The publication policy of the Sakarya Medical Journal is based on the improvement and dissemination of information in an impartial and ethical manner. The processes applied in line with this policy directly affect the quality of the studies submitted by authors and affiliated institutions. Peer-reviewed studies support and advance the scientific method. Therefore, all parties involved in the process (authors, readers, researchers, publishers, reviewers, editors) must comply with ethical principles.

Sakarya Medical Journal adheres to national and international research and publication ethics standards. It complies with the Press Law, the Law on Intellectual and Artistic Works, and the Higher Education Institutions Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive. Sakarya Medical Journal has adopted the International Ethical Publishing Principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). 

The Sakarya University Sakarya Medical Journal expects all parties to assume the following ethical responsibilities as part of its publication ethics.

The ethical duties and responsibilities listed below are based on the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as open access.

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is essential to the development of a coherent and, respected knowledge network. Peer-reviewed articles support and develop scientific methods. Therefore, it is important for all relevant parties involved in the publishing process, including authors, journal editors, reviewers, and publishing agencies, to agree on the expected ethical behaviors and standards.

1. Ethical Principles
1.1. Authorship of the Paper:
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

1.2. Conflicts of Interest:
Authors: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Reviewers: Referees should inform the journal editor during the evaluation process if they suspect any conflict of interest in the article they are evaluating, and should refuse to evaluate the article if necessary. In order to prevent a conflict of interest, individuals at the institutions where the article authors work cannot serve as referees for the article.
Editors: Editors should not have personal or financial conflicts of interest with the articles.

1.3. Data Access and Retention:
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

1.4. Data Fabrication and Falsification:
Fabrication and/or falsification experimental results, including the manipulation of images.

1.5. Duplicate / Multiple Submission(s):
Manuscripts that are either found to have been submitted elsewhere or published elsewhere will be rejected. If authors have used their own work, either previously submitted or published, as the basis for a submitted manuscript, they are required to cite the previous work. They also need to indicate how novel contributions are made in the submitted manuscript beyond those of the previous work.

1.6. Intellectual Property
• Authors certify that their submitted manuscript (and any supporting items) are their own intellectual property, and that the copyright has not been transferred to others.
• Authors certify that the manuscript contains no plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, manipulated citations, and that the manuscript conforms to JSS authorship policies.
• All manuscripts, revisions, drafts, and galleys remain the intellectual property of the author(s). Except as stated in the agreed license, the author(s) retain the copyright to their work.
• Authors, reviewers, and editors agree to keep all communications, comments, or reports from reviewers or editors confidential.
• Reviewers and editors agree to keep all manuscripts, revisions, and drafts confidential, except the final published galley(s).

1.7. Correction, Retraction, Expression of Concern
• Editors may make corrections if they detect minor errors in the published article that do not affect the findings, interpretations, or results.
• Editors may retract the article in case of major errors/violations that invalidate the findings and results.
• Editors may issue a statement of concern if there is a possibility of abusive research or publication by the authors, if there is evidence that the findings are unreliable and the authors' institutions have not investigated the incident, or if the potential investigation seems unfair or inconclusive. The COPE guideline is taken into account with regard to the correction, retraction, and expression of concern.

1.8. Ethical Approval, Informed Consent, and Research Standards

Sakarya Medical Journal requires that all submitted manuscripts comply with international ethical standards and relevant guidelines, including the Declaration of Helsinki, COPE, and ICMJE recommendations.

Ethics Committee Approval
All studies involving human participants or animals must be approved by an appropriate ethics committee. The name of the committee, approval date, and approval number must be clearly stated in the manuscript. If ethical approval is not required, authors must provide a clear justification.

Studies Requiring Ethical Approval
Ethics committee approval is required for, but not limited to:

• Clinical studies involving human participants,
• Experimental and observational studies,
• Survey- and interview-based research,
• Qualitative and quantitative studies involving data collection from individuals,
• Animal experiments,
• Retrospective studies involving patient data,
• Any research involving biological materials or identifiable data.

Informed Consent
Informed consent must be obtained from all participants involved in the study. For minors or individuals unable to provide consent, consent must be obtained from legal guardians. A statement confirming that informed consent was obtained must be included in the manuscript.

Patient Consent for Publication
For case reports and studies containing identifiable patient information (including images or personal data), authors must obtain explicit written consent from the patient. Authors must ensure that patient anonymity is protected.

Use of Images and Identifiable Data
Images or data that may reveal the identity of a participant must not be published without documented permission. Any modifications made to protect identity must not compromise the scientific integrity of the work.

Clinical Trial Registration
Clinical trials must be registered in a publicly accessible registry prior to participant enrollment. The registration number and registry name must be included in the manuscript.

Animal Studies
Studies involving animals must comply with national and international ethical guidelines. Authors are encouraged to follow the ARRIVE guidelines and must provide details of ethical approval.

Permissions and Copyright
Authors are responsible for obtaining permission for the use of previously published materials, including scales, figures, and tables. A statement confirming compliance with copyright regulations must be included.

1.9. Policy of Publishing Additional or Special Issues
A special issue can be published in our journal once a year upon the request of the Editorial Board. The publication processes for articles submitted for inclusion in the special issue are the same as the standard processes.

1. Additional or Special issue: An issue published in addition to the regular issues of a periodically published journal. It may consist of conference papers or a series of articles focusing on a specific topic.
2. Page numbering in the additional or special issue is different from that of the regular issues.
3. The print run of the additional or special issue cannot exceed one-third of the regular issue. The special issues containing conference paper abstracts are not included in this scope.
4. The ratios of case reports, review articles, and research articles (excluding conference paper abstracts) published in the additional or special issue will be included in the ratios of articles published in other issues.
5. The issues published as a tribute are not accepted as additional or special issues. Their page numbering and organization are the same as those of the regular issues.

1.10. Journal Policies on Data Sharing and Reproducibility
Sakarya University Sakarya Medical Journal strongly recommends that author(s) submit supplementary material and data sets that illustrate the results presented in their papers. If authors have any restrictions, they should be shared with the editorial team when submitting scientific papers.

Sakarya Medical Journal encourages authors to share data and make it publicly available if this does not violate human rights or other privacy issues. Cited data sets, whether or not they are created by the author(s), should be included in the reference lists of papers. Authors are also recommended to include a data availability statement.

Sakarya Medical Journal encourages all authors to make their data available to share publicly.

Actions that violate scientific research and publication ethics are as follows:

Plagiarism: Showing others' original ideas, methods, data, or works as their own work, partially or completely, without reference to scientific rules,
Forgery: Using data that does not actually exist or has been falsified in scientific research,
Distortion: Falsifying the research records or data obtained, displaying the equipment or materials not used in the research as if used, distorting or shaping the results of the research in the interests of the people and organizations that provide support.
Republishing: Presenting repetitive publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
Slicing: Dividing the results of research into pieces in an improper way or in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and publishing each one separately to increase the total publication count for academic appointments and promotions.
Unfair Authorship: Including non-contributors in the author list or not including those who have contributed, changing the authors’ order in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of contributors from the work in subsequent editions, using influence to include names among the authors despite not being contributors,

Other ethical violations include:
a) Not specifying the supporting individuals, institutions, or organizations and their contributions in the publications made as a result of research conducted with support.
b) Using theses or studies that have not yet been submitted or have not been accepted as a source without the permission of the owner,
c) Not complying with ethical rules in research on humans and animals, and not respecting patients' rights in publications,
ç) Violating the provisions of the relevant legislation in biomedical research and other clinical research related to humans,
d) Sharing the information in a work that has been assigned for review with others before it is published without the explicit consent of the author,
e) Misusing resources, spaces, facilities, and equipment provided or allocated for scientific research,
f) Deliberately making a false and ungrounded allegation about an ethical violation,
g) Publishing the data obtained from surveys conducted as part of a scientific study without the explicit consent of the participants, or without the permission of the relevant institution if the study is conducted in an institution,
h) Harming animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,
ı) Failing to obtain written permissions from authorities that are required for starting research activities or experiments,
i) Conducting research activities or experiments in violation of the related legislation or the provisions of international conventions to which Türkiye is a party,
j) Disregarding the obligation to inform and warn the relevant authorities about possible harmful practices related to the scientific research.
k) Not using the data and information obtained from other individuals or institutions in scientific studies to the extent and as permitted, not respecting the confidentiality of this information and not ensuring its protection,
l) Making false or misleading statements regarding scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions.

Ethical Guidelines for Authors
• Studies must be original and based on research.
• It must be ensured that all the persons mentioned as authors/co-authors have contributed to the article. It is against scientific ethics to show persons who have not made any academic contribution as additional authors or to rank the authors by non-scientific criteria such as title, age, and gender, regardless of the order of contribution.
• In articles with multiple authors, it should be clearly stated to what extent the authors have contributed to each stage of the article.
• The article should not be sent to different journals at the same time and should not have been sent to another journal before. If it is found to have been sent to another journal, the publication process will be canceled.
• It is assumed that the authors who submit articles to the journal have read and accepted the publication and writing principles of the journal, and the authors are deemed to have committed to these principles.
• The citations and bibliography should be complete.
• Plagiarism and fake data should be avoided.
• The percentage of similarity in articles, excluding references, should not exceed 30%.
• An article may be included in a maximum of 2 PRE-REVIEW processes. The article will be rejected if the feedback conveyed to the author is not revised.
• The corresponding author must inform the journal editor in case of any conflict of interest.
This issue can be referred to WAME.

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
• Peer reviewers should be aware that they play a critical role in the academic quality of the article to be published in the journal, and they should engage in the peer review process with the responsibility of improving academic quality.
• Peer reviewers should only accept to review articles for which they have the expertise to make an appropriate assessment. They should also respect the confidentiality of the blind peer review process and keep the details of the article confidential at all times.
• After the review process, any information about the reviewed article should not be shared with others under any circumstances.
• Peer reviewers should only evaluate the accuracy of the content of the articles and their compliance with academic criteria. Any difference of opinion between the article's argument and the peer reviewer should not affect the review process.
• Peer review reports should be objective and measurable. Libelous, derogatory, or accusatory expressions should definitely be avoided.
• Peer reviewers should avoid superficial or inaccurate statements in their peer review reports. In reviews with negative results, a complete justification should be presented on the aspects that led to the negative result.
• Peer reviewers should review the articles within the time period allotted to them. If they are not going to review the article, they should notify the journal within a reasonable time.
• Peer reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Ethical Guidelines for Editors
• Editors should accept articles that will contribute to the relevant areas specified in the journal policy.
• Editors should not have any conflict of interest with accepted or rejected articles.
• Editors have full responsibility and authority to accept or reject an article.
• It is the editors' responsibility to keep the identities of peer reviewers and authors mutually confidential.
• Only articles that will contribute to the relevant field should be accepted.
• If an error is detected, editors should support the correction or retraction of the error.
• It is the duty of editors to complete the pre-review, peer review, editing, and publishing processes of the articles submitted to the journal in a timely and appropriate manner.
• Editors should not assign people who do not contribute to the journal as editorial board members or associate editors.

2. Publication Policy

Any manuscript that is considered to be published in Sakarya Medical Journal must meet the following criteria:
• Originality
• Not containing ethical violations
• Having clear messages for the scientific community
• Expressing the extent of the article's contributions to researchers in the field and its relevance to the health  sciences
• Current fields and topics drawing the interest of researchers in the field of health sciences
• Having structural and logical integrity
• Research results that are based on scientific evidence
• Coherence of the scientific method

Review of the Articles
Articles can be submitted to the Sakarya Medical Journal by registering in the "Article Management System" on https://dergipark.org.tr/en/journal/630/submission/step/manuscript/new
Articles sent by e-mail will not be taken into consideration.

Pre-Review and Plagiarism Checking
The journal's compliance with the writing rules is examined, and a similarity check is performed to prevent plagiarism. Similarity software is used in the checking process. The percentage of similarity in articles, excluding references, should not exceed 30%. If the similarity rate exceeds 30%, the study is either rejected or sent back to the author for reduction. The pre-review is completed within a maximum of 30 days.

Editor/Field Editor Review
After the study passes the stages of pre-review and similarity checking, it is reviewed by the relevant editor/field editor in terms of subject, scope, language use, and academic competence. This review is completed within a maximum of 30 days.

Peer Review Process (Double-Blind Peer Review)
Studies that pass the pre-review and editorial review undergo a confidential double-blind peer review process. Within the double-blind strategy, the identity of the peer reviewer is concealed from the author submitting the manuscript to the journal. Similarly, the peer reviewers do not know who wrote the article they are reviewing. In other words, the peer review process is conducted by keeping both authors and peer reviewers anonymous to each other. The reports are also stored in the Article Management System.

Author's Revision
Authors take into account the feedback, criticisms, and recommendations of the reviewer and the Editorial Board. In case of any disagreement, they have the right to appeal with their justifications. Authors edit the article in accordance with the reports and upload the final version of the article to the system.

Field Editor Review
The field editor checks whether the author has made the requested corrections in the text. If there is a “Major Revision” requirement in the peer review reports, they send the article to the relevant peer reviewer. If there is an "Acceptance" or "Minor Revision" requirement and the revisions are completed, they can submit the article for language checks (the checking process is completed within a maximum of 7 days). If they detect that the corrections have not been made, they resend the article to the author. They may reject the article if the author does not make the corrections again. Articles that are not accepted for publication are not deleted from the system. Their processes and files are stored in the system.

English Language Checks
The checking process is completed within 15 days at the latest.

Editorial Board Review
The articles that pass technical, academic, and linguistic reviews are examined by the Editorial Board, and the final publication status is determined. In case of any objection from the members, the Board decides by a majority of votes.

Typesetting and Layout Process
The journal undertakes the typesetting and layout processes for studies decided to be published by the Editorial Board.

Language
Sakarya Medical Journal publishes articles written in English. 

Change of Authorship
Sakarya Medical Journal accepts article authors according to the statement on the Title Page of the article. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the authors to submit the final version of the full author list. Requests for any change of authorship after the submission of the article (e.g., removal/addition of authors, change of order, etc.) are subject to editorial approval. The Editorial Board will investigate such cases and act according to the COPE flowcharts.

Requests for a change of authorship should be conveyed to the Editor with an official letter stating the reasons for the change. The letter should be signed by all the authors and include their confirmation of the change of authorship. If the request is approved by the Editorial Board, the authors are required to submit a new License to Publish and Author Declarations Form according to the final author list.

Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in the articles published in the journal are those of the author(s). They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Sakarya Medical Journal, its Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board, or Publisher. The Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board, and Publisher assume no responsibility or liability for such cases. The sole responsibility for the published content lies with the authors.

Complaints and Appeals
Sakarya Medical Journal handles complaints and appeals by following the procedure below. Complaints, including but not limited to the long delays in the handling of manuscripts and publication ethics, are initially handled by the Editor-in-Chief of Sakarya Medical Journal. The Editor-in-Chief examines complaints and appeals together with Area Editors and the Editorial Board, if applicable. If any issues arise regarding complaints and appeals, please contact sakaryatipdergisi@sakarya.edu.tr.

Complaints about the Content of a Paper
The Editor-in-Chief examines the complaints of the author(s) and the reports of reviewers and makes a decision about: 

• The confirmation of the rejection of the paper,
• The appeal of the author being considered,
• Obtaining a fresh opinion from an independent reviewer.
   

The final decision of the Editor-in-Chief is communicated to the author(s). The explanation of the consequences of the appeal is shared with the author(s) if necessary. This is the final decision of Sakarya Medical Journal.

Complaints about Processes
The complaints about processes are handled by the Editor-in-Chief. Long delays in the handling of manuscripts are examined by the editors of Sakarya Medical Journal, and any necessary issues are shared with the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the complaints, and when necessary, information is shared with the authors.

Complaints about Ethics
The Editor-in-Chief considers complaints about the publication ethics of the author’s or reviewer’s conduct. The Editor-in-Chief follows the publication ethics on the Sakarya Medical Journal website. The Editorial Board of Sakarya Medical Journal examines the concerns of complainants or reviewers. The details and progress of the examination are clearly shared with the complainant(s). The Editor-in-Chief or Assistant Editors provide feedback to the complainant(s) on the manner of action and the final decision.

Editorial Independence and Editor Authorship

The editorial processes of Sakarya Medical Journal are conducted in accordance with the principles of editorial independence and transparency. Editors make decisions based solely on the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of the manuscripts, without any external influence.

In cases where editors submit their own work to the journal, they are excluded from all editorial and peer review processes related to their manuscript. Such submissions are handled independently by other members of the Editorial Board or external editors to ensure an unbiased and transparent evaluation process. Editors have no access to information regarding the review process of their own manuscripts.