In March 2019, OAE Publishing Inc. (hereafter "OAE") officially became a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This document outlines the editorial standards and ethical principles that academic journals are expected to follow. It defines the roles, responsibilities, and rights of all participants in the academic publishing process, including authors, reviewers, Editors-in-Chief, Advisory Editors, Associate Editors, Editorial Board Members, and in-house Editors, and provides guidance on the handling of publication misconduct. OAE's editorial policies are based on the guidelines of COPE, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and comprise the following twenty sections. While these policies provide a unified framework, specific implementation may vary slightly across journals in different disciplines. For journal-specific details, please refer to the respective journal website.

1. Research Integrity

OAE is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity in scholarly research and publishing. All content published in OAE journals must adhere to internationally recognized principles of research integrity and publication ethics, including the guidelines and Core Practices established by COPE.

1.1 Core Principles of Research Integrity

OAE expects all authors, editors, reviewers, and contributors to uphold the following principles:

• Honesty in all aspects of research and reporting

• Rigor, demonstrated through careful, thorough, and responsible research practices

• Transparency in methodology, data availability, authorship, and potential conflicts of interest

• Accountability for the accuracy and integrity of published work

• Respect for all research participants, subjects, and communities, including adherence to ethical and legal requirements

1.2 Responsibilities of Authors and Contributors

Authors submitting to OAE journals must ensure that:

• The research is conducted and reported in accordance with applicable ethical standards and relevant disciplinary guidelines

• The submitted work is original and has not been fabricated, falsified, or plagiarized

• All sources are appropriately cited and acknowledged

• Authorship accurately reflects individual contributions and complies with accepted authorship criteria

• Any research involving human participants, animals, or sensitive data complies with institutional, national, and international ethical requirements

Where applicable, authors must provide documentation of ethical approval and evidence of informed consent.

1.3 Editorial Oversight and Ethical Compliance

Editorial teams of OAE journals are responsible for:

• Ensuring that submitted manuscripts are evaluated in line with established ethical and editorial standards

• Providing discipline-specific guidance on research integrity where appropriate

• Identifying, assessing, and addressing potential ethical concerns during peer review and publication

All journals operate under OAE's centralized editorial policies to ensure consistency, transparency, and compliance across the publisher.

1.4 Handling Allegations of Misconduct

OAE takes all allegations of research or publication misconduct seriously and investigates them thoroughly. Concerns may include, but are not limited to:

• Data fabrication or falsification

• Plagiarism

• Improper authorship attribution

• Ethical violations in human or animal research

• Undisclosed conflicts of interest

Anyone who suspects that a publication in an OAE journal does not comply with this policy or with accepted ethical standards is encouraged to contact the relevant journal editorial office or the OAE Ethics Committee.

All concerns will be handled in accordance with the procedures and flowcharts recommended by COPE. Where necessary, cases will be formally investigated, and appropriate actions will be taken, including but not limited to:

• Issuance of corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions

• Notification of authors' institutions or relevant authorities

• Removal of withdrawal of affected content, where appropriate

1.5 Commitment to Continuous Improvement

OAE regularly reviews and updates its editorial policies to align with evolving best practices in scholarly publishing and guidance from international organizations, including COPE and other relevant bodies.

2. Editorial Process

2.1 Editorial Independence

OAE is committed to maintaining full and uncompromised editorial independence across all its publications. Editorial decisions are made solely on academic grounds, without interference from the publisher or any external influence, including commercial, financial, institutional, or political interests.

All manuscripts submitted to OAE journals are evaluated by independent editorial teams. Editorial Office staff provide administrative and technical support only and do not participate in, or influence, editorial decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.

Academic Editors

For the purposes of OAE editorial policies, Academic Editors are defined as members of a journal's editorial team who are formally authorized to oversee the peer review process and make editorial decisions on manuscripts. This typically includes:

• Editor-in-Chief

• Associate Editors

• Other editorial roles formally assigned decision-making authority

Members of the Editorial Board, Guest Editors, or other contributors may participate in the peer review process, but are considered Academic Editors only when they have been formally assigned editorial responsibility for a specific manuscript.

The Editor-in-Chief holds ultimate responsibility for editorial decisions and for ensuring the integrity, fairness, and transparency of the editorial process.

Editorial Decision Criteria

Editorial decisions are based exclusively on the academic merit of the work, including:

• Scientific validity, methodological rigor, and originality

• Relevance to the journal's scope and readership

• Quality, clarity, and coherence of presentation

• Constructiveness and quality of peer review reports

• Adequacy and completeness of authors' responses to reviewer comments

OAE enforces a strict non-discrimination policy. Editorial decisions are made without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Conflicts of Interest

Academic Editors must recuse themselves immediately from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest, including but not limited to:

• Personal, professional, or collaborative relationships with the authors

• Shared institutional affiliations (current or recent)

• Financial interests or funding relationships

• Direct academic competition or intellectual conflicts

In such cases, manuscripts are reassigned promptly to another qualified Academic Editor to ensure an independent and unbiased evaluation process.

Professional Conduct

OAE does not tolerate abusive, defamatory, discriminatory, or otherwise inappropriate behavior or communication directed at editors, reviewers, authors, or editorial staff. The publisher reserves the right to take appropriate and proportionate action to protect all participants in the editorial process, including:

Termination or suspension of the peer review process

Rejection or withdrawal of submissions

Removal or redaction of inappropriate reviewer reports

Restriction of future submissions or reviewer participation, where necessary

2.2 Peer Review and Editorial Decision Process

OAE journals operate recognized and transparent peer review models (such as single-blind or double-blind review), which are clearly described on each journal's website.

OAE reserves the right to adopt alternative or innovative peer review models, where appropriate. Any such models will be transparently disclosed on the relevant journal website.

Peer Review Workflow

1. Initial Editorial Assessment – Manuscripts are evaluated for scope alignment, academic quality, and compliance with ethical standards and submission requirements.

2. Independent Peer Review – Suitable submissions are reviewed by qualified and independent experts, selected based on subject expertise, impartiality, and absence of conflicts of interest.

3. Author Revision – Authors may be invited to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer and editor comments, with clear guidance provided where necessary.

4. Editorial Decision – The assigned Academic Editor makes the final decision, taking into account reviewer reports, author responses, and overall scholarly merit.

Editorial Responsibilities

• Editor-in-Chief – Holds overall responsibility for the academic quality, integrity, and strategic direction of the journal, including final decision-making authority and oversight of editorial board appointments.

• Associate Editors and other Academic Editors – Manage the peer review process and make editorial decisions within their assigned areas of responsibility, in accordance with journal policies.

Special Issues and Guest Editors

All Special Issues (or Special Topics) are managed under strict editorial governance and oversight:

• Guest Editors must comply fully with the same ethical and editorial standards as Academic Editors

• Guest Editors must not make decisions on manuscripts where any conflict of interest exists

• The Editor-in-Chief or a designated independent Academic Editor retains final decision-making authority over all submissions

• Submissions to Special Issues are subject to the same rigorous peer review and editorial standards as regular submissions

Transparency and Policy Alignment

Each journal provides a clear, accurate, and accessible description of its editorial and peer review procedures on its website. These procedures must be fully aligned with OAE's publisher-level policies.

Comprehensive details regarding peer review procedures, reviewer responsibilities, and ethical requirements are provided in the OAE Peer Review Policies.

3. Peer-review Policiy

3.1 Scope of Peer Review

All manuscripts submitted to OAE journals are subject to initial editorial assessment. Research manuscripts undergo independent peer review prior to publication. Manuscript types typically subject to peer review include, but are not limited to:

• Original Research Articles

• Review Articles

• Systematic Reviews

• Short Communications

• Case Reports

• Guidelines, Opinions, and Perspectives

Non-research content (e.g., Editorials, Letters to the Editor, Errata) may be evaluated solely by the Editorial Office and may not require external peer review, depending on individual journal policies. In exceptional cases, the Editorial Office may initiate peer review for other article types, as deemed appropriate.

3.2 Peer Review Models

OAE journals use recognized peer review models to ensure fair and impartial evaluation:

• Single-blind peer review: Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors.

• Double-blind peer review: Both reviewer and author identities are concealed, particularly for submissions from Editors or Editorial Board Members.

OAE may adopt alternative peer review models when appropriate. Any deviations from standard models are clearly described on the respective journal websites.

3.3 Editorial Assessment

All submissions undergo an initial screening by the Editorial Office for completeness and compliance with journal policies. Academic Editors then assess:

• Alignment with the journal's scope and relevance

• Scientific quality, rigor, and originality

• Compliance with ethical standards

Manuscripts not meeting these criteria may be rejected without external peer review (desk rejection).

3.4 Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on:

• Relevant expertise and subject area knowledge

• Publication record and professional reputation

• Independence from the authors

• Absence of conflicts of interest

Author-suggested reviewers may be considered but are subject to independent evaluation and verification. OAE promotes diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in reviewer selection, considering geographic, gender, and broader demographic representation where appropriate.

3.5 Peer Review Process

• External Review: Suitable manuscripts are sent to independent reviewers, typically at least three. Additional reviewers may be invited where specialized expertise is required (e.g., statistical or technical evaluation).

• Evaluation: Academic Editors assess reviewer reports and authors' responses. When opinions conflict, additional experts may be consulted.

• Revision and Re-review: Authors may be invited to revise their manuscripts. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed by new reviewers, as appropriate. Academic Editors may in some cases assess revisions directly.

• Final Decision: Academic Editors make decisions based on all available information. The Editor-in-Chief retains ultimate responsibility for the journal's editorial quality and integrity. Editorial decisions are made independently of

3.6 Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

• Provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations

• Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscripts and review reports

• Declare any potential conflicts of interest prior to accepting the review invitation

• Complete reviews within the requested timeframe (typically within 14 days)

• Refrain from revealing their identity unless permitted by the journal's peer review model

Reviewer reports may be edited only to remove inappropriate, offensive, or confidential content, without altering the scientific meaning or integrity.

3.7 Confidentiality

All participants—authors, reviewers, and editors—must maintain strict confidentiality regarding manuscript content and review reports. Manuscripts may not be shared or used for personal advantage. Any consultation with colleagues must be disclosed and approved by the Academic Editor in advance.

3.8 Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest may compromise, or be perceived to compromise, impartiality. Alternative editors or reviewers are assigned to ensure an unbiased and transparent evaluation process.

3.9 Special Issues and Guest Editors

Special Issues follow the same peer review standards as regular submissions. Guest Editors may oversee the peer review process, but must:

• Follow OAE editorial policies

• Recuse themselves when conflicts of interest exist

The Editor-in-Chief or a designated Academic Editor retains final decision-making authority for all manuscripts.

3.10 Timelines

OAE aims to ensure timely and efficient peer review and editorial processing:

• Reviewers are requested to submit reports within 14 days (or as otherwise specified by the journal)

• Any delays are communicated promptly to the Editorial Office and authors

• Revised manuscripts are subject to re-review where necessary

3.11 Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a detailed and evidence-based rebuttal. Appeals are evaluated by the Academic Editor and/or Editor-in-Chief. Independent expert opinion may be sought where appropriate. Final decisions rest with the editorial leadership.

3.12 Misconduct and Research Integrity

OAE adheres to established best practices in publication ethics and follows the COPE guidance:

• Suspected misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication, unethical research practices) will be thoroughly investigated

• Appropriate actions may include corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions

• Serious misconduct may be reported to authors' institutions or relevant regulatory bodies

Detailed submission requirements, peer review procedures, and research integrity guidance are provided in each journal's Author Guidelines.

3.13 Policy Alignment

All peer review procedures at the journal level adhere to OAE's publisher-level policies, ensuring consistent standards of quality, integrity, and transparency across all journals. Individual journals may provide additional details in their Editorial Process and Peer Review Guidelines, provided these remain fully aligned with the overarching policies.

4. Access to Full-Text and Article Processing Charges

OAE journals operate under a Gold Open Access publishing model, ensuring that all published content is freely and permanently accessible online to readers worldwide, without subscription or registration barriers.

All articles published in OAE journals undergo rigorous peer review and benefit from professional editorial and production services, in accordance with internationally recognized standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.

To support open access dissemination and maintain the quality, integrity, and sustainability of the publishing process, an Article Processing Charge (APC) is applied to manuscripts accepted for publication. APCs contribute to covering the costs associated with the following activities, including but not limited to:

• Editorial management and coordination of peer review

• Professional production services, including copyediting and typesetting

• Language quality control and proofreading

• Digital publication, online hosting, and long-term archiving

• Platform maintenance and technical infrastructure support

• Indexing services, metadata management, and citation linking

• Dissemination, visibility enhancement, and promotion of published content

• Compliance with ethical standards and publishing best practices

The applicable APC rates, along with any relevant policies (e.g., waivers, discounts, or institutional agreements), are detailed on the respective journal's Article Processing Charges (APC) Policy page.

OAE is committed to full transparency in publishing fees. Authors will be clearly informed of any applicable charges prior to publication, and no undisclosed fees will be applied at any stage of the publishing process.

5. Publication Ethics and Publication Misconduct Statement

This statement on publication ethics and misconduct provides a unified framework for all journals published by OAE. It establishes the core principles and responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, and the Editorial Office in alignment with internationally recognized standards, including COPE, ICMJE, and WAME. While minor variations in implementation may occur across individual journals, all policies remain consistent with these overarching principles. For journal-specific procedures, readers and contributors should consult the Editorial Policies section of the respective journal.

5.1 Author Responsibilities and Rights

• Authors must ensure the originality, accuracy, integrity, and reproducibility of all submitted work.

• Submissions must not be under consideration elsewhere or previously published; duplicate or redundant publication is strictly prohibited.

• All required ethical approvals (e.g., for human subjects, animal studies, and clinical trials) and informed consent must be obtained where applicable.

• All potential conflicts of interest must be fully and transparently disclosed.

• Authors are expected to promptly notify the journal of any significant errors and cooperate in issuing corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions.

• All listed authors must have made substantial scholarly contributions to the work; authorship disputes or suspected misconduct should be reported to the Editorial Office.

• Authors have the right to track the progress of their manuscript and to submit formal appeals or complaints regarding editorial decisions and processes.

5.2 Reviewer Responsibilities and Rights

• Reviewers must provide fair, objective, constructive, and timely evaluations.

• Strict confidentiality must be maintained; unpublished data or ideas must not be used for personal advantage.

• Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts where such conflicts exist.

• Any suspected misconduct or ethical concerns should be promptly reported to the Editorial Office or Editor-in-Chief.

5.3 Editor-in-Chief Responsibilities and Rights

• Oversees the journal's academic quality and integrity, ensuring that editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit and relevance to the journal's scope.

• Defines the journal's scope, develops editorial strategy, appoints Editorial Board Members, and promotes the journal.

• Conducts initial manuscript assessment and makes final publication decisions.

• Term of service: 2–4 years, renewable. Institutional support for editorial activities may be provided where applicable.

5.4 Executive Editor Responsibilities and Rights

• Supports the Editor-in-Chief in maintaining academic quality and editorial standards.

• Invites manuscripts, recommends reviewers, performs preliminary assessments, and contributes to editorial decision making (acceptance/rejection).

• Promotes the journal and proposes themes or topics for Special Issues/Topics.

• Term of service: 2–4 years, renewable.

5.5 Associate Editor Responsibilities and Rights

• Assists with manuscript handling, including peer review coordination and initial assessment (particularly in cases involving conflicts of interest).

• Recommends reviewers, promotes the journal, and provides input on editorial policies and development.

• Term aligns with that of the Editor-in-Chief and is renewable; editors may step down upon reasonable request (e.g., excessive workload).

5.6 Editorial Board Member Responsibilities and Rights

• Evaluates submissions within their area of expertise, and contributes to peer review.

• Promotes the journal and provides advice on editorial policy and strategic development.

• Term of service: 2–4 years, renewable; voluntary resignation is permitted at any time with prior notice.

5.7 Guest Editor Responsibilities and Rights

• Proposes and manages Special Issues/Topics, including the preparation of Call for Papers and oversight of the peer review process.

• Must ensure no conflicts of interest exist with submitted manuscripts; where conflicts arise, independent editorial handling is required.

• Collaborates with the handling Academic Editor or Editor-in-Chief, who retains final decision-making authority.

• May contribute editorials or post-publication summaries for the Special Issue.

5.8 In-house Editor Responsibilities

• Managing Editors: Conduct initial manuscript checks (scope, formatting, ethics compliance), assign manuscripts to Assistant Editors, and oversee the editorial workflow.

• Assistant Editors: Coordinate the peer review process, communicate with authors and reviewers, and support editorial decision making.

• Language Editors: Provide language editing services where necessary; additional fees may apply for substantial revisions.

• Production Editors: Responsible for copyediting, typesetting, and online publication.

5.9 Research Ethics and Consent

• Human subjects: Research must comply with the Declaration of HelsinkiHelsinki; ethics committee approval and informed consent are required. Personal data must be anonymized or handled in accordance with applicable data protection regulations.

• Animal studies: Must comply with institutional, national, and international ethical guidelines, with appropriate approval obtained.

• Cell lines: The origin and ethical approval for human-derived cell lines must be clearly documented.

• Plant studies: Must comply with relevant institutional, national, and international legislation; supporting genetic or accession information should be provided where applicable.

• Bias-free language: Authors should use inclusive and non-discriminatory language, following recognized style guidelines (e.g., APA or equivalent).

• Geopolitical references (e.g., borders, territories, ethnicity, race): The journal respects authors' descriptions, while reserving editorial discretion to ensure neutrality and appropriateness.

• Text recycling and translations: Submissions must be original and unpublished; any overlap with prior work must be properly cited and justified.

5.10 Publication Misconduct and Handling

• Types of misconduct include, but are not limited to: data fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate image manipulation, authorship disputes, ethical/legal violations, misappropriation of intellectual property, and breaches of accepted research and publication practices.

• Detection tools and mechanisms: plagiarism detection software (e.g., iThenticate), editorial screening systems (i.e., OAE's MESAS system), forensic image analysis tools, and whistleblowing following COPE/WAME/ICMJE guidelines.

• Preventive measures include: clear authorship criteria, mandatory conflict of interest disclosures, confidentiality safeguards, and oversight by editorial quality control and ethics committees.

• Handling procedures: All cases are assessed on a case-by-case basis in accordance with COPE flowcharts and guidelines; investigations may involve authors, institutions, and relevant ethics bodies. Authors have the right to respond and to appeal editorial decisions.

5.11 Hazardous Materials, Risks, and Biosecurity

• Authors must clearly identify any potential hazards, risks, or safety concerns associated with their research and describe appropriate safety measures.

• Research with potential dual-use implications must be disclosed and handled responsibly.

• Compliance with relevant biosecurity guidance, including the NSABB framework for Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC), is strongly recommended.

5.12 Investigation of Questionable Research Practices

• Concerns may be raised through editorial screening, peer review, post-publication feedback, or third-party notifications.

• Investigations are conducted in accordance with COPE guidelines and flowcharts, ensuring fairness, confidentiality, and transparency.

• Where appropriate and with consent, the identity of whistleblowers may be disclosed; otherwise, confidentiality will be maintained.

• Complex cases may involve research institutions, funding bodies, or regulatory authorities.

• All relevant parties will be informed of the investigation's progress and outcome, in accordance with confidentiality requirements.

6. Authorship and Contribution

Authorship credit should be based solely on substantial contributions to a published study, as defined by 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.

All individuals who meet these criteria should be identified as authors. Authors must clearly specify their individual contributions in the Authors' Contributions section of their manuscripts. Contributors who do not meet all four criteria (e.g., those involved only in funding acquisition, general supervision, administrative support, writing assistance, technical or language editing, proofreading, etc.) should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section rather than listed as authors.

Artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies must not be listed as authors or co-authors, as authorship requires accountability and responsibility that can only be attributed to human individuals.

For a large multi-author group, authors are encouraged to determine authorship before the work begins and confirm the final author list prior to submission. All named authors must meet the four authorship criteria.

6.1 Corresponding Author(s)

The corresponding author(s) bear primary responsibility for communication with the journal throughout the manuscript submission, peer review, publication process, and post-publication period. They are responsible for ensuring that all journal requirements are completed, including author agreements, manuscript approval, accurate authorship details, ethical approvals, clinical trial registration (if applicable), and disclosure of conflicts of interest.

Any changes to the author list after submission (e.g., additions, deletions, or changes in order) must be approved by all authors. Editors are not responsible for resolving authorship disputes; unresolved disagreements should be referred to the relevant institutional authority. No changes to authorship are permitted after final acceptance, except in exceptional circumstances and with full documentation and approval from all authors and the journal.

The primary affiliation of each author should reflect the institution where the majority of the work was conducted. Current addresses may be included if an author has since moved. Journals remain neutral with respect to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The corresponding author is also responsible for ensuring that:

• Data, materials, and code comply with transparency and reproducibility standards;

• Original data/materials/code are preserved following best practices for potential reanalysis or verification;

• The presentation of data/materials/code accurately reflects the original work;

• Obstacles to sharing data/materials/code are minimized, where ethically and legally permissible.

At submission, any previously published material must be clearly identified, and appropriate permissions must be obtained from the original copyright holders. After acceptance, the corresponding author is responsible for reviewing and confirming the accuracy of proofs, including author names, affiliations, and contact details. After publication, the corresponding author serves as the primary contact for all inquiries and is responsible for informing all co-authors of relevant post-publication communications or issues. The use of ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) identifiers is strongly encouraged for corresponding authors.

6.2 Co-First Authorship

When two or more authors contribute equally to a work, this should be clearly indicated in the manuscript. Journals may allow dual or multiple first authorship, typically denoted by a symbol or a note on the title page stating that the authors contributed equally.

Authors should follow the specific formatting instructions of the journal regarding co-first authorship. This policy emphasizes transparency and appropriate recognition of equal contributions while allowing flexibility in journal-specific presentation.

6.3 Group Authorship

Group names may be used when large collaborative groups collectively designate authorship, with or without listing individual members. The corresponding author should specify the group name and clearly identify all individuals who meet authorship criteria and who can take responsibility and credit as authors.

6.4 Statement of Authors' Contributions

Authors must provide a detailed statement outlining each author's contributions at the end of the manuscript. Individuals who do not meet authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments section. Journals support COPE guidelines, ORCID integration, and frameworks such as the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to enhance transparency and standardization of contributor roles.

6.5 Deceased Authors

If an author is deceased at the time of submission or passes away during the review process, a footnote (†) should be added to the author list to indicate this status. Co-authors must verify and take responsibility for the contributions of the deceased author and disclose any conflicts of interest on their behalf. If the corresponding author is deceased, another qualified co-author should be designated as the new corresponding author. Where copyright or legal considerations apply, appropriate authorization from the deceased author's legal representative or successor must be obtained if no prior agreement exists.

6.6 Author Name Changes After Publication

Requests for author name changes after publication will be considered under reasonable and appropriate circumstances. Approved changes will be implemented through formal corrections, and all authors will be notified. COPE guidelines are followed to ensure that such changes are handled transparently, respectfully, and consistently, while maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

6.7 Authorship Disputes

Editorial offices follow COPE flowcharts and guidelines to address authorship disputes. Where disputes cannot be resolved at the editorial level, they should be referred to the relevant institutional authorities for investigation and resolution. The journal maintains a neutral stance and does not adjudicate disputes independently.

6.8 Editors and Journal Staff as Authors

Editorial staff and Editorial Board Members (including Editors-in-Chief) are not permitted to participate in the handling or editorial decision making of their own submissions. Such submissions are managed independently to ensure fairness and impartiality. Peer review is conducted in accordance with the journal's standard procedures (typically involving at least three independent reviewers where applicable), and final editorial decisions are made by editors without conflicts of interest.

7. Policy on the Use of AI and AI-assisted Technologies

7.1 Authorship and Accountability

7.1.1 AI Tools Cannot Be Authors

Generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude) do not meet the authorship criteria established by ICMJE and must not be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship entails accountability for the integrity, accuracy, and originality of the work, which can only be assumed by human contributors. AI tools must not be cited as primary sources or references.

7.1.2 Author Responsibility for AI-Assisted Content

Authors retain full responsibility for all content generated with AI assistance and must ensure that:

• All AI-assisted content is accurate, verifiable, and scientifically valid.

• No fabricated, misleading, or plagiarized material is included.

• All outputs comply with applicable copyright and intellectual property laws.

• All scientific claims and conclusions are supported by appropriate evidence.

Any use of generative AI in manuscript preparation beyond basic language editing must be transparently disclosed.

7.1.3 Exceptions for Methodological Use

If AI tools are integral to the research methodology, authors must:

1. Describe their use in the Materials and Methods section, including:

• Tool/model name

• Version/release number (if applicable)

• Developer or provider (e.g., company or organization)

2. Include a Declaration of Generative AI Use prior to the References section, as follows:

Note: The use of basic tools such as grammar/spelling checkers and reference management software does not require disclosure.

7.2 Use of AI in Figures and Images

AI tools may be used solely for the creation of illustrative content, including figures, schematics, graphical abstracts, or cover images. Their use is strictly prohibited in the generation or modification of primary research data (e.g., microscopy images, Western blots, radiological images, flow cytometry plots). Any undisclosed manipulation of primary data will be treated as potential research misconduct.

7.2.1 Accuracy

All AI-generated figures must accurately represent the underlying data, concepts, or intended scientific message. Authors remain fully responsible for ensuring scientific accuracy and proper representation.

7.2.2 Disclosure

Authors must disclose the use of AI in figure creation, including:

• Tool or software name and version (if applicable)

• Model, system, or source (if applicable)

• A brief description of the input prompts and resulting outputs

Such disclosures should be provided in the figure legend, Methods section, or Supplementary Materials.

7.2.3 Transparency

Authors are strongly encouraged to submit relevant AI prompts and generated outputs as supplementary materials to enhance transparency and reproducibility.

7.3 Use of AI in Peer Review

Peer review is a confidential, human-driven process. Reviewers must:

• Not upload manuscripts or any identifiable or unpublished data to external AI systems.

• Refrain from using AI tools for scientific evaluation or decision making due to risks of bias, inaccuracy, and confidentiality breaches.

• Limit any permissible AI use to language refinement of review reports, provided that no confidential manuscript content is shared.

If AI tools are used at any stage of the review process, reviewers must explicitly disclose this in their review report.

7.4 Disclosure Requirements

Authors must disclose any use of AI-assisted technologies in:

• Drafting, editing, or restructuring text

• Generating summaries or interpretations

• Producing illustrative figures or graphical content

Disclosure statements must include:

• Tool or software name

• Version (if available)

• Purpose and extent of use

Authors retain full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of all submitted content.

7.5 Compliance and Misconduct

Failure to comply with this policy may result in one or more of the following actions:

• Manuscript rejection

• Publication of corrections or expressions of concern

• Article retraction

• Notification of the authors' affiliated institutions, following COPE guidelines

7.6 Policy Review

This policy will be periodically reviewed and updated to reflect advancements in AI technologies, evolving international standards, and best practices in publication ethics.

8. Conflicts of Interest

8.1 Conflicts of Interest Policy

It is the responsibility of every academic to uphold transparency and credibility in research publications. Strengthening transparency and integrity in the publishing process facilitates the effective dissemination of scholarly information and improves the understanding of academic knowledge. OAE journals require authors to declare any potential financial and/or non-financial conflicts of interest at the time of manuscript submission.

8.2 Definition of Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest occur when an author may be unable to maintain full objectivity due to personal, financial, or professional relationships. Such conflicts may compromise the objectivity, integrity, or value of a publication and include both financial and non-financial interests.

8.2.1 Financial Conflicts of Interest

Financial conflicts include but are not limited to:

• Funding Support: Authors must disclose any funding that could be affected by the publication, as well as the funder's role in study design, data collection and analysis, the decision to publish, and manuscript preparation.

• Employment: Current, recent, or anticipated employment with any organization that may gain or lose financially from the publication.

• Personal Financial Interests: Stocks, shares, consultation fees, patents, or patent applications whose value could be influenced by the publication.

Because defining strict thresholds for financial interests is difficult, authors are strongly encouraged to disclose all potential conflicts, even if they are uncertain whether such interests constitute a conflict, to ensure full transparency and avoid any issues after publication.

8.2.2 Non-Financial Conflicts of Interest

Non-financial conflicts typically involve personal or professional relationships with organizations or individuals. Examples include unpaid membership in governmental or non-governmental organizations, unpaid advisory roles in commercial entities, or acting as an expert witness. Authors should declare any roles or relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the publication process.

8.3 Conflicts of Interest Policy for Authors

Authors submitting to OAE journals must declare all potential financial and/or non-financial conflicts of interest in the manuscript, in the cover letter, and during submission in the editorial system. If no conflicts exist, authors should include the following statement:

If authors are bound by confidentiality agreements that prevent disclosure, they should include the following statement:

All declarations are made available to editors and reviewers during the peer review process and to readers upon publication of the article.

8.4 Conflicts of Interest Policy for Reviewers

Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they have significant conflicts of interest. If potential conflicts exist but are fully disclosed to the editors and deemed not to compromise the impartiality of the review, reviewers may still provide evaluations and comments. Editors will take such disclosures into account when assigning reviewers and interpreting their recommendations.

8.5 Conflicts of Interest Policy for Editors

Editors of OAE journals must disclose any interests that could influence editorial decisions. They should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts when conflicts of interest could significantly affect the editorial process or create a perception of bias. In such cases, another editor with no relevant conflicts will be assigned to manage the manuscript.

9. Duplicate Publication

All manuscripts submitted to OAE journals must be original and must not be published, previously published in full or in part, or under consideration for publication elsewhere. Authors are required to declare any potential overlap, duplication, or related submissions in the cover letter. Any related prior publications must be properly cited and clearly distinguished from the submitted manuscript. OAE journals use iThenticate (or Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate) to detect possible plagiarism and textual overlap. Suspected cases of covert duplicate submission will be handled in accordance with COPE Guidelines, and editors may contact the authors' institutions if research misconduct is identified.

Exceptions may include:

• Preliminary reports such as letters to the editors, preprints, abstracts, or posters presented at conferences;

• Conference papers that have not been published in full, or submissions intended for conference proceedings;

• Press reports or media coverage of scheduled meetings, unless supplemented with additional data, analyses, or figures.

Certain forms of secondary publication may be justifiable under appropriate circumstances. OAE journals endorse ICMJE recommendations on overlapping publications.

10. Citation

Authors must ensure that all material taken from other sources, including their own previously published work, is properly cited and that permissions are obtained when necessary.

Authors should avoid:

• Excessive self-citation;

• Copying references without reading the cited work;

• Preferentially citing publications from themselves, colleagues, or their institution without scholarly justification;

• Citing advertisements, advertorial materials, or non-scholarly sources.

In accordance with COPE guidelines on citation integrity, any text taken directly from other publications must appear in quotation marks with appropriate citations. This requirement also applies to the authors' own previously published work when reused verbatim. OAE journals follow COPE recommendations on citation ethics and actively discourage citation manipulation, including coercive citation, citation stacking, and irrelevant citation practices.

11. Embargo Policy

Submitted and accepted manuscripts are considered privileged and confidential documents and must not be shared with the media or the public in any form—including print, television, or online platforms—until the article is officially published online, either as an online ahead-of-print version or as a final publication.

Authors may:

• Post manuscripts on non-profit preprint servers, provided that this is disclosed at the time of submission;

• Present their work at scientific conferences, seminars, or academic meetings.

Authors must not engage in media communication or publicity regarding the findings of their manuscript prior to formal online publication, unless prior written permission has been obtained from the journal editorial office.

12. Preprints & Conference Proceedings

12.1 Preprints Policy

A preprint is defined as an author's version of a research manuscript prior to formal peer review that is deposited on a publicly accessible server. Prior to acceptance for publication, authors retain the right to make a preprint version available on preprint servers, on authors' personal or institutional websites, and for open scholarly communication within community preprint platforms or commenting services.

When submitting preprints, authors should disclose relevant information such as the preprint DOI, version information, and licensing terms in the cover letter. Once the article is accepted for publication, authors are responsible for updating the preprint with a statement indicating the final publication:"This article has been accepted for publication in [Journal Title] published by OAE Publishing Inc. (DOI: xxxxx; URL: xxxxx)."

Preprints may be cited in submitted manuscripts, following the format: Adams DM, Reay WR, Geaghan MP, Cairns MJ. Investigating the effect of glycaemic traits on the risk of psychiatric illness using Mendelian randomization. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.984690v1 (2020).

12.2 Conference Proceedings Policy

Submissions containing material previously published in conference proceedings are permitted, provided that they include substantial extensions in methodology, results, analysis, or conclusions beyond the conference version. Authors must disclose such prior publication in the cover letter and obtain appropriate copyright permissions for any reused material. The manuscript should also clearly indicate the differences between the conference version and the submitted journal version when applicable.

13. Confidentiality

OAE journals adhere to the COPE Ethical Guidelines and treat all manuscripts as confidential throughout the editorial process. Editors will not share manuscripts with third parties except in cases of suspected misconduct or when required for editorial evaluation. Refer to the Misconduct Policy for further details. Rejected manuscripts are deleted from the editorial system unless explicit prior permission is obtained from the authors to retain them.

OAE journals adopt a single-blind peer review process, meaning reviewer identities are not revealed to authors unless reviewers choose to disclose them. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and may not distribute, share, or misuse any manuscript information during or after the review process. If reviewers wish to involve another person in the review, prior approval must be obtained from the Editors, and confidentiality must be strictly maintained. All individuals involved in the review process are expected to adhere to ethical standards and avoid conflicts of interest.

14. Copyright and License to Publish

OAE journals adopt the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License for publication. Copyright remains with the authors. Authors are required to sign a License to Publish, which can be downloaded from the Author Instructions section on each journal's homepage, granting the journal, as the original publisher, a non-exclusive license to publish the article while allowing third parties to freely use, distribute, and reproduce the work, provided that the integrity of the article is maintained and the original authorship, citation, and publisher are properly acknowledged.

15. Availability of Data and Materials

To maintain the integrity, transparency, and reproducibility of research records, OAE journals strongly encourage authors to make their experimental materials and research data openly available to readers, either by providing supporting information as supplementary material within the journal or by depositing datasets in publicly accessible data repositories. Manuscripts must include a dedicated Availability of Data and Materials statement, clearly indicating where the data and materials can be found. Authors who are unable to share their data must explicitly state this limitation and provide a clear and justified reason.

Recommended Data Availability Statements:

```html

16. Publication Permanency

To ensure long-term preservation and permanent accessibility, articles published in OAE journals are archived in Portico, one of the world's leading digital preservation services.

17. Repository Policy

OAE journals permit authors to deposit versions of their work in institutional or other repositories of their choice. Detailed policies can be found via Sherpa Romeo.

18. Describing New Taxa (for relevant journals only)

This section applies only to journals that publish research in biological, microbiological, botanical, zoological, or virological sciences.

18.1 Fungal and Botanical Names

Manuscripts containing new taxon names or other nomenclatural acts must follow the guidelines set by the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants. Authors describing new fungal taxa should register the names in a recognized repository (e.g., Mycobank) and include the corresponding unique identifier in the published article.

18.2 Zoological Names

Since January 2012, the electronic publication of zoological names is considered valid provided that specific criteria are met. Manuscripts containing new taxon names or nomenclatural acts must follow the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) guidelines. The new taxon name and the associated article must be registered with ZooBank, and the unique identifier must be included in the published article. Authors are encouraged to update ZooBank with the final publication details following publication.

18.3 Bacterial Names

In accordance with the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP), the effective publication of new prokaryotic names in electronic journals is recognized subject to compliance with established criteria. For OAE journals publishing new bacterial taxa:

• Authors must provide all required information to support validation of  new names, including the deposition of type strains in at least two publicly accessible, internationally recognized culture collections.

• Editors will verify the submitted information for compliance with ICNP requirements.

• Where applicable, validly published names will be formally recorded in the article and linked to relevant unique identifiers.

18.4 Virus Names

The proposal of new virus names must follow the guidelines established by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) under the International Code of Virus Classification and Nomenclature. Proposals for new virus taxa should be submitted to the appropriate ICTV for review and consideration prior to formal recognition.

19. Corrections, Retractions, Withdrawals, and Expressions of Concern

19.1 Corrections

Editors encourage readers and authors to report errors, especially those that may affect the interpretation of data. When an error is identified:

• The Editorial Office will work collaboratively with the authors and the publisher to correct significant errors.

• Retraction may be considered if the errors are so fundamental that the findings or conclusions are rendered invalid.

• Corrections must be clearly distinguishable from retractions or expressions of concern, particularly those related to potential research or publication misconduct.

• Corrections should be formally published, indexed, linked to the original article, and made freely accessible.

The format of corrections depends on the stage of publication:

• Early View / Online First articles: corrections may be made directly to the online version, with a transparent audit trail documenting what was changed and when.

Issue-published articles (Version of Record): a separate, citable correction notice is published and linked to the original article; the original article is typically not altered.

19.2 Retractions

Articles may be retracted under the following circumstances:

• Major scientific errors that invalidate the conclusions, whether arising from research misconduct or honest error.

• Redundant or duplicate publication without proper citation, permission, or justification.

• Ethical breaches, including but not limited to plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, or inappropriate authorship.

• Research conducted in violation of ethical standards or regulations.

Retraction process:

• OAE journals follow the COPE guidelines for retraction.

• The Editorial Office conducts a thorough investigation in consultation with the Editorial Board, with final decisions made by the Editor-in-Chief. External experts or relevant institutions may be consulted where appropriate.

• Retracted articles remain accessible online to preserve the scholarly record, clearly marked with a "RETRACTED" watermark, and are indexed as separate, citable items linked to the original article.

• Partial retractions may be issued when appropriate; complete removal of articles is extremely rare and permitted only under exceptional circumstances.

19.3 Withdrawals

Accepted Articles (Ahead of Publication)

Uncorrected, unedited, and non-typeset articles (assigned a DOI but not yet the Version of Record) may be withdrawn in cases such as duplicate submission, significant errors, or ethical concerns. In such cases, the bibliographic record will be retained, accompanied by a withdrawal statement explaining the reason for removal.

Published Version (Version of Record)

Withdrawal of the Version of Record is strongly discouraged in accordance with STM guidelines. Removal may be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as:

• Serious violation of research participant privacy or confidentiality.

• Errors that pose a significant risk to public health or safety.

• Content that is demonstrably defamatory or unlawful.

19.4 Expressions of Concern

Editors may issue an Expression of Concern when there are well-founded concerns regarding the integrity or reliability of a published article, and it is deemed important to alert readers.

• Expressions of Concern are typically issued when an investigation has been initiated but remains inconclusive, and there are credible indications that the concerns may be valid. See COPE cases: Data manipulation and institute's internal review.

• In exceptional cases, an Expression of Concern may be issued while an investigation is underway, particularly if a final outcome is unlikely to be available within a reasonable timeframe, and there is sufficient evidence to justify alerting readers.

Editors should be aware that an Expression of Concern may have significant reputational implications, similar to a retraction. Therefore, such notices should be issued with caution, and where possible, publication of a final decision (e.g., retraction or correction) is preferable once a definitive conclusion has been reached. See COPE cases: Handling self-admissions of fraud.

20. Crossmark Policy

Crossmark is a Crossref-supported, multi-publisher initiative that enables readers to identify the current and authoritative version of a publication.

• By displaying the Crossmark logo, OAE journals commit to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record and to inform readers of any updates, corrections, or retractions.

• The Crossmark icon provides access to additional publication metadata, including document status, publication history, and funding information.

21. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who disagree with editorial decisions may submit a formal appeal to the Editorial Office, clearly outlining the grounds for the appeal and providing supporting evidence where appropriate. Appeals and complaints are handled in a timely, transparent, and fair manner, in accordance with COPE guidelines.

22. How to Raise a Concern

Anyone who believes that research published in an OAE journal may violate ethical or publication standards is encouraged to contact the relevant Editor or the Editorial Office. For inquiries, please email [email protected], or contact the Editorial Office of the respective journal directly.

Last updated: 8 April 2026