Allegations of Research Misconduct

Madago Nursing Journal (MNJ) is committed to research integrity, academic honesty, and ethical scholarly publishing. Authors, editors, reviewers, and other participants in the publication process are expected to uphold responsible research practices and protect the credibility of nursing scholarship.

The journal addresses allegations of research and publication misconduct fairly, objectively, and in accordance with relevant Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance.

1. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

The following practices constitute research misconduct or potential violations of publication ethics:

Fabrication: Inventing data, participants, observations, procedures, or results and presenting them as genuine.
Falsification: Manipulating research procedures, materials, data, or results, including unjustified omissions that misrepresent the findings.
Plagiarism: Using another person’s ideas, words, data, images, or findings without appropriate acknowledgment.
Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Submitting or publishing substantially overlapping work without adequate disclosure, acknowledgment, or legitimate justification.
Authorship Misconduct: Including individuals who do not qualify for authorship, excluding qualifying contributors, or dishonestly reporting contributions, affiliations, or authorship agreements.
Citation Manipulation: Adding irrelevant citations, coercing citations, or otherwise manipulating references to artificially influence citation counts or journal metrics.
Peer-Review Manipulation: Using fabricated reviewer identities, interfering with independent evaluation, or breaching the confidentiality and integrity of peer review.
Ethical Violations: Conducting research without required ethical approval, informed consent, or appropriate safeguards for participants and their information.
Inappropriate Image or Data Manipulation: Altering, duplicating, or selectively presenting images, tables, clinical records, or other evidence in ways that distort the research.
Failure to Disclose Relevant Conflicts of Interest: Omitting relationships or interests that could influence the research or publication process.
Misrepresentation: Providing false or misleading information about methods, ethical approval, funding, registration, data availability, or findings.
Other Serious Violations: Conduct that substantially compromises participant safety, research reliability, or publication integrity.

Honest errors, differences in interpretation, and methodological disagreements do not automatically constitute misconduct. Concerns will be assessed in context and on the available evidence. Editorial correction may still be necessary when an honest error affects the published record.

2. Reporting Suspected Misconduct

Authors, reviewers, readers, institutions, and other concerned parties may report suspected misconduct through the journal’s official editorial contact channels.

Reports should identify the manuscript or article concerned, describe the allegation clearly, and provide supporting evidence where available. Relevant evidence may include source publications, specific passages, data records, images, or correspondence.

Anonymous reports may be considered when they contain sufficient information for assessment. An allegation will not be treated as an established finding merely because it has been reported.

3. Assessment and Investigation Procedures

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor will oversee the initial assessment. Anyone with a relevant conflict of interest must withdraw from handling the case. Allegations involving an editor will be referred to an independent editor or an appropriate publisher representative.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may:

Assess the concern: Determine whether the allegation is sufficiently specific and supported to warrant further examination.
Examine the evidence: Review relevant manuscripts, publications, similarity reports, data, images, and ethical documentation.
Seek an explanation: Contact the relevant authors or other parties and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond.
Obtain independent advice: Consult qualified experts while protecting confidentiality and managing conflicts of interest.
Refer for institutional investigation: Contact the responsible institution, ethics committee, funder, or other authority when establishing the facts requires powers or resources beyond those of the journal.
Determine editorial action: Decide how to protect readers and the scholarly record based on the available evidence.

The journal’s role is to assess publication integrity and take appropriate editorial action. Formal findings about individual research misconduct may require investigation by the responsible institution.

Failure to respond to reasonable inquiries may inform editorial decisions but does not, by itself, prove misconduct.

4. Possible Editorial Actions

Depending on the evidence and seriousness of the concern, MNJ may:

Request clarification, supporting documentation, or a formal explanation.
Require correction or revision before further consideration.
Suspend manuscript processing while concerns are investigated.
Reject a manuscript that fails to meet scientific or ethical requirements.
Publish a correction when a limited error can be addressed without undermining the article as a whole.
Publish an Expression of Concern when serious questions remain unresolved and readers should be alerted.
Retract an article when its findings are unreliable or other grounds for retraction are established.
Notify relevant institutions, ethics committees, funders, or publishers when warranted.

Actions will be proportionate and documented. Post-publication notices will be publicly accessible and linked to the affected article. Where practicable, authors will be informed before a notice is published; author agreement is not a prerequisite for necessary editorial action.

5. Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

Information concerning allegations will be shared only with those who need it for assessment, investigation, or an appropriate response, subject to applicable obligations.

MNJ will seek to protect all parties from unnecessary disclosure and unfair treatment. Absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed where disclosure is necessary for a fair investigation or referral to the responsible authority.

All parties are expected to cooperate honestly. Knowingly fabricated allegations may themselves raise ethical concerns; reports made in good faith will not be treated as misconduct merely because they are unsubstantiated.

6. Ethical Conduct of Research

Research involving human participants, patient records, identifiable information, biological materials, or animals must comply with applicable ethical and institutional requirements.

Where required, manuscripts must identify the approving ethics committee, approval reference, and relevant consent procedures. Where approval or consent was waived or not required, authors must explain the basis and identify the responsible determination where applicable.

For nursing case studies, authors must distinguish consent for care or research participation from consent to publish identifiable patient information. Patient confidentiality must be protected throughout the manuscript and accompanying materials.

Clinical trial registration information must be provided where applicable. The journal may request supporting documentation if concerns arise about approval, consent, registration, or participant safety.

7. Post-Publication Concerns

Concerns raised after publication will be assessed regardless of when the article was published. The journal may seek author explanations, independent advice, or institutional findings.

A correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction may be issued as appropriate. Retraction may be necessary to address unreliable findings even when misconduct has not been established.

The purpose of these actions is to maintain a trustworthy scholarly record, rather than to punish individuals. Retracted articles will normally remain accessible, clearly marked and linked to the retraction notice.

8. Appeals and Reconsideration

Authors may submit a reasoned written appeal through the editorial office, identifying the grounds for reconsideration and providing relevant evidence.

Where practicable, an appeal will be reviewed by an editor or representative who was not responsible for the original decision and has no relevant conflict of interest.

The journal may uphold, modify, or reconsider its decision. An appeal does not automatically delay measures needed to protect readers or the scholarly record.

9. Commitment to Publication Ethics

Madago Nursing Journal applies relevant COPE guidance and its publication ethics policies when addressing research and publication integrity concerns.

By submitting a manuscript, authors acknowledge their responsibility to report research honestly, comply with ethical requirements, disclose relevant interests, and cooperate with reasonable inquiries about their work.

The journal may request clarification or supporting documentation before or after publication whenever necessary to safeguard the integrity of nursing scholarship.