Peer review
Research manuscripts undergo editorial screening and assessment by at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Final publication decisions are made by the responsible editor. Editorials and other material not externally reviewed are clearly labelled.
Originality and concurrent submission
Submitted work must be original and must not be under consideration by another journal. Authors must identify related manuscripts and explain any substantial overlap with previously disseminated work.
Authorship
Listed authors must have made a substantive contribution, approved the submitted version, and accepted responsibility for their work. The corresponding author confirms that all authors have authorised submission.
Research integrity
Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, manipulated evidence, and misleading reporting are not acceptable. Methods and analysis should be described with enough clarity to permit informed assessment.
Artificial intelligence tools
Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI or other AI tools in research or manuscript preparation. AI systems cannot be authors. Human authors remain responsible for originality, accuracy, citations, confidentiality, and the complete published work.
Competing interests and funding
Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose financial, professional, personal, or institutional interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence the work. Authors must identify funding and the funder’s role.
Data, software, and supplementary material
Authors should make supporting materials available where lawful and ethical. Accepted supplementary records must contain accurate metadata and identify the article to which they relate.
Licensing and copyright
Accepted records must use an appropriate open licence. Authors retain copyright while granting the permissions needed to distribute and preserve the published work.
Corrections, withdrawals, and retractions
Material errors are corrected transparently. Withdrawals and retractions are documented in the scholarly record with an explanation appropriate to the circumstances. Repository records are managed to preserve an accurate publication history.
Complaints and appeals
Authors may ask the editorial office to review a procedural concern or appeal a decision by identifying a specific factual or policy issue. Disagreement with academic judgement alone is not normally sufficient grounds for appeal.