1. Purpose of Corrections

Corrections are an essential component of responsible scholarly publishing. They allow published errors to be addressed transparently while preserving the identity, citation history, and continuing scholarly value of otherwise reliable research.

The principal purposes of a correction are to:

• Restore Accuracy: Correct factual, numerical, textual, methodological, bibliographic, or production-related information that was inaccurate in the published article.
• Protect Scientific Reliability: Ensure that errors are evaluated and corrected without concealing their potential implications for the research.
• Inform Readers: Clearly identify material changes and explain whether they affect the interpretation of the published findings.
• Preserve Publication History: Maintain an accurate record of the original publication and subsequent amendments.
• Support Reliable Citation: Help readers, researchers, libraries, and indexing services identify the current and corrected publication record.
• Maintain Public Trust: Demonstrate accountability through prompt, proportionate, and transparent management of publication errors.

1.1 Scope of the Policy

This policy applies to all formally published content in Health Nexus, including Original Research Articles, Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Narrative Reviews and Perspectives, Case Reports, Methodological and Theoretical Papers, Short Communications, Editorials, and Commentaries.

Corrections may concern the article text, figures, tables, references, author information, funding statements, research ethics declarations, data availability information, supplementary materials, or other essential elements of the publication.

1.2 Errors and Subsequent Scientific Developments

A correction addresses an error or material omission in the publication. Subsequent changes in medical knowledge, new research findings, differences in scientific interpretation, or later professional disagreements do not automatically constitute errors requiring correction. Such developments may be addressed through correspondence, commentary, replication studies, updated reviews, or new publications.

2. Types of Corrections

Health Nexus recognizes several forms of formal post-publication amendment. The appropriate designation depends on the origin, content, and significance of the matter requiring correction.

2.1 Erratum (Publisher Error)

An Erratum may be issued when an error was introduced by the journal, Editorial Office, publisher, or production process after the authors supplied the relevant information correctly.

Examples include:

• Incorrect typesetting or formatting that changes the meaning of published information.
• Omission or misplacement of figures, tables, equations, or supplementary materials during production.
• Incorrect author names, affiliations, ORCID identifiers, or other metadata introduced during publication.
• Errors in references, figure captions, numerical values, or article text arising from editorial or production processing.
• Failure to incorporate an approved author proof correction into the published Version of Record.

An Erratum should identify the affected content and the correct information. Where appropriate, the notice should explain that the error was introduced during editorial or production processing.

2.2 Corrigendum (Author Error)

A Corrigendum may be issued when an error originated in the authors' submitted work or research reporting and requires correction after publication.

Examples include:

• Incorrect numerical values, calculations, or statistical reporting that do not invalidate the principal findings.
• Errors in figure labels, table headings, legends, or explanatory notes.
• Incorrect descriptions of research procedures or analytical parameters.
• Errors in reference information or source attribution that require formal clarification.
• Material inaccuracies in funding, competing interest, ethics, or data availability declarations.
• Other identifiable author-originated errors that can be adequately corrected while preserving the reliability of the article.

The journal may require additional verification or expert assessment to determine whether a proposed Corrigendum adequately resolves the error.

2.3 Addendum (Additional Information)

An Addendum may be published when essential additional information is required to complete or clarify the published record without replacing the original research or introducing an unreviewed substantive study.

Circumstances may include:

• Disclosure of important information inadvertently omitted from the original publication.
• Clarification of study documentation or methodology necessary for accurate interpretation.
• Supplementation of a material declaration or explanatory note.
• Publication of essential contextual material that should accompany the original article.

An Addendum must not be used to introduce substantial new experimental results, replace unsuccessful analyses, conceal limitations, or avoid appropriate editorial or peer review. Material requiring independent scholarly evaluation may instead warrant a separate publication.

2.4 Terminology and Classification

The journal generally distinguishes Errata and Corrigenda by the origin of the error. Where responsibility is shared, disputed, or irrelevant to the corrective action, a notice may instead be designated simply as a Correction. The priority is an accurate explanation of the change rather than a rigid classification.

3. Criteria for Correction

A formal correction is appropriate when an identifiable error or material omission affects the accuracy, attribution, interpretation, completeness, or integrity of a published article and can be adequately resolved without invalidating the publication's principal findings and conclusions.

3.1 Scientific and Material Errors

The Editorial Office considers:

• The nature and extent of the error.
• Whether the original findings remain supported by reliable evidence.
• Whether corrected analyses materially alter the interpretation or implications of the research.
• The adequacy of the authors' explanation and supporting documentation.
• Whether further independent statistical, methodological, clinical, or ethical assessment is necessary.
• Whether correction provides readers with a sufficiently accurate and reliable scholarly record.

Errors need not be minor to qualify for correction. Extensive numerical, computational, coding, or reporting errors may be formally corrected when the central direction, implications, and conclusions of the study remain reliable.

3.2 Author and Bibliographic Information

Material errors in author names, affiliations, contribution statements, funding details, acknowledgments, or other bibliographic information may require formal correction when they affect accurate attribution or the scholarly record.

Requests affecting authorship must comply with the journal's authorship and publication ethics requirements. Such changes may require documented agreement from relevant authors, supporting evidence, and additional editorial assessment.

3.3 Minor Technical Errors

Insignificant typographical, stylistic, or formatting errors that do not affect scientific meaning, attribution, interpretation, indexing, or the reliability of the record may be corrected administratively without a separate formal notice.

Such changes should remain appropriately documented in the journal's production or editorial records. They must not be used to conceal substantive amendments.

3.4 Errors Requiring Retraction or Further Investigation

Where an error fundamentally invalidates the principal results or conclusions, or where serious ethical and research integrity concerns cannot be resolved through correction, the journal will consider an appropriate action under its Retraction Policy. An Expression of Concern may be considered when credible and consequential concerns remain unresolved.

4. Correction Process

Health Nexus follows a structured procedure for receiving, assessing, approving, and publishing corrections. The process is proportionate to the significance and complexity of the reported error.

4.1 Notification

Errors may be reported by authors, readers, reviewers, editors, research institutions, or other individuals with relevant information. Reports should identify the affected article and provide a clear explanation of the suspected error.

A notification should include the article DOI or URL, the affected text, figure, table, or metadata, and appropriate supporting evidence where available.

4.2 Preliminary Assessment

The Editorial Office determines whether the concern involves a minor administrative issue, a material error requiring formal correction, a potentially unreliable finding, or a matter requiring research integrity investigation.

The assessment considers the error's effect on the article and whether the proposed corrected information can be independently verified.

4.3 Author Consultation

Relevant authors will normally be contacted for an explanation and asked to provide corrected text, figures, tables, calculations, or supporting documentation where necessary.

Where responsibility for the error or the accuracy of the proposed correction is disputed, the Editorial Office may seek clarification from additional coauthors, institutions, or independent experts.

4.4 Editorial Verification

Proposed scientific corrections may undergo additional methodological, statistical, clinical, or specialist review where required to assess their validity.

The journal may request original records or analytical documentation. Such requests must respect legal, ethical, institutional, privacy, and data protection restrictions.

4.5 Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or an editor formally authorized to exercise delegated decision-making authority determines whether the matter requires an Erratum, Corrigendum, Addendum, general Correction, further investigation, or another appropriate editorial action.

A formal correction may be issued on the basis of verified evidence even when one or more authors do not respond or disagree, provided that the necessary editorial requirements have been met and the notice accurately reflects the circumstances.

4.6 Publication and Follow-Up

Once approved, the correction is prepared for publication, linked to the original article, and incorporated into the applicable version and metadata management procedures.

The journal seeks to resolve confirmed errors promptly. The duration of assessment may vary according to the need for evidence, expert review, author consultation, and the significance of the issue, particularly where patient safety or research integrity is involved.

5. Correction Notice

Material post-publication corrections are communicated through a formal, publicly accessible notice that clearly identifies the affected publication and describes the amendment.

5.1 Required Information

A formal correction notice should include:

• A clear designation such as Correction, Erratum, Corrigendum, or Addendum.
• The title and relevant bibliographic information of the original article.
• The DOI or persistent URL of the original publication.
• The location and nature of the identified error or omission.
• An accurate description of the corrected or added information.
• An explanation of the effect, if any, on the results, interpretation, or conclusions.
• The source of the error where relevant and sufficiently established.
• The date of the correction notice.
• A direct link to the affected publication.

5.2 Accurate Explanation of Changes

Where reasonably possible, the notice should identify the original inaccurate information and the corrected information in a sufficiently precise form to allow readers to understand what has changed.

The notice should not merely state that an article has been updated without explaining the material amendment.

5.3 Independence and Accessibility

Formal correction notices should be independently identifiable within the journal's publication record, freely accessible to readers, and included in the appropriate journal issue or electronic publication listing where applicable.

A separate DOI should be assigned to a substantive correction notice when supported by the journal's DOI registration arrangements. The original article retains its existing DOI.

5.4 Reciprocal Links

The original article and the correction notice should be linked in both directions. Readers accessing either record should be able to locate the related publication and understand the current correction status.

6. Article Updates

Formal corrections must be implemented through transparent version management. The journal seeks to preserve the relationship between the original published article, the formal correction notice, and the corrected publication version.

6.1 Original Version of Record

The original Version of Record must remain identifiable as part of the article's publication history. It must not be silently overwritten or deleted in a manner that conceals a material amendment.

Earlier versions should be preserved and made available to readers directly or upon reasonable request, subject to applicable legal, privacy, confidentiality, and safety restrictions.

6.2 Corrected Version

Following a formal correction, the journal may provide an updated Version of Record incorporating the approved amendment. The updated article should indicate that it has been corrected, identify the correction date, and link to the relevant notice.

The article's existing DOI normally remains unchanged. The corrected article and the independent correction notice are distinct scholarly records with different functions.

6.3 HTML and PDF Versions

6.4 Citation and Scholarly Use

Readers should ordinarily cite the most recent reliable version of the article. Where the correction materially affects information cited in another work, the correction notice should also be consulted and acknowledged as appropriate.

A corrected publication must not be presented as though no previous version or correction existed.

7. Transparency and Record Integrity

Health Nexus seeks to maintain a complete and verifiable publication history that permits readers to understand the original article, any subsequent corrections, and the current status of the scholarly record.

7.1 Documentation of Changes

For material corrections, the journal should document:

• The original publication details.
• The reported error and supporting explanation.
• The editorial assessment and corrective determination.
• The approved correction text or replacement material.
• The dates of the formal notice and relevant article version changes.
• The applicable DOI, article URL, and related publication records.

7.2 No Undisclosed Substantive Changes

Material revisions to published results, methods, conclusions, authorship, essential declarations, or supporting evidence must not be implemented through an unmarked replacement of the published article.

The journal distinguishes formal scholarly corrections from insignificant production or display adjustments that do not affect the interpretation or citation of the work.

7.3 Administrative Service Fees and Correction Deadlines

7.4 Continuing Correction Responsibilities

Material errors may be reported at any time after publication. The absence of an immediate report does not automatically eliminate the journal's responsibility to assess a verified problem, although the availability of records and proportionality of possible corrective action may be considered in older publications.

8. Indexing and Metadata Updates

Accurate and persistent publication metadata is essential to the discovery, citation, and long-term management of corrected scholarly records.

8.1 DOI and Publication Relationships

The original article ordinarily retains its existing DOI following correction. A formal correction notice should receive its own DOI where supported by the applicable registration arrangements.

Appropriate metadata relationships should identify the original article and the correction notice as related scholarly records.

Where the relevant DOI registration service supports update metadata, the journal should register or revise the corresponding correction relationship in accordance with that service's technical requirements.

8.2 Crossref and Other DOI Registration Services

For articles and notices registered through Crossref, appropriate update relationships and Crossmark-related metadata may be used where available and correctly configured.

Where identifiers are registered through another service, the journal will follow that provider's applicable procedures for linking records and updating metadata.

The journal must not assume that creating a hyperlink on its website automatically updates the associated DOI registration record.

8.3 Indexing and Discovery Services

Where applicable, the journal will seek to:

• Update relevant journal website and article metadata.
• Ensure that the correction notice is discoverable through available indexing and metadata export mechanisms.
• Provide appropriate correction information to relevant DOI registration services.
• Notify indexing databases, repositories, or other discovery services where appropriate and technically supported.
• Maintain accurate links between the original publication, corrected versions, and formal notice.

External indexing services maintain their own metadata update schedules. The journal cannot guarantee that corrections will appear immediately in every external database.

8.4 Digital Preservation

Health Nexus participates in LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, and the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) as part of its digital preservation framework.

The publisher seeks to preserve the traceability of corrected scholarly records through appropriate platform and archival arrangements. Participation in a preservation service does not automatically establish that every correction notice or article version has been successfully archived; specific coverage depends on the relevant deposit and preservation records.

9. Author Responsibility

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy and integrity of their published work. They must cooperate appropriately when material errors are identified after publication.

Authors are expected to:

• Notify the Editorial Office promptly after identifying a material error.
• Identify the affected article, text, figure, table, analysis, or publication information.
• Provide the accurate replacement information and explain the original error.
• Describe any implications for the study's results, interpretation, limitations, or conclusions.
• Supply relevant data, analyses, images, code, or other evidence where reasonably required and legally permissible.
• Coordinate with coauthors concerning the proposed correction where appropriate.
• Review proposed notices for factual accuracy when invited to do so.
• Cooperate with justified editorial or institutional inquiries concerning research reliability.

9.1 Author-Initiated Corrections

Authors requesting a correction should explain why the change is required, provide sufficiently detailed supporting information, and disclose whether the error affects any other part of the publication.

A correction request does not automatically entitle authors to rewrite or substantially expand an already published article. Proposed changes remain subject to editorial verification and approval.

9.2 Author Disagreement or Non-Response

The journal should normally provide affected authors with a reasonable opportunity to comment on a material correction. However, a correction supported by sufficient evidence may be issued even if an author cannot be contacted or declines to cooperate.

9.3 Errors Introduced by the Journal

Where an error originated from editorial or production processing, the journal and publisher are responsible for taking appropriate action. Authors may be consulted to verify the correct information but must not be required to pay an administrative service fee to remedy the publisher's error.

10. Editorial Responsibility

The Editorial Office, Editor-in-Chief, authorized editors, and publisher share responsibilities for accurate, transparent, and timely correction of the scholarly record.

10.1 Editorial Assessment

Editorial responsibilities include:

• Receiving and assessing reports of publication errors.
• Determining the significance and reliability implications of reported discrepancies.
• Requesting author explanations or independent verification where necessary.
• Distinguishing formal corrections from technical adjustments, expressions of concern, and retractions.
• Managing conflicts of interest and maintaining procedural fairness.
• Approving accurate and appropriately detailed correction notices.
• Maintaining appropriate documentation of substantive editorial decisions.

10.2 Final Decision Authority

Formal correction decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or an editor formally authorized to exercise delegated decision-making authority.

Editors with material conflicts of interest must not control the assessment or final outcome. Where necessary, the matter should be referred to an appropriate independent editor or other unconflicted responsible person.

10.3 Publisher Responsibilities

Panorama Scholarly Group (PSG) supports implementation of approved corrections through article production, version management, publication platform administration, metadata updates, and appropriate preservation procedures.

The publisher must respect independent editorial judgment while fulfilling its legitimate technical, legal, and publication integrity responsibilities.

10.4 Complaints and Appeals

Authors and other affected parties may seek reconsideration where they identify material factual errors, relevant new evidence, procedural irregularities, or an unmanaged conflict of interest affecting the correction decision.

Complaints and appeals are managed under the journal's Complaints & Appeals Policy.

11. Compliance with Standards

This policy is informed by internationally recognized guidance concerning corrections, version control, research integrity, transparency, persistent identification, and responsible maintenance of the scholarly record.

Relevant guidance includes:

• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): Recommendations concerning corrections, version control, publication notices, retention of previous versions, and the relationship between corrections and retractions. Corrections and Version Control
• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): Guidance concerning research integrity, editorial responsibilities, correction of the scholarly record, and proportionate handling of publication ethics concerns. COPE Official Website
• Crossref: Best practices concerning post-publication updates, persistent identifiers, metadata relationships, and the discoverability of corrected scholarly publications. Registering Updates
• Applicable Ethical, Institutional, and Legal Standards: Relevant rules concerning research integrity, patient protection, personal data, authorship, intellectual property, and scholarly publication records.

11.1 Relationship to Other Journal Policies

This policy should be interpreted consistently with the journal's Retraction Policy, Publication Ethics Policy, Data Policy, AI & Research Integrity Policy, APC & Waiver Policy, and Archiving & Preservation Policy.

Where a matter concerns the reliability of the published research, the specific requirements for maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record take precedence over the journal's general arrangements for optional administrative changes.

11.2 International Guidance and Institutional Status

References to COPE, ICMJE, Crossref, and other organizations identify the guidance informing the journal's policies. They do not independently establish organizational membership, certification, accreditation, endorsement, or database indexing status.

11.3 Policy Review

Health Nexus may periodically review and update this policy to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, research integrity, clinical reporting, version management, persistent identifiers, digital preservation, and international editorial standards. Material amendments should be publicly communicated and coordinated with related policies.