Ethics, integrity and transparency policy

This Journal meets the international ethics and good practice standards of publication. The goal is to provide a transparent and ethical publication, reason why the articles published in the Journal must meet the ethical principles of the different declarations and legislations on copyright, specific to every country where the research was carried out.

The Editor, authors, members of both committees and peer reviewers will follow the ethical guidelines of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The Journal RNCM seeks to encourage the publication of articles resulted from research that complies the ethical principles of research, as well as avoid fabrication, falsification, data omission, plagiarism, citation manipulation, redundant publication, among other cases of malpractice in research. To do so, the Journal will follow the COPE guidelines of the following link https://publicationethics.org/core-practices to guarantee the adequate management of situation where the ethic of the editorial process of submitted articles is compromised.

The ethical behavior expected from the authors includes*:

  • The research being reported should have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation.
  • Researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
  • Researchers should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
  • Researchers should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere.
  • Authors should take collective responsibility for submitted and published work.
  • The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.
  • Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.

 Reference*: Wager E & Kleinert S (2011) Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 50 in: Mayer T & Steneck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 309-16). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7)

The ethical behavior expected from the Editors includes**:

  • Editors are accountable and should take responsibility for everything they publish
  • Editors should make fair and unbiased decisions independent from commercial consideration and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process
  • Editors should adopt editorial policies that encourage maximum transparency and complete, honest reporting
  • Editors should guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct
  • Editors should pursue reviewer and editorial misconduct
  • Editors should critically assess the ethical conduct of studies in humans and animals
  • Peer reviewers and authors should be told what is expected of them
  • Editors should have appropriate policies in place for handling editorial conflicts of interest

Reference**: Kleinert S & Wager E (2011) Responsible research publication: international standards for editors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 51 in: Mayer T & Steneck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 317-28). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7.)

The ethical behavior expected from peer reviewers include:***:

  • only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
  • respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal
  • not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others
  • declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
  • not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations
  • be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments
  • acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner
  • provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
  • recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct

Reference***: Wiley's Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics Editorial Standards and Processes. https://authorservices.wiley.com/ethics-guidelines/editorial-standards-and-processes.html#4.)

Allegations of misconduct

In the event of an accusation of misconduct by a third party, you should contact the Editor at editor-rncm@nutriclinicacolombia.org to present your case. The RNCM will ensure that the necessary resources and support are available as appropriate while the accusation is being resolved, always prioritizing ethics and transparency. In the case of accusations, the journal ensures total anonymity and confidentiality for the accuser to preserve their integrity until the accusation is resolved.

Authorship and contributions

In the list of authors, only those who meet each of the following criteria must be included:

  1. To have participated in the conception and design, as well as acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data.
  2. To have participated in the drafting of the article and its reviews.
  3. To have approved the final version of the article to be published.
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the article ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Under no circumstances should AI tools be included as authors or co-authors, as they cannot assume responsibility, originality, or integrity of the submitted manuscript since they are not human beings, nor do they have legal personality. Therefore, individuals are responsible for any material included in the manuscript that involves the use of AI-assisted technologies. They must identify, review, and correct biases in data sources, tool design, and any information that may compromise the integrity of the manuscript's authors. Authors as humans are morally and legally responsible for any errors or biases in the manuscript or infringement of copyright and harm to third parties.

It is a collective responsibility to ensure that the listed authors meet the four criteria of authorship, as well as those who qualify in the acknowledgments section. Additionally, they must identify co-authors responsible for other specific parts of the article and must be certain of the integrity of the co-authors' contributions.

Furthermore, the corresponding author is the one who takes responsibility for communication with the journal during manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process. They ensure compliance with administrative requirements such as authorship declaration, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration, and conflict of interest declaration. Additionally, they must be available during the editorial process (submission and peer review) to respond to inquiries in a timely manner.

It is not the responsibility of the journal editor to determine who qualifies as an author of the article or arbitrate authorship conflicts. In the event of a dispute regarding authorship of a manuscript, the institution(s) where the research was conducted should be requested to handle the case appropriately. The journal reserves the right to request authors to provide justification and a signed statement if the addition or removal of an author from the listed authors is requested.

The Authorship Declaration must be included on the title page as indicated in the author guidelines.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy

The Journal of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism requires authors to demonstrate transparency and integrity in the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the production of their manuscript and further declare it. If authors utilized AI tools in drafting their manuscript, in producing figures or graphical elements of the article, or in data collection and analysis, they must indicate it in the manuscript's "Methods" section, detailing how the tool was used and which tool was utilized.

This document outlines the position of the Journal of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence in manuscript preparation.

Complaints and Appeals

Regarding potential complaints and appeals, the journal has a process in place to address cases where an author decides to appeal against an editorial decision, or when a user, whether author, reader, reviewer, or editor, submits a complaint against the journal or a member of the editorial team. In either case, the individual should contact the Editor at editor-rncm@nutriclinicacolombia.org to present their case. If the case is an appeal against an editorial decision, the corresponding author must submit clear arguments as to why a reevaluation of the manuscript should be conducted, and it must be signed by the co-authors. In the case of a complaint, the editor will assess the situation and take measures to resolve the user's concern in the best possible manner.

Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest is an economic or other type of affiliation (academic, personal, intellectual) that may influence the opinions, behavior, or manuscript of an author, editor, or reviewer. All parties must declare potential conflicts of interest that could lead to bias in the production, review, and/or editorial decision-making of a manuscript, among other aspects.

Authors should indicate on the "Title Page" if there are any conflicts of interest. If there are no conflicts of interest, it should be declared: "The authors declare no conflicts of interest."

In the case of reviewers, they must declare any potential conflicts of interest regarding the assigned article for review.

The journal has a document where conflicts of interest of the editorial team, associate editors, and scientific advisory committee are declared, aiming to be transparent about editorial processes and those who have a role in manuscript evaluation. The document states whether there is a conflict of interest and of what type. Click here to view the document.

The journal's editorial team will take the necessary measures in cases of conflicts of interest in order to maintain transparency in editorial processes and decisions.

Funding Source

All articles published in the Journal must declare their funding source. This involves disclosing financial relationships with entities in the biomedical field that could be perceived as influential or potentially influential in the results and contents of the articles. All public or private entities that sponsored or institutions that participated in the financial support of the research work must be reported. Academic institutions do not need to be disclosed. For example, if a governmental agency or a university sponsored a study on a nutritional/pharmaceutical product provided by a pharmaceutical company, only the pharmaceutical company needs to be listed. It is important to disclose any type of financial relationship. If there is no funding source, it should be declared: "This study received no funding."

Study Description

It is recommended to use the methodological guidelines provided by the Equator Network (https://www.equator-network.org/) for original articles, randomized clinical trials (CONSORT), and systematic reviews (PRISMA). The use of checklists is important to ensure compliance with the methodological and ethical requirements of research.

Ethical responsibilities in research

When describing studies involving human subjects, it should be indicated whether the procedures followed adhered to the ethical standards of the Institutional or Regional Ethics Committee for Clinical Research, the World Medical Association, and the Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/).

When describing experiments on animals, it must be indicated if the research complied with the ARRIVE guidelines, the guidelines of an international research institution or council (The Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences), or a national law regulating the care and use of laboratory animals (in Colombia, Resolution No. 008430 of October 4, 1993, from the Ministry of Health).

Informed consent

Authors should mention in the Methods section that the procedures performed in patients and controls have been carried out after obtaining the informed consent. Likewise, ethic responsibility and informed consent must be stated in the text in the Methods section.

Discussions and Corrections After Publication

The journal allows for discussions on scientifically published content through letters to the editor. It is recommended to cite and reference the article being discussed, as well as provide theoretical support for statements made.

Regarding corrections or retractions after publication, authors must request and justify their corrections to the Editor, who will then evaluate the corrections and follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). For retractions, depending on the case, the outcome of the article will be determined; it may involve retraction with a statement from the journal and authors explaining why the article is being retracted, or retraction with republication. The editor and editorial team will evaluate each case individually to make the best decision aligned with publishing ethics.

 

RNCM Funding Source Declaration

The Journal is financed by the Colombian Association of Clinical Nutrition. Some Numbers will have advertising of pharmaceutical companies. In no case editorial decisions will depend on them. Advertisements of products that coincide with the editorial content or come from multi-level companies are prohibited. The Editor has full authority to approve advertising and to ensure compliance with the Ethics, integrity and transparency policy.