EDITORIAL POLICY

Ethics and Publication Standards

AFMN Biomedicine is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and transparency in scholarly publishing. Our editorial policies and procedures are informed by internationally recognized best practices, including the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as the guidance from the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM). All parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, and peer reviewers, are expected to uphold these principles.

Peer Review

The Journal adheres to a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the validity, quality, and scientific integrity of published work. All submissions first undergo an editorial assessment to determine their suitability for the Journal’s scope, standards, and ethical requirements. Manuscripts deemed appropriate are typically sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject-matter or methodological expertise to evaluate their scientific merit. The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript rests with the editorial team.

The Journal uses a double-blind peer-review system, meaning that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process. Publication decisions are based on the originality, novelty, scientific rigor, clarity, and methodological soundness of the work. Editors have broad discretion in determining whether a submission is appropriate for external review or for publication. Manuscripts may be rejected at the editorial stage without external peer review, accompanied by a general explanation. Such decisions are final and not subject to formal appeal.

To ensure fairness and transparency, editors do not take part in decisions on manuscripts they have authored, manuscripts submitted by family members, close colleagues, or collaborators, or papers involving products or services in which they hold a financial or professional interest.

Reviewer Responsibilities and Confidentiality

Reviewers must uphold the highest standards of confidentiality and integrity throughout the peer review process. They may not contact authors directly without prior authorization from the Journal. Any potential financial, personal, or professional conflicts of interest that could compromise impartiality must be disclosed to the Editors immediately upon invitation to review, so that appropriate action can be taken.

Manuscripts under review are privileged and confidential documents. Reviewers are strictly prohibited from disclosing, sharing, or using any part of an unpublished manuscript for personal or professional benefit. The use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools in preparing or conducting reviews is not permitted. Reviewers are expected to act with fairness, integrity, and professionalism throughout the review process.

Scientific Integrity

Although instances of duplicate publication or scientific misconduct are rare, they compromise the integrity of the scientific record. If the Editorial Board identifies or receives credible evidence of such concerns, the matter will be thoroughly investigated.

Plagiarism

The Editorial Board considers plagiarism, where an author presents another person’s ideas, words, or other creative expression as their own, to be a serious violation of scientific and publication ethics. Plagiarism may also constitute a breach of copyright law and may be subject to legal action. AFMN Biomedicine checks every submission using the iThenticate Similarity Check software to detect potential instances of plagiarism, i.e., overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts.

The Journal also considers self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, and unauthorized text recycling or reuse of previously published material without appropriate citation, disclosure, or permission to be unethical practices that may constitute copyright infringement.

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Verbatim (word-for-word), or almost verbatim copying, or deliberately paraphrasing substantial portions of another author's work without clearly acknowledging the source or marking the copied fragment (e.g., using quotation marks).
• Copying equations, figures, or tables from another author's work without proper citation of the source and without obtaining permission from the original author or the copyright holder
• Reusing substantial portions of one’s own previously published work without appropriate citation, disclosure, or editorial approval.

Any manuscript showing clear evidence of plagiarism will be automatically rejected. If plagiarism is discovered in an article that has already been published, the Journal will conduct a preliminary investigation. If plagiarism is confirmed, the Journal will notify the author's institution and, as appropriate, the funding agencies. The paper containing plagiarism will be formally retracted or subject to correction, following COPE guidelines.

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Technologies

The Journal recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI) tools are being increasingly used in the research and writing process. While such tools may facilitate language editing and organizing text or ideas during manuscript preparation, their improper use can compromise research integrity, accuracy, or confidentiality. When using AI technologies during the preparation, submission, and review of manuscripts, the Journal expects all authors, reviewers, and editors to adhere to the principles outlined in the following documents: COPE, WAME, and STM guidelines on the use of generative AI in scholarly publishing. 

AI tools for spelling, grammar, or style may be used without disclosure, provided they do not generate original scholarly content. However, the use of generative AI technologies, such as large language models (LLMs) that generate text, references, images, or analyses, must be fully disclosed at the time of submission. Authors must clearly specify any AI-generated content, including the name and version of the tool used, as well as the date of its use, in the Methods section. Generative AI tools must not be cited as primary sources, nor may they be listed or credited as authors.

Authors are fully responsible for verifying the accuracy and validity of all AI-generated content. They must ensure AI tools have not introduced fabricated data, inaccurate citations, bias, or uncredited copied text, as this may constitute plagiarism or misconduct. The Journal strictly prohibits the use of generative AI to create, alter, or enhance empirical data, images, or figures.

If concerns are raised or evidence of the inappropriate or undisclosed use of AI technologies is identified by reviewers, members of the Editorial Board, or after publication, the Journal will initiate an investigation and assess the matter in accordance with its established policies and procedures. If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate editorial actions will be taken. These actions include rejection of the manuscript, notification of the author’s institution, issuance of an Expression of Concern, or retraction of the article.

Post-Publication Policies and Editorial Actions

Post-publication policies, including corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, and, in exceptional cases, withdrawal, removal, or replacement of an article, are vital to maintaining scholarly integrity. In handling these matters, the Journal follows established and widely recognized ethical standards for scholarly publishing, particularly the COPE guidelines. All post-publication updates are formally documented and incorporated into the article’s Crossmark record to ensure transparency regarding its current status. For additional information about the Journal’s Crossmark policy, please click here.

In cases of alleged scientific misconduct involving published articles, the Journal may take all necessary steps to maintain the accuracy and transparency of the scholarly record. Anyone may report suspected unethical behavior to the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board, if supported by credible evidence. The Journal will conduct an internal review and allow the involved author(s) to respond. After the review, any confirmed misconduct is classified as minor or serious.

Minor misconduct that does not compromise the integrity of the manuscript or the Journal is generally resolved directly with the authors or reviewers involved. The Journal will publish a correction (for author(s) errors), or an erratum (for Journal’s errors). Both a correction and an erratum will be linked to the original paper.

Serious misconduct may require more extensive actions. The Editorial Board may issue a formal notice, inform the author’s or reviewer’s institution, retract the article in accordance with the Journal’s Retraction Policy, impose a temporary submission ban, or refer the case to legal authorities. All procedures follow COPE guidelines. Retractions and other formal notices are published separately, clearly explain the reason for the action, and remain permanently linked to the original article.

Allegations may be submitted anonymously, but must include a written disclosure of any financial or other conflicts of interest. Potential conflicts should be declared even if they seem unrelated. Disclosure does not invalidate the allegation but may be considered during evaluation. The Journal strives to protect the complainant’s anonymity; however, in some cases, identity may be unintentionally revealed. Once the investigation is complete, complainants are informed about the final decision.

Expression of Concern

When serious concerns arise that cannot be immediately resolved, or when sufficient information cannot be obtained from authors or institutions, the Journal may issue an Expression of Concern. This notice is linked to the article and alerts readers to potential issues. It may later be replaced by a Correction or Retraction, or remain in place if the investigation is inconclusive. Authors are informed before the notice is published, but their approval is not required for publication.

Retractions

Retractions are issued when an article contains major errors or breaches of scholarly integrity, such as plagiarism, fraudulent data, or misrepresentation of results. They may be initiated by the Editorial Board, the authors, or both. Retraction notices are published separately, linked to the original article, and explain the reason for the retraction. The original article remains available but is clearly marked as retracted, including on the PDF version. Retractions may also occur if results are unreliable or if the findings were previously published without proper attribution. Authors are informed and may comment, but their approval is not required for publication. For more details, please refer to our Retraction Policy.

Withdrawal, Removal, and Replacement

In addition to retractions, the Editorial Board may, in exceptional circumstances, decide to withdraw, remove, or replace an article. Such measures are applied only in cases involving legal issues, ethical violations, or other serious concerns. A notice clearly explaining the reason for withdrawal is permanently linked to the article, and content is removed only when legally required. Even in such cases, bibliographic information remains available to preserve the scholarly record.

In rare circumstances when published information may pose a serious health or safety risk, an article may be replaced with a corrected version. The reason for this action is clearly stated and recorded through Crossmark.

Appeals

Authors may appeal post-publication corrections by providing relevant evidence and submitting any new data that addresses the concerns. They may express objections or ask for reconsideration, but reversal is not guaranteed, as the final decision rests with the editors and does not require a formal appeals process. All appeals should be directed to editorial.office@afmn-biomedicine.com.

Retraction Policy

The Journal is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scientific record. Articles containing serious errors or involving misconduct that compromises the reliability or validity of the published work will be retracted in full accordance with COPE guidelines.

Retraction is warranted when findings are deemed unreliable due to data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or significant methodological errors. Grounds for retraction also include duplicate publication, inappropriate citation practices, and failure to disclose the use of AI technologies in generating content. Additional reasons for retraction are non-disclosure of conflicts of interest or financial relationships that may influence results, as well as legal, ethical, or regulatory violations that compromise research credibility. Inadequate institutional or ethical approvals, authorship disputes, and a compromised peer-review process also justify retraction. Any other unethical practice threatening the integrity of the article will be treated in the same manner.

When a potential issue is identified, the Editorial Board will conduct an assessment or request an institutional investigation if necessary. Authors will be notified and given an opportunity to respond. The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the Editorial Board, will make the final decision on retraction based on the evidence and any institutional findings.

If an article is retracted, a notice will be published in the next available issue and linked to the online article. The notice will clearly identify the article by title, author(s), and citation details, and explain the reasons for retraction. The original article will remain accessible online but will be marked with a “Retracted” watermark to preserve the scholarly record, and retractions will be flagged in indexing databases.

Crossmark Policy

Disclaimer

AFMN Biomedicine is published by the University of Niš Faculty of Medicine. Neither the Journal nor the Publisher, including their officers and employees, shall be liable for any special, incidental, indirect, or consequential damages, or for any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data, or profits, whether or not advised of the possibility of such damages and under any theory of liability, arising out of or in connection with the use of, or reliance upon, the information provided in this publication.

This publication is made available “as is,” without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. The Journal’s policies and publication details are subject to change at any time without notice. References to specific products, services, or publications do not imply endorsement, recommendation, or approval by AFMN Biomedicine or the University of Niš Faculty of Medicine.