Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences

GOAL AND SCOPE

TÜBİTAK Academic Journals are peer-reviewed, diamond open-access journals owned and published electronically and bimonthly by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK).

The aim of these journals is to foster academic excellence, support the global dissemination of scientific knowledge, and promote equal access by offering all content free of charge. Submissions are accepted in English and undergo rigorous peer review by field experts to ensure quality, integrity, and relevance. TÜBİTAK Academic Journals are indexed in major international databases, including:

• Web of Science
• Scopus
• PubMed

TÜBİTAK Academic Journals are available online for free at https://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/

{ top }

OPEN ACCESS STATEMENT

TÜBİTAK Academic Journals are Diamond Open Access journals. All articles are freely and immediately available online upon publication, without embargo, subscription, or registration barriers. The journals provide users with broad reuse rights through the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.

This licence permits anyone to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link to, or otherwise use the full texts, including for commercial purposes, provided appropriate credit is given to the original authors and the source. Attribution should include:

• Article title
• Author(s)
• Journal name
• Volume/issue
• Year of publication

The full licence terms are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

{ top }

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

Authors retain the copyright of their works. Upon acceptance, authors grant the journal a non-exclusive right of first publication and permission to distribute the article in all forms and media. All published articles are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence, allowing reuse, sharing, adaptation, and distribution, provided the original author(s) and the journal are properly credited as the source of the published version.

{ top }

Note on Policy Change

Previously, TÜBİTAK journals operated under a copyright transfer model. However, starting from [01.01.2026], authors retain copyright while granting the journal the non-exclusive right to publish.

{ top }

ARTICLE PUBLISHING CHARGE

There are no Article Publishing Charges (APC) required for the publication of this journal. All submissions are processed and published free of charge.

{ top }

PRESERVATION AND SUSTAINABILITY

To ensure the long-term accessibility and integrity of its scholarly record, TÜBİTAK Academic Journals are preserved in the two leading preservation archives, CLOCKSS and Portico, which guarantee persistent access for the very long term. Articles also receive Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) from the Crossref organization to ensure they can always be found.

{ top }

PEER REVIEW AND PUBLICATION

As a peer-reviewed publishing platform, our journals are committed to fostering scientific progress through an objective, ethical, and rigorous evaluation process. We follow the ethical standards and best practices outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in all matters related to research integrity, authorship, and the handling of misconduct.

Each submitted manuscript first undergoes an initial editorial review to evaluate its compliance with the journal’s author guidelines (Information for Authors), language quality, scientific contribution, and originality. Submissions that do not meet these criteria may be returned to the authors or declined prior to peer review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to Manuscript Editors with subject expertise. The peer review process is conducted under a blind review model to ensure impartiality and fairness. While Manuscript Editors oversee the peer review process and make editorial recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief retains final authority over all publication decisions.

The publication of articles by the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editor-in-Chief in their own journal is generally discouraged in order to avoid any real or perceived conflict of interest. Editors and members of the editorial board are not prohibited from submitting their own scholarly work; however, such submissions are handled by an independent editor to ensure a fair, transparent, and unbiased review process.

For detailed information on the specific peer review model used by each journal—such as whether the journal follows a single-blind or double-blind review process—please refer to the Peer Review section on the individual journal’s website.

For detailed information on formatting requirements, writing guidelines, and referencing style, please visit https://journals.tubitak.gov.tr. Before submitting, we strongly encourage authors to carefully review the Information for Authors (IFAs) and consult the Manuscript Template available on the specific journal’s website.

{ top }

EDITORIAL GOVERNANCE AND ETHICAL STANDARDS

The journal maintains editorial independence, ensuring that all editorial decisions are free from conflicts of interest. In alignment with internationally recognized standards (e.g., COPE, DOAJ, and ICMJE), the journal implements clear policies to avoid conflicts of interest, ensure transparency in peer review, and maintain trust in the integrity of its editorial processes.

Ethical Issues

The journal treats all forms of research and publication misconduct with the utmost seriousness. In alignment with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines, it will take appropriate action to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record.

Misconduct

Misconduct may include, but is not limited to, the following:

• Misrepresentation of author affiliation
• Unauthorized use of copyrighted or third-party materials
• Manipulation of citations for the purpose of artificially inflating citation counts
• Simultaneous or duplicate submission/publication
• Conducting unethical research or “ethics dumping”
• Fabrication or falsification of data, including image manipulation
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest
• Manipulation of the peer review process
• Plagiarism or self-plagiarism (text recycling)
• Inadequate acknowledgment of author contributions

Duplicate Submission

If a manuscript is found to have been submitted elsewhere or has already been published, it will be subject to duplicate submission/publication sanctions. When building on their own prior work, authors must cite the original publication and clearly explain how the new submission provides distinct and original contributions beyond the previous material.

Citation Manipulation

Submissions that contain citations intended primarily to boost citation counts for specific authors or journals, rather than for scholarly relevance, will be considered citation manipulation and will be subject to disciplinary measures.

Data Falsification and Fabrication

Manuscripts found to contain invented or manipulated data, including the unauthorized alteration of figures or experimental results, will be subject to sanctions for data misconduct.

Improper Authorship Attribution

All individuals listed as authors must have made substantial contributions to the research and must approve the final manuscript. Contributors who played a meaningful role—including students and lab technicians—must be acknowledged appropriately.

Redundant Publication

Dividing the outcomes of a single study into multiple publications inappropriately, also known as redundant or salami publishing, is a form of misconduct and will be addressed accordingly.

Image Manipulation

Deliberate tampering with images to mislead or distort findings constitutes a serious breach of publication ethics. All images must accurately reflect the original data. Authors must not enhance, obscure, move, or remove features within an image without clearly disclosing such modifications.

Acceptable edits include:

• Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance (provided they do not distort the data)

If parts of an image (e.g., gels or microscopy figures) are combined from different sources, this must be transparently described in the figure legend or arrangement. Failure to provide original, unedited images upon request may result in the rejection or retraction of the manuscript.

Plagiarism

The use of someone else’s ideas or words in their original form or slightly changed without a proper citation is considered plagiarism and will not be tolerated. Even if a citation is given, if quotation marks are not placed around words taken directly from other authors’ work, the author is still guilty of plagiarism. Reuse of the authors’ own previously published words, with or without a citation, is regarded as self-plagiarism.

All manuscripts received are submitted to iThenticate®, a sophisticated plagiarism checking system, which compares the content of the manuscript with a vast database of web pages and academic publications. Manuscripts judged to be plagiarized or self-plagiarized, based on the iThenticate® report or any other source of information, will not be considered for publication.

Open-access theses are treated as publicly available scholarly sources and are included in similarity checks. Authors must appropriately cite and reference any material reused from their theses. Submitted manuscripts with an unacceptable similarity index resulting from plagiarism are rejected immediately. The Preprint archive will not be considered a duplicate publication.

Misconducts mentioned above are considered serious offenses and may cause a rejection or retraction of the article.

Respect for Research Integrity

Both editors and reviewers should be alert to signs of unethical practices or any kind of misconduct mentioned above. If such concerns arise, they should notify the handling editor or the EiC with discretion and evidence. Information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal, academic, or financial gain.

Conflicts of Interest

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) definition of conflicts of interest is as follows:

“A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients’ welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Perceptions of conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest.”

A conflict of interest defines the situations that might raise the question of bias, direct or indirect, in the work reported. These situations occur when an individual’s objectivity is potentially compromised by a desire for financial gain, prominence, professional advancement, or a successful outcome. Conflicts can also arise for other reasons, such as personal relationships or rivalries, academic competition, and intellectual beliefs.

Authors should avoid entering into agreements with study sponsors, both for-profit and nonprofit, that interfere with authors’ access to all of the study’s data or that interfere with their ability to analyze and interpret. In order to preserve the reliability of the TÜBİTAK Academic Journals, authors are required to disclose all and any potential conflicts of interest when they submit their manuscripts.

Conflicts of interest are the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and science itself. In this manner, editors and reviewers are required to notify the journal if they find they do not have the necessary expertise to assess the manuscript, if the manuscript is very similar to one in preparation elsewhere, or if they suspect the identity of the author(s), which raises potential competing interests.

Potential conflicts may include but are not limited to:

• Financial relationships: (e.g., funding, stock ownership, consultancy fees, honoraria).
• Personal relationships: (e.g., family, close colleagues, or institutional affiliations).
• Professional or academic conflicts: (e.g., competition, intellectual bias, disputes).

To maintain transparency and trust in academic publishing:

• Authors must disclose all potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission. Any financial support or external influence that could affect the integrity of the research must be explicitly stated.
• Reviewers should recuse themselves from evaluating a manuscript if they have prior collaborations, personal relationships, or competing research that could compromise their impartiality. Reviewers must not review manuscripts authored or co-authored by colleagues at the same institution, recent collaborators, or individuals with whom they have a close relationship.
• Editors must declare conflicts and delegate decision-making to an unbiased colleague when necessary.

Failure to disclose conflicts of interest may result in manuscript rejection or post-publication corrections or retractions, depending on the severity of the violation.

Duties of Editors-in-Chief

The journal and its editorial board fully adhere to and comply with the policies and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The Editor-in-Chief, together with the editorial board, plays a pivotal role in upholding these standards and ensuring that the peer-review editorial process is fair, timely, thorough, and conducted with respect. The primary responsibilities of Editors-in-Chief include:

• Selecting manuscripts that meet the journal’s standards for publication and rejecting those that do not.
• Ensuring a steady flow of high-quality manuscripts by identifying significant “hot topics” in the field.
• Striving to increase the journal’s impact factor while maintaining its publication schedule.
• Providing strategic guidance for the journal’s growth and development.
• Managing the manuscript workflow by effectively communicating with editors, authors, reviewers, and TÜBİTAK.
• Establishing, implementing, and regularly reviewing policies for addressing ethical concerns and handling allegations of misconduct.
• Treating all authors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity, honesty, and transparency.
• Protecting the confidentiality of all submitted work.

Duties of Authors

The corresponding author is responsible for the manuscript through and after the evaluation and publication process with the authority to act on behalf of all co-authors. Only one corresponding author is permitted per manuscript. The corresponding author should be the same as the one who submits the manuscript in the editorial system.

The Journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and endorses the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations, as well as the GPP3 guidelines regarding authorship.

ICMJE Authorship Criteria

The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria:

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
2. Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged. Authors should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work and have confidence in the integrity of their co-authors' contributions.

CRediT Taxonomy

The CRediT taxonomy, which enables authors to specify their individual contributions, is integrated into our submission system. Please ensure the contribution information in the manuscript is consistent with the details entered into the CRediT taxonomy. Note that CRediT roles define contributorship, not authorship; a contributor may not necessarily meet the requirements for authorship.

The main responsibilities of authors are as follows:

• Author(s) should affirm that the material has not been previously published and that they have not transferred elsewhere any rights to the article.Author(s) should ensure the originality of the work and that they have properly cited others work in accordance with the reference format.
• Author(s) should not engage in plagiarism or in self-plagiarism.
• In case of experimenting on humans, author(s) must certify that the research process is in accordance with the ethical standards of the Helsinki Declaration and the domestic and foreign committees that preside over the human experiment. If any doubts are raised whether the research proceeded in accordance with the declaration, the author(s) should explain it. In the case of experimenting on animals, the authors must comply with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 and associated guidelines, EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments or the National Institutes of Health guide for the care and use of Laboratory animals (Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 8th edition, 2011, Published by the National Research Council, U.S.) and certify that they followed the domestic and foreign guidelines related to experimentation on animals in a laboratory. See the Section named “Human and Animal Rights” below for details.
• Author(s) should suggest no personal information that might make the identity of the patient/participant recognizable in any form of description, photograph or pedigree. When photographs of the patient/participant were essential and indispensable as scientific information, the author(s) must have received consent in written form and have clearly stated as much.
• Author(s) should provide the editor with the data and details of the work if there are suspicions of data falsification or fabrication. Fraudulent data shall not be tolerated. Any manuscript with suspected fabricated or falsified data will not be accepted. Any publication found to have included fabricated or falsified data will be rejected or retracted.
• Author(s) should clarify everything that may cause a conflict of interests such as work, research expenses, consultant expenses, and intellectual property.
• Authors must follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
• Authors must report any significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript to the editor at any point in time.
• Author(s) should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
• The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
• Author(s) must agree not to pursue publication of their manuscript in additional journals once accepted for publication.
• It is the responsibility of authors to ensure the validity, originality, and integrity of their article content.
• All responsibility for the scientific content and statements in articles published in the TÜBİTAK Academic Journals belongs to the authors.
• Authors are exclusively responsible for the contents of their submissions and must make sure that they have permission from all involved parties to make the content public.

Authorship Misconduct/Author Change

• Authorship should be based on significant contributions to the research and writing process.
• Ghost authorship (excluding key contributors), guest authorship (including individuals who made no substantial contribution), and honorary authorship are unacceptable.
• Individuals who participated in the development of a manuscript but do not qualify as an author should be acknowledged. Organizations that provided support in terms of funding and/or other resources should also be acknowledged.
• Requests for changes to authorship — including the addition or removal of authors, changes in author order, or changes to the designated corresponding author - are strongly discouraged and will normally not be considered once peer review has been completed.
• During the peer-review process, such changes are generally discouraged. Any request must be clearly justified and will be considered at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.
• To request a change in authorship at the revision stage, the corresponding author must provide:
  • A written explanation for the proposed change, and
  • Written confirmation (via email or signed letter) from all listed authors, including any author being added or removed, stating their agreement with the proposed modification.
  Incomplete or unsubstantiated requests will not be considered.
• All authorship changes must be formally requested before the completion of peer review. After peer-review, the author list is considered final.

Third-Party Material and Permissions

• Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reuse any third-party copyrighted material (such as figures, tables, photographs, or data) included in their manuscript.
• Such material must be properly cited and credited to the original source, and the permission must cover distribution under the article’s open licence (e.g., CC BY 4.0).
• Authors should provide written evidence of permission upon submission when required. Failure to secure appropriate rights may result in rejection or removal of the affected content.

Author Affiliations

An author's affiliation refers to the institution(s) where they were employed, conducted significant research, or received substantial support during the study's execution.

Multiple Affiliations

Authors may include multiple affiliations if they have genuine associations with more than one institution. Conditions for listing multiple affiliations include:

• Active Engagement: The author must have active roles or appointments at each institution during the research period.
• Substantial Contribution: Each institution listed should have provided significant support or resources pertinent to the research.

Authors must list all relevant affiliations to attribute where the research was approved and/or supported and/or conducted. For non-research articles, authors must list their current institutional affiliation. In cases where an author has moved to a different institution before the article has been published, they should list the affiliation where the work was conducted, and the current affiliation and contact details should be listed in the Acknowledgments section.

Format and Order

When listing multiple affiliations:

• Sequence: Authors are allowed to list multiple affiliations if both institutions contributed to the work being reported. There is no concept of "primary" or "secondary" affiliation, and authors can list affiliations in any order.
• Consistency: Use consistent formatting for all affiliations, including official institution names, faculties, and departments.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all listed affiliations are current and accurate at the time of manuscript submission and informing the journal promptly of any changes in affiliation that occur during the peer-review process. Authors are not permitted to change their affiliations after the peer-review process.

Duties of Editors

The main responsibilities of editors are as follows:

• Editors must evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without considering the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. Editors should decline any assignment when there is a potential for conflict of interest.
• Editors must ensure that the anonymity of authors and reviewers is maintained in accordance with the journal’s peer review policy.
• Editors’ decisions should be provided to the authors accompanied by the reviewers’ comments unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks.
• Editors should respect requests from authors that an individual should not review the submission if such requests are well reasoned and practicable.
• Editors and all staff members should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
• Editors must eliminate conflicts of interest and maintain confidentiality and integrity throughout the editorial process. Editors should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept. They must not have a conflict of interest with the authors, funder, or reviewer of the manuscript.
• Editors affirm adherence to COPE standards and stress the importance of transparency, editorial independence, and ethical conduct.
• Editors will be guided by the COPE flowcharts and related guidelines that the Journal follows if there is suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.

• Editors should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors and to constantly improve the journal.
• Editors should maintain the integrity of the academic record and preclude business needs from compromising intellectual standards.
• Editors should always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
• Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
• Editors or editorial staff must not use unpublished content in a submitted manuscript in their own personal research without written consent of the author.
• Editors should also work in close collaboration with TÜBİTAK to uphold the quality and integrity of the publication process, address any form of misconduct, and take necessary corrective actions.

Duties of Reviewers

The main responsibilities of reviewers/referees are as follows:

• Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
• Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
• Reviewers assist in the editorial decision process and as such should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
• Reviewers should complete their reviews within a specified timeframe. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within a stipulated time, then this information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s personal research without written permission of the author. Information contained in an unpublished manuscript will remain confidential and must not be used by the reviewer for personal gain.
• Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
• If the reviewer suspects plagiarism, duplicate publication, or data fabrication, they must report it confidentially to the editor with specific details.
• Reviewers should identify published work in manuscripts that has not been cited by the author. Reviewers should also notify the Editors of significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published or unpublished material.

{ top }

CORRECTIONS, EXPRESSIONS OF CONCERN, WITHDRAWAL AND RETRACTIONS POLICY

The integrity and reliability of scholarly publications are of utmost importance to our journal. To uphold these principles and prevent ethical violations, articles may be withdrawn or retracted at different stages of the publication process, even if articles have been accepted or published. This policy clarifies the distinctions between these actions and outlines the conditions under which they may be applied.

Definitions

• Withdrawal: In academic publishing, withdrawal generally refers to a voluntary action taken by the author(s), usually prior to acceptance or publication, to remove their manuscript from the review process. Reasons for withdrawal may include the discovery of an error or other personal or institutional considerations. A withdrawn article is not considered part of the journal's publication history. Withdrawal requests are thoroughly reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief (EiC) and may be denied following careful evaluation. Authors do not have an automatic right to withdraw a manuscript after peer review simply because their authorship modification request was denied. The journal reserves the right to proceed with editorial evaluation or ethical review if the withdrawal request appears intended to circumvent editorial or ethical procedures.
• Rejection: The editorial decision not to accept a manuscript for publication and can occur at any point in the editorial process, either
  • Before peer review (commonly referred to as desk rejection/early decision): Typically occurs when a submission
    • is out of scope,
    • lacks the scientific rigor required and does not justify peer review,
    • does not meet formatting requirements,
    • fails the preliminary language check a second time,
    • when required supporting documents after the technical check are not provided by the author(s) a second time or within the specified deadline
  • After peer review, when the manuscript is found not to meet the standards of the journal despite external evaluation.
• Retraction: The formal removal of a published or accepted article due to ethical breaches, fraudulent data, plagiarism, or other severe violations. A retraction notice will be published, detailing the reason for the retraction while preserving the article’s metadata for transparency.
• Correction:
  • Erratum is typically issued for errors introduced by the publisher post-author proof correction stage (e.g., typographical mistakes, formatting issues, mislabeling of figures, incorrect author affiliations). The erratum is published as a separate notice and linked to the original article.
  • Corrigendum is typically issued for errors introduced by the authors post-publication (e.g., minor data miscalculations, missing references/tables/figures, factual errors). Authors must notify the editorial office and submit a corrigendum request, which will be reviewed before publication. The corrigendum is published as a separate notice and linked to the original article.

Correction

Occasionally, after an article has been published, it may be necessary to revise its final, edited version. Such changes are made only after thorough evaluation by the Editor, with support from the journal’s editorial team, and in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. Any modifications are transparently documented through a permanent post-publication notice, which is linked directly to the original article. These notices may take the form of a Correction (Corrigendum or Erratum), an Expression of Concern, a Retraction, or, in exceptional cases, a Removal. This process ensures transparency and upholds the integrity of the scholarly record.

A Correction notice is issued to amend an error or omission that may affect the interpretation of the article but does not compromise its academic validity. For example, this could include mislabelled figures or missing disclosures related to funding or competing interests. The journal uses two categories of correction: a Corrigendum and Erratum. The journal recognizes the need for post-publication corrections to ensure accuracy and transparency. Depending on the nature and severity of the errors, one of the following correction types will be issued.

Procedure for Corrections (Erratum/Corrigendum):

1. Authors or readers should notify the editorial office regarding errors.
2. The editorial office (generally the journal admin) will assess the impact of the errors and determine whether an erratum or corrigendum is appropriate.
3. If the error originates from the journal's production process, an erratum will be issued.
4. If the error originates from the authors, a corrigendum request must be submitted for review and approval.
5. Once approved by the Editor-in-Chief and related manuscript editors, the correction notice will be published in the next available issue and linked to the original article.

Retraction and Expression of Concern

A Retraction is issued when a critical flaw—such as an error in methodology or analysis—renders the article’s conclusions invalid, or when serious ethical breaches are identified. Examples include falsified data, manipulated images, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or lack of ethical approval. Retractions are made in alignment with COPE standards. Authors and institutions may also request retraction, provided their reasons meet the established criteria. TÜBİTAK Academic Journals emphasize that the purpose of retractions is to maintain the accuracy and credibility of the scientific record, not to penalize authors.

Retractions are generally not used to settle authorship disputes. In such cases, if the authors can provide adequate justification and institutional backing, a Corrigendum is the preferred solution. To reduce the negative impact of flawed or misleading publications, the journal aims to process retractions as promptly as possible.

In certain instances, an Expression of Concern may be issued when serious concerns have arisen—such as allegations of misconduct—but the investigation is either inconclusive or significantly delayed. Once the investigation concludes, this notice may be followed by either a Correction or a Retraction, with all associated materials remaining part of the permanent publication record.

A Removal notice is issued only in rare situations where neither a Correction nor a Retraction is sufficient. Such cases might involve content that is defamatory, breaches legal rights, or is subject to a court order. If an article is removed from the online journal, a formal removal notice will be published in its place.

Grounds for Rejection or Retraction

The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the editorial board, reserves the right to reject or retract articles. This right may be exercised in, but is not limited to, the following circumstances:

• When there is credible evidence falsifying or ruling out the findings of the research.
• When the manuscript is under review or has been published elsewhere (journal, congress, conference, etc.).
• When an author is added/removed, the order of the authors is changed, the corresponding author is changed, or the addresses of the authors are changed without the consent of the Editor-in-Chief.
• When an article fails to comply with ethical publication standards (e.g., undisclosed conflicts of interest, ghostwriting, duplicate submission).
• When it is determined that one of the authors is subject to a publication ban imposed by the TÜBİTAK Committee on Research and Publication Ethics (TÜBİTAK AYEK).
• When plagiarism or excessive similarity is detected using plagiarism detection software (e.g., iThenticate) or any other means.
• When any other form of academic misconduct, such as data fabrication or manipulation, is discovered.
• When requested corrections are not completed by the author(s) within the given timeframe.
• When required supporting documents (e.g., ethics committee approval, dataset) are not provided by the author(s) within the specified deadline.
• When outdated, misleading, or unverifiable data are used in the study.
• When unauthorized changes (e.g., addition/removal of authors, change in authorship order) are made without editorial approval.
• When ethical approvals for studies involving human or animal subjects are missing or invalid.
• When data used in the study cannot be provided upon request, raising concerns about the validity of the research.

Procedure for Retraction

1. Initiation of Retraction Request

   A retraction may be initiated by the author(s), the journal’s editorial team, or an external party (e.g., reader, reviewer, or institution) who brings to attention a significant issue affecting the article's validity or ethical integrity.

2. Preliminary Assessment

   Upon receiving a retraction request or identifying a concern, the Editor-in-Chief (EiC), in consultation with relevant editorial staff, will conduct a preliminary review to assess the nature and severity of the issue.

3. Investigation

   If the concern involves allegations of research or publication misconduct (e.g., data fabrication, plagiarism, unethical research practices), an investigation will be initiated. This may involve the authors' affiliated institution(s), funding bodies, or external ethics committees, as appropriate.

4. Decision-Making

   Based on the findings, the EiC will determine whether the article meets the criteria for retraction in accordance with COPE guidelines. The final decision will be documented and, where necessary, reviewed by the journal’s editorial board.

5. Author Notification

   The corresponding author (and co-authors, if applicable) will be informed of the outcome and the decision to retract. They will be given the opportunity to respond and, where appropriate, participate in drafting the retraction notice.

6. Publication of Retraction Notice

   Each retraction will ensure:

   • Bidirectional linking between the retraction notice and the original article,
   • Clear identification of the retracted article,
   • The original HTML version remains available, with both HTML and PDF versions prominently watermarked as “Retracted”,
   • A detailed explanation for the retraction is provided.

Appeals and Complaints

The journal adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines regarding appeals against editorial decisions and complaints related to the editorial handling of peer review.

We are open to receiving well-founded appeals concerning editorial decisions. However, to be considered, such appeals must include compelling justification, such as strong evidence, new information, or data that directly addresses the concerns raised by the editor or peer reviewers.

{ top }

HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS

Ensuring that the studies published in our journals are conducted in a fair and ethical manner is one of our major missions. We publish across multiple research areas, many of which have their own standards and methods of governing research practice.

When reporting experiments with human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation. For manuscripts reporting medical studies involving human participants, authors are required to provide a statement identifying the ethics committee that approved the study and confirming that the study conforms to recognized standards, for example:

• Declaration of Helsinki
• US Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects
• European Medicines Agency Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice

These standards encourage authors to conduct studies in a way that ensures adequate steps have been taken to minimize harm to participants, to avoid coercion or exploitation, to protect confidentiality, and to minimize the risk of physical and psychological harm.

If the editors or referees doubt whether the research was conducted in accordance with ethical standards, they may ask the authors to explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. The Editorial Board has the right to reject any studies not meeting the criteria.

One of our main principles in studies involving human subjects is to ensure that a patient’s right to privacy has not been infringed without prior informed consent. Authors are encouraged to follow the ICMJE guidelines for reporting on human subjects. For publication of material that contains detailed patient/participant information about a living individual, it is compulsory for a signed patient consent form to be obtained. Any identifier that might reveal a patient’s/participant’s identity must be removed (from X-rays, MRIs, charts, photographs, etc.). Written informed consent is required from any potentially identifiable patient or legal representative and should be presented in either the Materials and Methods section or the Acknowledgments.

Research involving animals should be conducted with the same rigor as research involving humans. When reporting experiments on animals, authors are asked to indicate whether the institutional and national standards for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed.

Where animals are used in research we expect them to have been treated in a humane manner and complying with the ARRIVE guidelines and the Consensus Author Guidelines For Animal Use developed by the International Association of Veterinary Editors. Our editors and referees also handle submissions involving these guidelines. Editors may ask authors to describe in their manuscripts how discomfort, distress, and pain were avoided and minimized, and to confirm that animals did not suffer unnecessarily at any stage of an experiment. Editors may request that reviewers comment on the standard of experimental reporting, experimental design, or any other aspects of the study reported that might cause concern. If concerns are raised or clarifications are needed, they may need to request evidence of ethical research approval or question the authors.

Animal ethics-based criteria for manuscript rejection are:

• Manuscripts and authors that fail to meet the aforementioned requirements,
• Studies that involve unnecessary pain, distress, suffering, or lasting harm to animals.

Editors retain the right to reject manuscripts on the basis of ethical or welfare concerns.

{ top }

OPEN DATA POLICY

Why Sharing Data is Important?

Sharing research data is essential for advancing scientific knowledge and fostering innovation. By making your data accessible to others, you:

• Gain recognition for your contributions to the scientific community.
• Increase the likelihood of your work being cited by others, enhancing your academic impact.
• Boost your number of publications and overall research profile.
• Enhance your visibility, potentially leading to new collaborations and opportunities.

Authors can select the repository most appropriate for their data type and discipline. We encourage authors to use our institutional repository, APERTA, which ensures long-term availability and accessibility of the data. For details, please visit: https://aperta.ulakbim.gov.tr/

What is Research Data?

Research data generally refers to the results of observations or experiments that validate your research findings. These can include a wide range of materials associated with your research project, such as:

• Raw or processed data files
• Software
• Code
• Models
• Algorithms
• Protocols
• Methods

It is important to note that research data does not include text in manuscript or final published article form, or data and other materials submitted and published as part of a journal article.

Data availability statements in the manuscript

If you have uploaded research data related to this work to any open data repository, the link to the data repository should be given in the Acknowledgments section.

If the research data are explicitly available in a public repository that publishes datasets with DOIs, the following statement should be written:

Data supporting the results of this study are explicitly available in [repository name e.g. "figshare"] at http://doi.org/[doi], reference number [reference number].

If the research data are explicitly available in a public repository that does not provide a DOI, the following statement should be written:

Data supporting the results of this study are explicitly available in [repository name] at [URL], with [reference number].

Please provide details of any restrictions on accessing the data and a justifiable explanation (e.g., for ethical, legal, or commercial reasons), if any to the end of the statements above.

If your data is unavailable to access or unsuitable to post, you should state the reason why (e.g., your research data includes sensitive or confidential information such as patient data) during the submission process.

{ top }

PREPRINT POLICY

TÜBİTAK Academic Journals support ethical preprint sharing as a means of boosting visibility, encouraging cooperation, and facilitating the early distribution of scientific research. This policy describes the circumstances in which authors may distribute preprints and the ramifications for the peer-review procedure.

This policy is applicable to all journals published by TÜBİTAK. Nonetheless, journals that use a double-blind peer review procedure are subject to certain considerations.

Definition of a Preprint

A preprint is an academic document that is published in a scientific journal before it has undergone official peer review. The research community can freely access preprints, which are usually hosted on public preprint servers. Sharing a preprint offers several benefits for both authors and the scientific community:

• Rapid Dissemination: Preprints make research findings available to the public considerably earlier than standard publishing schedules, facilitating quicker visibility and information exchange.
• Proof of Authorship & Priority: Preprints prove the authors' ownership and priority of the work by offering a permanent, time-stamped public record of the research, typically accompanied by a DOI.
• Early Feedback & Improvement: By publishing a preprint, researchers can get community comments and helpful criticism prior to official peer review, which helps to improve the work.
• Greater Research Impact: Early public release of research promotes quicker citations, increases visibility, and enables subsequent researchers to build on the work more rapidly.

Permission to Post Preprints

• TÜBİTAK Academic Journals permit authors to post their manuscripts as preprints on reputable and non-commercial preprint servers (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, SSRN, etc.) before or during the submission process.
• Posting a preprint does not prevent submission to TÜBİTAK journals.
• The preprint version should not have been peer-reviewed, edited, or typeset by another publisher.
• Once the preprint is published, it is the author’s responsibility to update the preprint record with a publication reference, including the DOI and a link to the published version of the article on the journal's website.

Citation of Preprints

• Preprints may be cited within manuscripts provided they are clearly identified as preprints.
• Authors are encouraged to include the DOI or persistent link of the preprint, where applicable.

Preprints & Double-Blind Peer Review Considerations

Some TÜBİTAK journals operate under a double-blind peer review model, where both author and reviewer identities are concealed. To maintain the integrity of the double-blind review process while allowing preprint posting, the following conditions apply:

Author Responsibility

• Authors should ensure that preprints do not contain identifying information that may compromise anonymity during peer review, especially if submitted to a double-blind journal.
• Authors are strongly advised to avoid using institutional email addresses or ORCID IDs directly on the preprint that might easily disclose their identity.
• Where possible, authors may choose to post preprints without listing their full names or affiliations until after the peer review process.

Reviewer Responsibility

• Reviewers are instructed to evaluate submissions based solely on the content of the manuscript submitted to the journal, regardless of any knowledge of preprints.
• Reviewers should refrain from actively seeking the identity of authors through preprint platforms or online searches.
• If a reviewer feels their impartiality may be compromised due to knowledge of a preprint, they should notify the editorial office immediately.

Editorial Handling

• Editors will make every effort to assign reviewers who are unlikely to have prior knowledge of the authors or their preprints.
• If a preprint is publicly available, its existence should be disclosed by authors during submission (in the dedicated field in the submission system).

License and Copyright

• Authors are free to choose appropriate licenses for their preprints, but must retain the right to submit the manuscript to TÜBİTAK Academic Journals.
• Posting a preprint does not transfer copyright to any platform or third party.

Version of Record and Preprint Updates

• After publication in a TÜBİTAK academic journal, authors are responsible to update the preprint record with DOI and a link to the final published version (Version of Record).
• The published article remains the authoritative version for citation.

{ top }

GENERATIVE AI POLICY

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), particularly generative AI tools, and AI-assisted tools, such as Large Language Models, into academic research and publishing necessitates the establishment of clear guidelines to uphold the integrity, transparency, and ethical standards of scholarly work. This section outlines the appropriate use of AI for authors, peer reviewers, and editors.¹

Use of AI by Authors

• Authorship Attribution: AI tools, including generative models like ChatGPT, cannot be credited as authors. Authorship requires responsibility for the integrity, accuracy, and ethical standards of the work. As AI tools cannot assume accountability or be held responsible for the research outcomes or ethical considerations, they do not meet the criteria for authorship.
• Permissible AI Usage: Authors may employ AI tools to enhance language and readability. However, AI should not be used to generate content that constitutes the core findings or interpretations of the research. Manuscripts should not be submitted if generative AI tools have been used in ways that compromise core responsibilities of researchers and authors. This includes, but is not limited to:
  • Producing text or code without careful verification and meaningful revision.
  • Generating synthetic data to replace missing data without a rigorous, validated methodology.
  • Creating inaccurate or misleading content, including abstracts or supplementary materials.
• Image Creation and Modification: Authors are not permitted to use generative AI for creating or modifying photography, videos, illustrations or images in submitted manuscripts. This includes actions such as concealing, repositioning, removing, or adding specific features within an image or figure. However, adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are allowed as long as they do not obscure or remove any original information. The use of non-generative machine learning tools should be disclosed in the relevant caption upon submission to allow a case-by-case review.
  • Concealing the use of AI tools is unethical.
  • Specialized software or forensic tools may be used during the review process to detect potential image inconsistencies.
• Disclosure Requirements: Full disclosure of AI or AI-assisted tools is mandatory. Authors must specify the tools used and detail their application in a separate section of the manuscript.
• Accountability: Authors are fully responsible for all content, including that produced with AI assistance. They must ensure the work's integrity, originality, and ethical compliance.
• Any assistance from artificial intelligence (AI) tools for content generation (e.g., large language models) or similar technologies used in the preparation of an article must be clearly disclosed in an ‘Acknowledgments’ section. Authors are solely responsible for ensuring the originality, validity, and integrity of the submitted content, regardless of tool usage.
• Such tools must be used responsibly and in compliance with the journal’s authorship criteria and broader publishing ethics policies. Under no circumstances should AI tools be listed as authors.

Use of AI by Peer Reviewers

• Evaluation Integrity: Peer reviewers should not rely on AI tools for manuscript evaluation. The assessment requires human expertise and ethical judgment. The critical assessment remains a solely human responsibility.
• Confidentiality: Reviewers must maintain manuscript confidentiality and avoid inputting any part of the content into AI tools to prevent unauthorized data sharing.

Use of AI by Editors

• Decision-Making: Editors should not use AI tools to make final decisions on manuscript acceptance or rejection. While AI can assist in administrative tasks, AI tools may not be relied upon to reach editorial decisions; any such decisions must be made by the editor, who remains fully accountable.
• Ethical Oversight: Editors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts comply with ethical standards concerning AI use. This includes verifying disclosures and addressing any potential misuse of AI tools. Suspected breaches of this AI policy by authors or reviewers should be reported to the Editor-in-Chief and the publisher for investigation.
• Editors must not input manuscripts, decision letters, or correspondence into AI tools for any purpose (including language polishing) as these materials are confidential.

General Considerations

• Transparency: All parties involved in the publication process must prioritize transparency regarding AI use to maintain trust in scholarly communications.
• Continuous Learning: As AI technologies evolve, authors, reviewers, and editors should stay informed about best practices and emerging ethical considerations related to AI in research and publishing.
• Policy Adherence: Non-compliance with this AI policy may result in actions as per the journal's ethical guidelines, including manuscript rejection, withdraw, or retraction. Violations may also lead to editorial sanctions, such as author blacklisting and revocation of reviewer or editorial roles.

TÜBİTAK Academic Journals’ editorial office may employ AI screening tools (e.g., for plagiarism, language editing purposes, etc.). All such use is subject to human oversight. The AI tools used by the editorial office are selected with due consideration for data security and confidentiality.

{ top }

SPECIAL ISSUES POLICY

Special Issue topics are determined by the editorial team of the journal. Submission for Special Issues follow the same process and author guidelines as regular issue submissions. Potential authors are encouraged to review all submission guidelines and follow the process as outlined.

Review Process and Guidelines for Special Issues

Special issues are reviewed and published in the same manner as all other issues of the journal.

Submission and Review Process: Special Issue welcomes submissions from all researchers whose work aligns with the scope and objectives of the issue. While some contributions may be invited, unsolicited submissions are generally encouraged and will receive full consideration. In some cases, however, the entire special issue may consist of invited contributions only. Authors should not interpret an invitation as an automatic acceptance of their paper.

The editorial team is committed to transparency and maintaining academic integrity in all special issue content, regardless of how submissions are solicited. All submissions will undergo an initial screening by the Guest Editors to ensure quality and relevance based on predefined criteria. Accepted manuscripts will undergo the same type of peer review process as those submitted for the regular issues of the journal.

Authors will be required to revise their manuscripts based on reviewer feedback. The Guest Editors will recommend acceptance or rejection, with final approval granted by the Editor-in-Chief.

Ethical Standards: The journal adheres to the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the relevant rules and regulations of scholarly publishing authorities, as set out under the Editorial Governance And Ethical Standards section. Submissions will be assessed based on originality, significance, and contribution to the field. The journal ensures a fair and impartial review process, maintains confidentiality, and requires disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest by both authors and reviewers. The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of ethical publishing practices, including authorship criteria, data integrity, and the handling of research misconduct.

Appointment of Guest Editors: Guest Editors for Special Issues are selected based on their expertise, academic reputation, and previous editorial experience. Potential Guest Editors can be nominated by the journal’s editorial board, existing editors, or through self-nomination. Nominations are reviewed by the journal’s editorial board and approved by the Editor-in-Chief.

Guest Editors are responsible for:

• Defining the scope of the special issue
• Drafting the call for papers
• Managing manuscript submissions
• Overseeing the peer review process
• Ensuring quality and originality
• Making final decisions on manuscript acceptance in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief

Publication Timing & Review Process: Submissions to the journal are accepted on an ongoing basis and should follow the requested submission types while adhering to the full author guidelines outlined here. Submissions are considered for publication in a pending issue once deemed ready for publication, not necessarily based on date of submission. All issues of the journal, including the Special Issues, follow the same editorial and review process and adhere to the guidelines provided on the website. We encourage and welcome your submissions.

ADVERTISING

TÜBİTAK Academic Journals are fully funded and managed by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Türkiye (TÜBİTAK), a public, non-profit research institution. TÜBİTAK Academic Journals do not accept advertising and sponsorships that are believed to create a potential conflict of interest. All operational and editorial costs are covered through institutional resources allocated by TÜBİTAK.

This policy is effective as of [01.01.2026], and applies to all submissions, publications and editorial actions from this date forward.

{ top }

[1] This policy will be reviewed and updated regularly to reflect advances in AI technology and evolving best practices in scholarly publishing.