1. General Principles

Health Nexus maintains an ethical framework founded on principles that apply throughout the scholarly publication process.

• Scientific Integrity: Research must be conducted, analyzed, documented, and reported honestly, without fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or misleading representation of evidence.
• Transparency: Research methods, supporting evidence, funding, competing interests, relevant AI assistance, and applicable limitations must be reported accurately.
• Accountability: Authors remain responsible for their scholarly work; reviewers for their evaluations; editors for editorial judgments; and the publisher for the integrity of its publishing operations.
• Fairness and Objectivity: Manuscripts must be evaluated on scholarly merit, methodological suitability, ethical acceptability, and relevance to the journal's scope.
• Confidentiality: Unpublished manuscripts, peer review correspondence, sensitive research information, and protected personal data must be handled responsibly.
• Respect for Research Participants: Research involving human participants, animals, or sensitive materials must comply with applicable ethical and welfare requirements.
• Editorial Independence: Scholarly evaluation and publication decisions must be protected against inappropriate commercial, institutional, financial, and personal influence.
• Procedural Fairness: Ethical concerns must be examined through appropriate, evidence-based, confidential, and proportionate procedures.

1.1 Academic and Disciplinary Fairness

The journal evaluates research according to the methodological and scholarly standards relevant to its discipline. Independent research within conventional medicine, TCM, biomedical sciences, or public health is eligible for consideration without a mandatory requirement to integrate multiple medical traditions.

Ethical and methodological requirements must be applied proportionately to the study. Clinical trial reporting standards, for example, are not automatically applicable to historical, theoretical, or purely conceptual investigations.

2. Ethical Compliance in Research

All submitted research must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international ethical requirements. Authors are responsible for obtaining necessary permissions and ensuring that their research activities are consistent with the relevant approvals and consent arrangements.

2.1 Human Participant Research

Research involving human participants must:

• Obtain approval from an appropriate research ethics committee or institutional review board where required.
• Document a valid exemption or waiver where applicable.
• Obtain informed consent or demonstrate an appropriately authorized waiver.
• Protect participant privacy, confidentiality, autonomy, and welfare.
• Disclose relevant ethical approval and consent information in the manuscript.
• Avoid research practices that expose participants to unjustified risk or violate applicable ethical obligations.

2.2 Animal Research

Animal studies must comply with relevant animal welfare legislation, institutional oversight requirements, and applicable reporting standards. Authors must describe ethical approval or a valid exemption, relevant experimental procedures, humane safeguards, and measures taken to minimize unnecessary suffering.

2.3 Clinical Trials

Applicable clinical trials must be prospectively registered in an appropriate publicly accessible registry, consistent with the journal's clinical trial registration requirements. The registration identifier, relevant dates, and applicable data sharing information must be reported accurately.

Retrospective registration or significant discrepancies between the trial record and the manuscript must be disclosed and justified. Such circumstances remain subject to editorial assessment.

2.4 Clinical Privacy and Consent for Publication

Authors must protect identifiable patient information, clinical images, and sensitive medical records. Consent to participate in a study does not automatically constitute consent for the publication of identifiable information.

Appropriate publication consent or another valid legal and ethical basis must be established where required. Removing direct identifiers alone may be insufficient if the remaining information presents a material risk of re-identification.

2.5 Traditional and Theoretical Medical Research

Clinical research involving traditional medical interventions, herbal products, acupuncture, or integrative healthcare must meet appropriate safety, ethical, and methodological standards. Theoretical, historical, or textual studies must maintain accurate source attribution and scholarly rigor but do not automatically require human-subject ethics approval when no such research is undertaken.

3. Publication Ethics

Health Nexus requires honest, transparent, and responsible reporting of scholarly work. Research and publication practices that materially compromise originality, scientific reliability, authorship accountability, or the integrity of the scholarly record are unacceptable.

3.1 Prohibited Practices

Serious publication ethics concerns may include:

• Plagiarism, misleading textual reuse, or unattributed appropriation of ideas.
• Unauthorized duplicate publication or simultaneous journal submission.
• Fabrication or falsification of research data and scientific findings.
• Misleading manipulation of images, figures, analytical results, or supporting evidence.
• Gift authorship, ghost authorship, or improper exclusion of eligible contributors.
• Material nondisclosure of competing interests, funding, or relevant AI assistance.
• Falsified ethics approval, informed consent, clinical trial registration, or research documentation.
• Manipulation of peer review or the use of false reviewer identities.
• Other practices that materially misrepresent the provenance, reliability, or ethical conduct of scholarly work.

3.2 Originality Screening

3.3 Handling Suspected Misconduct

Potential misconduct is assessed confidentially, proportionately, and on the basis of available evidence. Authors may be asked to explain relevant circumstances and provide supporting documentation. The journal may seek independent expert advice or institutional clarification where justified.

Suspected misconduct must not be treated as established solely on the basis of an automated screening result or an unsupported allegation.

Detailed responsibilities and procedures are set out in the Publication Ethics Policy and the Publication Ethics Requirements.

4. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship must reflect genuine scholarly contributions and the willingness to accept responsibility for the integrity of the published work. Health Nexus applies authorship requirements consistent with the four criteria recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

4.1 Authorship Criteria

Every listed author must meet all four of the following criteria:

1. Make substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
2. Draft the manuscript or critically review it for important intellectual content.
3. Approve the final version intended for publication.
4. Agree to be accountable for the integrity of the work and to ensure that questions concerning accuracy or integrity are appropriately investigated and resolved.

These criteria are cumulative. General supervision, funding acquisition, administrative assistance, language editing, or technical support alone does not qualify an individual for authorship.

4.2 Author Contributions and Acknowledgments

Authors must provide accurate contribution information where required. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not satisfy all authorship criteria should be appropriately acknowledged, subject to relevant consent and attribution requirements.

4.3 Authorship Changes

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission require an appropriate explanation, documented agreement from all relevant parties, and editorial approval. Authorship disputes may require institutional clarification when the journal cannot independently resolve the underlying disagreement.

4.4 Collective Responsibility

All authors must approve the manuscript's submission and remain responsible for their scholarly contributions. The corresponding author coordinates editorial communication but does not assume sole responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of contributions made by other authors.

5. Conflict of Interest and Funding Transparency

Authors, reviewers, editors, and other individuals involved in the publication process must disclose relevant interests that could influence, or reasonably appear to influence, their professional or scholarly judgment.

5.1 Competing Interests

Relevant interests may include:

• Employment, consulting fees, honoraria, equity ownership, patents, royalties, or other financial relationships.
• Institutional, academic, professional, or organizational affiliations relevant to the submitted work.
• Close personal relationships or professional collaborations affecting independent judgment.
• Intellectual, academic, or commercial interests that may create a material conflict.
• Other relationships that could reasonably be perceived as affecting scholarly impartiality.

All authors must submit a Competing Interests Statement, including an explicit declaration where no relevant competing interests exist. Reviewers and editors must disclose relevant conflicts before participating in manuscript assessment.

5.2 Funding Disclosure

The Funding Statement must identify, where applicable:

• Funding organizations and grant identifiers.
• Relevant institutional, commercial, governmental, or other financial support.
• The role of funders in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and manuscript preparation.
• Sponsor involvement in decisions concerning publication.
• An explicit statement where no specific research funding was received.

5.3 Independence and Disclosure

Disclosure of a competing interest does not automatically disqualify a manuscript or reviewer. The Editorial Office assesses whether the interest is adequately managed and whether it materially compromises the independence or integrity of the relevant scholarly process.

6. Data Integrity and Transparency

Research data and supporting materials must be accurately collected, processed, analyzed, documented, and reported. Authors are responsible for maintaining appropriate records and providing sufficient methodological information to enable reliable scholarly assessment.

6.1 Accuracy and Documentation

Authors must:

• Report scientific observations, clinical findings, analytical results, and research evidence accurately.
• Document relevant research methods, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data-processing procedures.
• Disclose material limitations, uncertainty, missing data, and methodological deviations.
• Avoid falsification, fabrication, misleading selective reporting, and inappropriate manipulation of evidence.
• Retain relevant supporting records according to applicable institutional, ethical, funder, and legal requirements.

6.2 Mandatory Data Availability Statement

The journal encourages responsible sharing of research data, code, and supporting materials where ethically appropriate and legally permitted. Identifiable patient information, restricted clinical records, and other protected datasets are not required to be made publicly accessible.

6.3 Verification and Research Reproducibility

Editors may request relevant original images, analytical code, research protocols, supporting data, or other documentation where reasonably necessary to assess a manuscript or investigate a material concern.

Requests for verification must respect applicable ethical, legal, institutional, contractual, and confidentiality restrictions. Where direct disclosure is not permitted, alternative verification arrangements may be considered.

The journal's detailed standards are provided in the Data Policy.

7. Ethical Peer Review

Health Nexus maintains a confidential, impartial, and academically independent peer review process. Research manuscripts selected for external review normally undergo double-blind assessment by at least two qualified and independent experts.

7.1 Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Provide objective, evidence-based, constructive, and timely scholarly assessments.
• Maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and associated review information.
• Declare relevant competing interests and withdraw when impartiality cannot be maintained.
• Avoid using unpublished research for personal, academic, or commercial advantage.
• Respect the journal's double-blind procedures and avoid attempts to identify authors.
• Report specific and substantiated research integrity concerns confidentially to the editor.
• Refrain from unauthorized delegation or disclosure of manuscript materials.

7.2 Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must:

• Select reviewers with appropriate subject and methodological expertise.
• Manage conflicts of interest and recuse themselves where necessary.
• Protect confidential manuscript and reviewer information.
• Consider reviewer reports independently and evaluate the underlying scholarly evidence.
• Apply consistent standards to independent disciplinary and interdisciplinary research.
• Address ethical concerns through appropriate and proportionate procedures.

7.3 Double-Blind Review and Article-Type Differences

For externally reviewed research manuscripts, author-identifying information is withheld from reviewers, and reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors through the standard process. Editorials and Commentaries may undergo editorial assessment with additional expert review where appropriate.

7.4 Editorial Decision Authority

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an editor formally authorized to exercise delegated editorial authority.

Detailed requirements are available in the Peer Review Process and Reviewer Guidelines.

8. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Health Nexus recognizes the potential value of artificial intelligence in medical research, data analysis, scientific communication, and scholarly publishing. AI-assisted activities must nevertheless comply with applicable requirements for transparency, scientific validity, confidentiality, and human accountability.

8.1 Responsible AI Assistance

Appropriate uses may include:

• Language editing, translation, and improvement of manuscript readability.
• Literature organization and research information processing.
• Coding assistance, statistical analysis, and computational workflow support.
• AI-assisted classification, image analysis, and scientific modelling where methodologically appropriate.
• Development and evaluation of AI technologies as legitimate subjects of medical and health-related research.

8.2 Disclosure and Accountability

Authors must disclose relevant use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation or research, including the tool, purpose, and extent of material assistance as appropriate.

AI-assisted research methods must be described sufficiently for scholarly assessment. Human authors remain responsible for the accuracy of data, references, images, analyses, interpretations, and all other submitted content.

AI systems cannot be listed as authors or coauthors because they cannot satisfy the journal's requirements for scholarly accountability.

8.3 Scientific Evidence and AI-Generated Material

AI must not be used to fabricate clinical findings, falsify research data, invent references, misrepresent synthetic information as authentic observations, or generate misleading scientific images.

Legitimate synthetic datasets, simulations, AI-assisted reconstructions, and other computational methods may be used when they are scientifically justified, accurately described, and validated as appropriate to the research.

8.4 AI in Peer Review and Editorial Assessment

Detailed provisions are available in the AI & Research Integrity Policy.

9. Corrections and Retractions

Health Nexus is committed to maintaining the reliability and integrity of the published scholarly record. When material errors or research integrity concerns arise, the journal may issue corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other appropriate notices.

9.1 Corrections

Corrections may be issued for identifiable errors that require amendment but do not make the article's overall findings unreliable. The significance of an error is assessed according to its effect on the scientific content, interpretation, and integrity of the published record.

9.2 Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be published when credible and potentially significant concerns about a published article remain unresolved and readers should be informed while clarification or investigation is pending.

9.3 Retractions

Retraction may be appropriate when a published article contains seriously unreliable findings, materially flawed evidence, or other circumstances that make its conclusions unsuitable for continued reliance.

Retraction is a mechanism for maintaining the integrity of the scholarly literature, not a disciplinary penalty. Unreliable findings may result from honest error as well as research misconduct. A retraction does not automatically establish intentional wrongdoing.

9.4 Transparency of the Published Record

Post-publication notices should clearly identify the affected article, describe the reason for the action to an appropriate degree, and remain linked to the original publication.

Retracted publications should ordinarily remain identifiable and accessible with their status prominently indicated, except where compelling legal, privacy, safety, or comparable circumstances require removal.

9.5 Investigation and Appeals

Relevant concerns are examined through confidential and evidence-based procedures. Authors should normally be given an appropriate opportunity to respond to material allegations. The journal may seek independent expert assessment or institutional involvement where justified.

Necessary scholarly corrections, retractions, and research integrity investigations are not conditional on payment of an optional administrative service fee. Related complaints and appeals are handled under the Complaints & Appeals Policy.

10. Editorial Independence

Editorial independence is essential to the fairness, credibility, and integrity of scholarly publishing. Health Nexus maintains a separation between academic editorial judgment and inappropriate financial, commercial, institutional, or other external influence.

10.1 Authority of the Editor-in-Chief

Final manuscript decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or an editor formally authorized to exercise delegated editorial authority. Reviewer reports provide expert recommendations but do not automatically determine manuscript outcomes.

10.2 Responsibilities of the Publisher

Panorama Scholarly Group supports editorial operations, financial administration, publication production, technical infrastructure, research integrity procedures, and the continued accessibility of published scholarship.

The publisher must respect independent academic decision-making while fulfilling its legitimate legal, administrative, technical, and publication ethics responsibilities.

10.3 Financial Transparency

Article Processing Charges and waiver arrangements are administered separately from scientific review and editorial decision-making. Payment does not guarantee acceptance, favorable reviewer recommendations, or expedited academic approval.

Publication charges and applicable transitional exemptions are detailed in the APC & Waiver Policy.

11. Compliance with International Standards

Health Nexus seeks to maintain ethical practices informed by internationally recognized guidance concerning medical research, responsible authorship, peer review, research integrity, and scholarly publication.

Relevant principles and guidance include:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): Guidance concerning research and publication misconduct, editorial responsibilities, conflicts of interest, corrections, retractions, and the protection of the scholarly record. Official Website
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): Recommendations concerning authorship, responsible medical publishing, clinical trial registration, competing interests, peer review confidentiality, research ethics, and AI-assisted technologies. Official Recommendations
• World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles relevant to medical research involving human participants. Official Declaration
• EQUATOR Network: Reporting guidance supporting transparent, complete, and accurate communication of health research. Official Website
• Open-Access Publishing Principles: Relevant standards concerning research accessibility, clear licensing, financial transparency, editorial independence, and responsible scholarly communication.
• Applicable Institutional and Legal Requirements: Relevant research ethics regulations, informed consent provisions, animal welfare standards, privacy protections, data governance rules, and intellectual property obligations.

11.1 Application of International Guidance

International ethical guidance must be applied according to the actual research design and relevant circumstances. Authors and editors remain responsible for complying with applicable laws, institutional obligations, and disciplinary requirements.

References to international organizations or standards indicate the guidance informing the journal's ethical framework. They do not independently establish membership, accreditation, certification, endorsement, or database indexing.

11.2 Policy Review and Development

Health Nexus may periodically review and update its ethical standards to reflect developments in research methods, medical ethics, artificial intelligence, clinical data governance, publishing infrastructure, and international scholarly guidance.

Material amendments should be communicated transparently and coordinated with the journal's more detailed policies to avoid inconsistent requirements or uncertainty concerning the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher.