All authors have met all four criteria for authorship listed below: (1) concept and design, or analysis and interpretation; (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; (3) approved the final version to be published; and (4) agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work and ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Group members who do not meet these criteria for authorship should be listed, with their permission, under ʻAcknowledgments.ʼ After submitting a manuscript, any changes in authorship (adding or deleting author or authors, or rearranging the order of authors) must be explained through a letter, signed by all the authors, to the editor of The Journal of the Korean Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco
(J Korean Soc Res Nicotine Tob, JKSRNT). Corresponding author and first author: JKSRNT allows multiple corresponding authors and first authors for one article.
2. Originality and Duplicate Publication
A paper that has been published in another journal, or is under consideration for publication elsewhere will be rejected. In instances where the paper contains similar work that has been reported in another publication, or has been published in the journal, the author should include copies of such material along with the submitted paper. The Editorial Committee of JKSRNT will decide whether to republish the submitted paper, and then consider its acceptance. According to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) as revised in 2013, the JKSRNT does not regard results that are posted in the same clinical trials registry in which primary registration resides as prior publication, if the results are presented in the form of a brief structured abstract or table (＜500 words). However, presentation of results in other circumstances (eg, investorsʼ meetings) is discouraged and could jeopardize consideration of the manuscript.
If editors receive manuscripts from separate research groups or from the same group analyzing the same data set (for example, from a public database, or systematic reviews or meta-analyses of the same evidence), the manuscripts should be considered independently because they may differ in their analytic methods, conclusions, or both. If the data interpretation and conclusions are similar, it may be reasonable although not mandatory for editors to give preference to the manuscript submitted first. Editors might consider publishing more than one manuscript that overlap in this way because different analytical approaches may be complementary and equally valid, but manuscripts based upon the same dataset should add substantially to each other to warrant consideration for publication as separate papers, with appropriate citation of previous publications from the same dataset to allow for transparency.
Secondary analyses of clinical trial data should cite any primary publication, clearly state that it contains secondary analyses/results, and use the same identifying trial registration number as the primary trial. (ICMJE)Secondary Publication
It is possible to republish manuscripts if they satisfy the conditions of secondary publication of the ICMJE Recommendations (http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html
3. Conflict of interests:
The corresponding author must inform the editor of any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the authorsʼ interpretation of data. Examples of potential conflicts of interest are financial support from or connection with companies, political pressure from interest groups, and academically related issues. In particular, mention about funds received and used for research purposes at the bottom of the cover page. All authors must disclose all interests related to research such as consultation fees and stocks when submitting the paper and affirm the disclosure, if at all, by signing the paper.
At the second title page, under a subheading ʻConflict of interestsʼ, all authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work. Examples of financial conflicts include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patents or patent applications, and travel grants, all within 3 years of beginning the work submitted. If there are no conflicts of interest, authors should state that
All sources of funding should be declared as an acknowledgment at the title page. The corresponding author should confirm that he or she had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication
4. Statement of Informed Consent and Institutional Review Board Approval
If the research involves human subjects, it must comply with the ethical standards of the Helsinki Declaration adopted in 1964 (http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/
); and, in principle, undergo scrutiny of an independent Institutional Review Board (IRB), which reviews ethical issues of human subject studies. In human subject studies, IRBʼs approval and patientʼs consent must be received and stated on paper. Description materials including photographs should not disclose the patientʼs name, initials, and hospital identification number.
5. Process to Manage Research and Publication Misconduct
In suspected cases of research and publication misconduct, such as redundant (duplicate) publication, plagiarism, fraudulent or fabricated data, changes in authorship, undisclosed conflict of interest, ethical issues with a submitted manuscript, appropriation of an authorʼs idea or data, and complaints against editors, the resolving process will be as per the flowchart provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts
). The Editorial Boardʼs decision on the suspected cases will be final.
If any illegal act that is contrary to the research ethics is confirmed, the editorial board deletes the article and decides the following disciplinary action according to the case and requests approval of the board.
- Send a warning letter about cheating
- Prohibition of submitting a manuscript to a person or organization responsible for cheating for a certain period (2 years)
- Send an official letter to your supervisor(institution) or research grant institution