
• The International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals (CIOMS/WHO).

Required Documentation:
• For Human Studies: An ethics committee approval document stating the name of the committee, approval number, and date of approval is required.
• For Animal Studies: A statement confirming compliance with animal welfare regulations and approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) is required.
• For Retrospective Studies: An ethics committee opinion or exemption letter must be provided. The lack of individual informed consent must be justified in the manuscript, consistent with institutional and national regulations.
• Ethics Approval Reporting: For all manuscripts involving human or animal subjects, the following statement must appear in the Methods section: “This study was approved by the [Name of Ethics Committee], Approval Number: [XXX], Date: [DD/MM/YYYY].” If ethics approval is deemed unnecessary, authors must explain this with appropriate institutional documentation.

Informed Consent
• For case reports and clinical images, written informed consent must be obtained from the patient. In the case of minors or individuals unable to consent, consent must be signed by both parents or a legal guardian.
• Authors must explicitly state in their manuscript whether informed consent was obtained. The Journal reserves the right to request copies of consent forms.
• For studies involving human organs or tissues, evidence must be provided that these were procured in accordance with the WHO Guiding Principles on Human Cell, Tissue, and Organ Transplantation. Manuscripts must include a declaration that organs/tissues were not sourced from executed prisoners or prisoners of conscience.

Authorship
All authors must meet ICMJE authorship criteria, having made substantial contributions to:
1. The conception and design of the study, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data.
2. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
3. Final approval of the version to be submitted.
Authors are accountable for all aspects of the work. Practices such as guest, ghost, or gift authorship are strictly prohibited.

Changes to Authorship
The Journal generally will not consider changes to authorship after a manuscript has been submitted. Any request for addition, deletion, or rearrangement must be made before acceptance, submitted by the corresponding author with a written explanation and confirmation from all authors. Only in exceptional circumstances will changes be considered after acceptance, which may result in a corrigendum.

Declaration of Competing Interests
All authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other individuals or organizations that could improperly influence or bias their work. Examples include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications, and grants. Authors with no competing interests to declare should state, "I have nothing to declare." The completed declarations form must be uploaded during submission.

Funding Sources
Authors must disclose any funding sources that provided financial support for the research. The role of sponsors, if any, should be declared. If no funding was provided, the following statement should be included: "This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors."

Reporting Sex- and Gender-Based Analyses
The Journal provides the following guidance for reporting sex- and gender-based analyses (SGBA):
• SGBA should be integrated into the research design when the study involves or pertains to humans, animals, or eukaryotic cells.
• The sex and/or gender dimensions of the research should be addressed within the manuscript or declared as a limitation.
• The definitions of sex and/or gender applied should be explicitly stated.
Authors are advised to consult the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines.
• Sex generally refers to a set of biological attributes.
• Gender generally refers to socially constructed roles, behaviors, and identities.

Jurisdictional Claims
The Journal respects authors' designations of territories and institutional affiliations. MediHealth Academy adopts a neutral stance regarding territorial disputes.
• Maps: Study areas shown within maps should be identifiable using common mapping platforms and must include the note: "Map lines delineate study areas and do not necessarily depict accepted national boundaries."
• Institutional Affiliations: Authors must use the full, standard title of their institution or its standard abbreviation.

Submission Declaration
By submitting an article, the author(s) imply that:
• The work has not been previously published (except as a preprint, abstract, thesis, etc.).
• The article is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
• Publication has been approved by all authors and responsible authorities.
• If accepted, the article will not be published elsewhere without written consent.
To verify compliance, manuscripts may be screened using appropriate tools.

Ethical Misconduct
The editorial board evaluates all research for ethical compliance prior to peer review. Manuscripts failing to meet ethical standards will be rejected. Suspected cases of fraudulent data, unethical authorship, falsified approvals, or fabricated peer review will be investigated following COPE’s procedures. If violations are confirmed, the manuscript will be rejected or retracted, and affiliated institutions will be notified.
 
POLICIES

AUTHORSHIP POLICY
The Journal and MediHealth Academy strictly adhere to the authorship guidelines recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authorship should be based on the following four criteria:
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 of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Each individual listed as an author must fulfill all four authorship criteria. Individuals who do not meet all four criteria but have provided other contributions should be recognized separately on the title page and in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript.
The Journal requires that the corresponding author submit a signed and scanned version of the authorship contribution form during the initial submission process. This form ensures authorship rights are appropriately indicated and helps prevent ghost or honorary authorship. The list of authors on the final manuscript will be presented in the order provided on this form. Should the editorial board suspect a case of gift authorship, the submission will be rejected without further review. The corresponding author must also submit a short statement confirming responsibility for authorship during the submission and review stages.

Changes to Authorship
Once a manuscript has been submitted, changes to authorship will generally not be considered. Authors must carefully consider the authorship list and order before the manuscript is submitted.
The policy regarding authorship changes is as follows:
• All authors must be listed in the manuscript and their details entered into the submission system.
• Any addition, deletion, or rearrangement of author names may only occur prior to acceptance and must be approved by the Journal editor.
• Requests for authorship changes should be made by the corresponding author, who must provide the reason for the request along with written confirmation from all authors (including those being added or removed) that they agree to the change.
• All authorship change requests must be submitted using the appropriate form. Requests that do not comply with the instructions will not be considered.
• Only in exceptional circumstances will the Journal editor consider authorship changes after acceptance.
• The publication of the manuscript may be paused while a request for authorship change is being considered.
• If a change is approved after publication, a corrigendum will be issued.
Any unauthorized changes to authorship may result in the rejection of the article or its retraction if already published.

Authorship Declaration
Each author is required to submit a signed authorship and contribution statement. This declaration should include:
• Author roles (e.g., conceptualization, data analysis, writing),
• Any editorial support received,
• Disclosures of potential honorary authorship.

In the event of authorship disputes, the Journal will follow the COPE authorship dispute resolution flowchart. If a dispute arises after publication, corrections or retractions may be issued as appropriate.
 
COMPLAINT and APPEAL POLICY
The Journal and MediHealth Academy welcome complaints as valuable opportunities for improvement. All complaints are handled in a fair, timely, and transparent manner, following the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
1. Types of Complaints Handled:
• Editorial delay or bias,
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest,
• Improper reviewer conduct,
• Publication ethics violations.
2. Procedure:
• All complaints must be submitted via email to the editorial office.
• An independent editor, not involved in the original decision, will assess the appeal.
• A formal response will be provided to the authors within 15 business days.
In cases where the resolution is deemed unsatisfactory, the author may appeal to:
• The publisher’s ethics committee,
• External bodies, such as COPE, if the Journal is a member.
Appeal and complaint cases will be handled within the scope of COPE guidelines by the Editorial Board of the Journal. Appeals should be based on the scientific content of the manuscript. The final decision regarding the appeal or complaint will be made by the Editor-in-Chief. An Ombudsperson or the Ethical Editor will be assigned to resolve cases that cannot be addressed internally. Authors should contact the Editor-in-Chief regarding their appeals and complaints via email.
 
CORRECTIONS POLICY
The Journal and MediHealth Academy are committed to ensuring the accuracy and transparency of the scholarly record. Corrections are made when material errors or inaccuracies in published work are identified.
Types of Post-Publication Notices:
• Erratum: Corrects minor, post-acceptance errors introduced by the journal/publisher during typesetting, formatting, or production.
• Corrigendum: Corrects an error made by the author(s) that was present in the original submitted manuscript and missed by both the authors and reviewers during the editing process.
• Retraction: Removes content that is misleading, unethical, or invalid.
• Addendum: Provides additional clarification or context to an already published article.
Each correction is:
• Clearly labeled,
• Linked to the original article,
• Indexed and citable.
Correction and Retraction Procedure:
Errors that impact the scholarly record, scientific integrity of the article, or the reputation of the authors or Journal will be corrected promptly, in coordination with the publisher. Corrections will be made as soon as possible, and will also be printed in an erratum sheet that appears in the next issue, along with the corrected digital version of the article. The corrected article will include a footnote indicating the date of correction, as well as the volume and issue in which the erratum will appear.
• Erratum: A significant error made by the Journal affecting the scholarly record, scientific integrity, or reputation of the authors or the Journal.
• Corrigendum: A significant error made by the authors that affects the scholarly record, scientific integrity, or the reputation of the authors or the Journal.
Editorial Responses:
All submitted corrections will be assessed by the Editorial Board. Where deemed necessary, they will undergo peer review, which may include consultation with the original reviewers. All parties will remain anonymous to the extent possible. Editorial responses are subject to oversight by the editorial team and will be published after full consultation with all interested parties.
• Editorial expression of concern: Notifies the addition of information to an article, for example, in response to a reader’s request for clarification or correction of a significant omission.
• Retraction: Notifies the readership of unsound results or misconduct after an investigation by the editor and publisher. The original article will remain available but will be marked as retracted through a published note from the editor.
• Article removal: In rare instances, an article may be removed due to legal action. The removal will be marked in the issue’s table of contents, with a notice indicating the removal replacing the article’s content.
Clarification and Appeals:
If any part of the editor’s decision letter or review material is unclear or inconsistent, authors may request clarification from the editor by emailing the editorial office. All correspondence regarding the submission should be sent by the corresponding author to the editorial office (not directly to the editor).
• Written clarification requests may be uploaded to the peer review system, where they will only be visible to the editor and associate editor. Reviewers will not see the authors’ clarification requests.
• The editor will decide whether to consult with the associate editor and provide a response, which will be archived in the system. Reviewers will not see the editor’s response.
• This written clarification process ensures proper record-keeping, allows the editor sufficient time to reflect on their answers, and facilitates consultation before responding.
The Journal does not provide or approve formal revision plans. Editors will consider the author’s requests and provide feedback, but clarification does not guarantee a positive outcome, nor should it be considered as approval for specific revisions. Any revised manuscript will be evaluated by the entire review team.
Unethical Practices:
The Journal disapproves of unethical practices, such as:
• Plagiarism: Republishing content without proper attribution,
• Fabrication: Publishing data or results that do not exist,
• Duplication: Using data from another publication, including republishing an article in a different language,
• Salami slicing: Splitting study results into multiple publications,
• Data manipulation/falsification: Distorting research data to present false results.
The Journal employs software to evaluate submitted manuscripts for plagiarism and duplicate publication. Authors must acknowledge any prior publication of study results, in whole or in part, including abstracts.
Human and Animal Rights:
For experimental, clinical, and human drug studies, approval by the ethics committee is required, along with a statement confirming adherence to international agreements, such as the WMA Declaration of Helsinki ("Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects," amended in October 2013). For experimental animal studies, authors must indicate that procedures followed are in accordance with animal rights guidelines, including the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, and that approval was obtained from the animal ethics committee. The ethics committee approval document should be submitted along with the manuscript.
The Methods section must include details regarding ethics committee approval, adherence to international guidelines, and proof of informed consent, especially for case reports where data or media may reveal a patient's identity. For individuals under 18 years of age, a consent form signed by both parents or a legal guardian is required.
 
FUNDING SOURCES POLICY
The Journal and MediHealth Academy require that all authors declare the financial support received to carry out their research. Declaring funding sources acknowledges the contributions of funders, fulfills funding requirements, and promotes greater transparency in the research process.
Each author must individually declare all sources of funding received for the research submitted to the Journal. This information must include the name of the granting agencies, grant numbers, and a description of each funder's role. If a funder has played no role in the research, this must be stated.
Authors are not required to provide a complete list of all grants that support them, unless the grant is directly related to the research being published.
Funding Sources
Authors must disclose any funding sources that provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article. The role of sponsors, if applicable, should be declared in relation to:
• Study design,
• Data collection,
• Analysis and interpretation of data,
• Writing of the report, and
• Decision to submit the article for publication.
If the funding sources had no involvement in these aspects, this must be stated in the submission.
To facilitate compliance with funder requirements, funding sources should be listed in the following standard format:
Funding: This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health [grant numbers xxxx, yyyy]; the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA [grant number zzzz]; and the United States Institutes of Peace [grant number aaaa].
Detailed descriptions of the programs or types of grants, scholarships, or awards are not necessary. If funding is from a block grant or other resources available to a university, college, or research institution, the name of the institute or organization providing the funding should be submitted.
If no funding was provided for the research, the following statement should be included:
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Undeclared Funding
Failure to disclose funding sources will be considered a breach of transparency and may result in rejection or retraction of the manuscript.
 
PEER REVIEW POLICY
The Journal and MediHealth Academy ensure that only manuscripts that have been approved by every individual author and have not been previously published or submitted elsewhere are accepted for evaluation.
Submitted manuscripts that pass preliminary control are scanned for plagiarism using iThenticate software. After the plagiarism check, eligible manuscripts are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief for their originality, methodology, importance of the subject matter, and alignment with the scope of the Journal. The Editor-in-Chief evaluates manuscripts for scientific content without regard to the ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religious belief, or political philosophy of the authors, ensuring a fair double-blind peer review process for the selected manuscripts.
The selected manuscripts are then sent to at least two national or international referees for evaluation. The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on modifications made by the authors in accordance with the referees' comments.
Conflicts of interest between authors, editors, and reviewers are strictly prohibited, and the Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of manuscripts in the Journal.
Reviewers' Judgments:
Reviewers are expected to provide objective feedback on the following aspects during their evaluation:
• Does the manuscript contain new and significant information?
• Does the abstract clearly and accurately describe the content of the manuscript?
• Is the problem significant and concisely stated?
• Are the methods described comprehensively?
• Are the interpretations and conclusions justified by the results?
• Are adequate references made to other works in the field?
• Is the language acceptable?
Reviewers must ensure that all information related to submitted manuscripts is kept confidential. If reviewers are aware of copyright infringement or plagiarism on the author’s side, this must be reported to the editor.
If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess the manuscript or knows that a prompt review will not be possible, the reviewer must notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.
The editor informs reviewers that manuscripts are confidential information and that this interaction is privileged. Reviewers and the editorial board are not permitted to discuss the manuscripts with others. The anonymity of referees is paramount.
Peer Review Structure:
• Manuscripts are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process.
• Each manuscript is assigned to at least two external reviewers based on their expertise.
Reviewer Ethics:
Reviewers must:
• Maintain confidentiality,
• Avoid reviewing manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest,
• Provide constructive, scholarly critiques.
Reviewer Misconduct:
Complaints regarding reviewer bias, plagiarism, or improper use of data will be thoroughly investigated. If misconduct is confirmed, the reviewer may be permanently removed from the reviewer pool.
 
LICENSES and COPYRIGHT POLICY
All content published in the Journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). This license permits:
• Unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
• Provided that the original work is properly cited,
• For non-commercial purposes only.
1. Copyright Retention:
• Authors retain the copyright to their work.
• Upon acceptance, authors grant the Journal a non-exclusive license to publish, disseminate, and archive the article.
2. Third-Party Content:
• Authors are required to obtain and provide written permission for the use of any copyrighted material, such as figures, tables, or datasets.
• The use of any content without permission will be considered a copyright violation and may result in immediate rejection or retraction of the manuscript.
 
AUTHOR SELF-ARHIVING POLICY
The Journal and MediHealth Academy grant authors permission to self-archive a preprint, the author's accepted manuscript version, and the published version of their article under the following policy:
1. Preprint Version:
The first stage of self-archiving occurs when the manuscript is fully drafted and ready for submission, often referred to as the original or preprint version. Authors are permitted to make their preprint articles available anywhere, at any time, prior to the peer review process. Various platforms are available for self-archiving the preprint version, including personal websites, institutional or non-commercial subject-based repositories, commercial platform websites or repositories, and social media.
However, once the article has been published in the Journal, authors must update the acknowledgment and provide a link to the final published version on the Journal’s website. The updated acknowledgment should read as follows:
“This is a preprint of an article published in [Journal]. The final authenticated version is available online at https://doi.org/[insert Digital Object Identifier (DOI)].”
2. Accepted Manuscript Version:
The second stage occurs once the manuscript has been accepted for publication in the Journal, following successful peer review, but before undergoing copyediting, typesetting, and proof correction. During this period, which is referred to as the "Embargo Period," authors retain the following rights:
• Authors may make their accepted manuscript available on their personal websites (excluding commercial websites and repositories).
• Authors may deposit their accepted manuscripts on their employer’s internal website or in institutional or funder repositories, provided that these versions are not made publicly available until after the Embargo Period has ended. The acknowledgment at this stage should read:
“This is a post-peer review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in [Journal]. The final authenticated version is available online at http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI].”
Commercial websites or repositories are defined as platforms intended for commercial gain. This includes services that charge fees for access, distribution, or aggregation of journal content, sell advertising, or engage in the sale of user data.
3. Published Version:
The third stage occurs once the article has been officially published online, assigned a specific DOI, and is available in the Journal. As an open-access publication, authors retain the right to upload and distribute the final published version of their article immediately upon publication. Authors may share and distribute their published articles freely at this stage.
 
PLAGIARISM POLICY
Plagiarism in any form is considered unethical and unacceptable by the Journal and MediHealth Academy.
1. Screening and Similarity:
• All manuscripts are subjected to plagiarism detection software (e.g., iThenticate) at least twice: once upon submission and again after revisions have been completed.
• Submissions with similarity rates exceeding 20% without proper referencing will be returned for revision or outright rejected.
2. Forms of Plagiarism:
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to, the following forms:
• Direct copying of text without proper citation,
• Mosaic plagiarism (patchwriting),
• Paraphrasing without attribution,
• Self-plagiarism (reusing one’s own previously published work),
• Data falsification or fabrication.
Confirmed cases of plagiarism will result in:
• Immediate rejection or retraction of the manuscript,
• Notification to the corresponding author’s institution.
In the event of suspected research misconduct, such as plagiarism, citation manipulation, or data falsification/fabrication, the editorial board will act in accordance with the COPE guidelines.
 
PUBLICATION CHARGES POLICY
Transparency:
• The Journal charges no submission, review, or publication fees, unless explicitly stated on the official website.
• If applicable, Article Processing Charges (APCs) are disclosed publicly.
• No hidden fees are associated with the Journal.
 
WITHDRAWAL POLICY
The Journal and MediHealth Academy are committed to upholding high-quality standards in publication and ensuring ethical practices that contribute to the advancement of scientific knowledge. Authors are expected to comply with best practices in publication ethics and the quality of their articles.
Manuscript withdrawal will be permitted only for compelling and unavoidable reasons. To withdraw a manuscript, authors must submit an Article Withdrawal Form, signed by all authors, clearly stating the reason for withdrawal. Authors must not assume that their manuscript has been withdrawn until appropriate notification is received from the editorial office.
1. Author-Initiated Withdrawal:
• Authors may withdraw submissions prior to peer review without penalty.
• Withdrawal after peer review must be requested via email, accompanied by a clear justification.
• Withdrawal will not be permitted post-acceptance without compelling ethical or methodological reasons.
2. Editorial-Initiated Withdrawal:
• If authors fail to respond to revision requests or if ethical concerns are raised during the review process, the manuscript may be withdrawn by the editor.
Unethical withdrawal, such as parallel submission or ghosting the Journal, may result in:
• Blacklisting of the author,
• Notification of the author’s institution,
• Public notice of unethical conduct.
Withdrawal Conditions:
• If a manuscript has been under review for more than five months, authors are permitted to withdraw the manuscript.
Manuscript Withdrawal Penalty:
Upon receipt of the Article Withdrawal Form, the Journal Editorial Board will investigate the reason for withdrawal.
• If the reason for withdrawal is deemed acceptable, the manuscript will be withdrawn without penalty.
• If the reason is deemed unacceptable, the Journal will not accept any future submissions from the same author for a period of one year.
Important Notes:
• Manuscripts may be withdrawn at any stage of the review or publication process by submitting a request to the editorial office.
• Manuscript withdrawal will only be permitted for compelling and unavoidable reasons after submission.
• The manuscript will not be withdrawn from the publication process until the completed, signed Article Withdrawal Form is received by the editorial office.
• Authors must not assume that their manuscript has been withdrawn until official notification is provided by the editorial office. 

GENERATIVE AI USE POLICY
Declaration of Generative AI Use
Authors must declare the use of generative AI in the manuscript preparation process upon submission of their paper. The Journal and MediHealth Academy recognize the potential of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies ("AI Tools") when used responsibly, to help researchers work efficiently, gain critical insights quickly, and achieve better outcomes. These tools, including AI agents and deep research tools, are increasingly aiding researchers in synthesizing complex literature, providing an overview of a field or research question, identifying research gaps, generating ideas, and offering tailored support for tasks such as content organization and improving language and readability.
Authors preparing a manuscript for the Journal are permitted to use AI Tools to assist them. However, these tools must never be used as a substitute for human critical thinking, expertise, and evaluation. AI technology should always be applied with human oversight and control.
Ultimately, authors are responsible and accountable for the contents of their work. This includes accountability for:
• Carefully reviewing and verifying the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and impartiality of all AI-generated output (including checking the sources, as AI-generated references can be incorrect or fabricated),
• Editing and adapting all material thoroughly to ensure that the manuscript represents the author’s authentic and original contribution and reflects their own analysis, interpretation, insights, and ideas,
• Ensuring the use of any tools or sources, AI-based or otherwise, is made clear and transparent to readers. If AI Tools have been used, a disclosure statement is required upon submission. An example of this statement is provided below,
• Ensuring the manuscript is developed in a way that safeguards data privacy, intellectual property, and other rights, by reviewing the terms and conditions of any AI tool that is used.
Authors must not list or cite AI Tools as authors or co-authors on the manuscript, as authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to, and performed by, humans.
The use of AI Tools in the manuscript preparation process must be declared by adding a statement at the end of the manuscript when the paper is first submitted. The statement will appear in the published work and should be placed in a new section before the references list.
Example:
• Title of new section: Declaration of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies in the Manuscript Preparation Process
• Statement: During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the published article.
The declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools, such as those used to check grammar, spelling, and references. If no AI tools have been used, a statement is not required.
Please refer to the Journal’s author policy on the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies, which can be found in the Journal's generative AI policies.
Please note: To protect authors’ rights and the confidentiality of their research, the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies such as ChatGPT or similar services is not permitted by reviewers or editors in the peer review and manuscript evaluation process, as stated in our generative AI policies. The use of compliant AI Tools is being actively evaluated, and this policy may be revised in the future.