In order to strengthen the construction of academic integrity, standardize the process of paper writing, editing, reviewing and publishing, and resist academic misconduct, the Chinese Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery has formulated the editorial policies for authors, reviewers and editors in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Copyright Law, the code of ethics for publishing at home and abroad, and the People's Republic of China's News and Publication Industry Standard Definition of Academic Misconduct in Academic Publishing Standard Journals (CY/T 174-2019), and in conjunction with the actual situation of the Journal.
Editorial Policies for Authors
1. Do not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously, and the manuscript that has already been published cannot be republished.
2. Ensure that the manuscript is original and does not contain confidential information, and avoid academic misconduct such as plagiarism, forgery, and tampering. The author is responsible for the article.
3. Ensure all authors listed have made sufficient contributions to the research, and authors should not be arbitrarily added or removed.
4. Ensure that the research involved in the manuscript complies with the principles of research ethics, and provide corresponding ethical approval certificates.
5. Ensure all references listed at the end of the article have been carefully reviewed by the author during the writing of the manuscript and are relevant to the research presented.
6. Do not recommend reviewers to the editorial board who have a conflict of interest with you.
Editorial Policies for Reviewers
1. The reviewers should uphold the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality, and timeliness, provide responsible review comments based on the scientific and innovative aspects of the manuscript, avoiding influence from non-academic factors such as the nationality, race, gender, religion, region, status, etc., of the authors.
2. The reviewers should complete the work on time and provide specific review comments, and do not unnecessarily delay the review process or interfere with the review procedure; if the review cannot be completed on time, the reviewer should respond promptly or suggest another reviewer.
3. Do not conceal any conflicts (or interests) with the authors, nor intentionally recommend other experts with conflicts (or interests) related to the manuscript to participate in the review.
4. Do not leak or misappropriate the content of the manuscript, nor use the right of reviewing to seek improper benefits.
Editorial Policies for Editors
1. The editors should uphold the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality and timeliness in handling each manuscript, and make decisions to accept or reject the manuscript based on the scientificity, innovation, readability and relevance of the manuscript to the journal.
2. The editors should adhere to confidentiality principles, employ a "double-blind review system," do not disclose information about the authors, reviewers, or the content of the manuscript, nor misappropriate content from unpublished manuscripts.
3. The editors shall not be driven by interests to interfere with peer review, and shall endeavor to ensure the independent review of the reviewers to ensure the fairness and impartiality of peer review.
4. Do not use editorial power to seek improper benefits.
5. The editors should obtain the author's consent for any critical modifications involving academic viewpoints.
Retraction and Correction Policies
1. Academic misconduct: If plagiarism, data fabrication, or other forms of academic misconduct are discovered in a manuscript, the editorial office will immediately initiate a retraction procedure.
2. False or misleading information: If the content in a manuscript is proved to be false or misleading, and these errors affect the main conclusions of the research, the editorial office will consider retracting the manuscript.
3. Author Request: Authors may request retraction but must provide a reasonable explanation. The editorial office will assess the request and decide whether to approve it.
4. Third-party complaints: If a third party (such as other researchers or the public) makes a complaint pointing out problems with the manuscript, the editorial office will investigate and decide whether to retract the manuscript based on the results of the investigation.
5. Corrections may be considered in the following situations: new research data or information has an impact on the content of the published manuscript, the author has provided sufficient supporting evidence and proactively requested a correction; the list of authors/contributors is incorrect (i.e. deserving authors are omitted or those who do not meet the copyright requirements are included).