PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLISHER ETHICS

Archives of Allied Health Sciences (Arch AHS) commits to upholding the highest ethical standards in academic publication. The journal employs a double-blind peer review policy; authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another throughout the process to ensure fairness and minimize bias. All parties involved in the publication process must adhere to the principles of our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement, which are based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The roles and responsibilities of each participant are outlined below.

ROLES AND DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Manuscript Preparation and Submission: Authors must adhere to relevant ethical guidelines for their research, ensuring all ethical considerations are thoroughly addressed. Authorship is limited to those who have made significant contributions to the manuscript, such as conception, experimental design, interpretation of results, or writing of the paper. All authors are collectively accountable for the scientific accuracy of the work and for avoiding issues such as plagiarism.

All submissions must be original works not under consideration elsewhere. The distortion or manipulation of data to mislead readers is strictly prohibited. Plagiarism—including the uncredited reproduction of text, ideas, images, or data—is not tolerated. Authors must also avoid self-plagiarism by ensuring that all reused text and references are appropriately cited. Manuscripts exhibiting a similarity index exceeding 30% (as detected by Turnitin) will be returned to authors for revision; failure to reduce this index will result in termination of the review process and outright rejection. Furthermore, authors are responsible for adhering to copyright laws and obtaining all necessary permissions for the use of copyrighted materials prior to submission.

Peer Review and Revision Process: The corresponding author is responsible for managing the revision process and ensuring that all comments and suggestions provided by reviewers are carefully addressed. If authors disagree with any specific comment, they should provide clear justification in their response. However, the final publication decision remains at the discretion of the assigned editor or Editor-in-Chief.

Authorship Changes and Copyright: Arch AHS follows a strict policy regarding authorship changes. If authors wish to change the number or order of authors (e.g., adding or deleting a name), written approval must be obtained from all authors. Upon acceptance, the corresponding author is required to sign the Copyright Transfer Agreement for the journal.

GENERATIVE AI AND AI-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGIES FOR AUTHORS

The Arch AHS policy applies solely to manuscript preparation and does not endorse the use of AI or AI-assisted tools for data analysis or for generating insights within manuscripts. Authors may use AI tools to improve language and readability; however, they must carefully review and edit all outputs, as AI may produce incorrect, biased, or overly authoritative information.

The only exception is when AI is an integral part of the research methodology (e.g., in biomedical imaging). In such cases, its use must be clearly described in the Methods section, including the AI model name, version, extension, and manufacturer. Authors must also comply with applicable software policies, provide appropriate attribution, and may be required to submit raw or pre-AI images for review.

AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors, nor cited as sources, as authorship requires human responsibility and oversight. Any use of AI beyond language and grammar improvement must be disclosed in the manuscript under the “Generative AI Declaration” heading to promote transparency, using the following statement:

This manuscript utilized [NAME OF TOOL/SERVICE] for [REASON]. The author(s) have reviewed and edited the content as needed and assume full responsibility for the content of the publication.

REVIEWER ETHICS

Reviewers play a critical role in the manuscript publication process. Their comments and suggestions help enhance the quality of manuscripts and contribute to the advancement of academic knowledge. Therefore, prospective reviewers should decline review requests if the manuscript’s subject area falls outside their expertise or if they have any conflicts of interest.

Reviewers are encouraged to follow international peer review recommendations, including the use of reporting checklists, to address variability in the scholarly quality of submitted studies. They should notify the editor if they suspect that a manuscript has been plagiarized from previously published work. Reviews and recommendations should be based solely on the reviewer’s expertise and free from any conflicts of interest. Reviewers must also maintain confidentiality and must not disclose any information or results from a manuscript prior to its publication.

USE OF GENERATIVE AI AND AI-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGIES IN PEER REVIEW

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential. Peer review relies on human judgment; therefore, AI tools must not be used to assist in the evaluation of manuscripts, as they lack critical assessment capabilities and may generate biased or inaccurate conclusions. Reviewers remain fully responsible and accountable for the content and quality of their reviews.

Uploading manuscripts, or any portion of them, into AI tools is strictly prohibited in order to protect author confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy. This confidentiality requirement also applies to review reports, which may contain sensitive information; such materials must not be uploaded into AI tools, even for the purpose of language or readability improvement.

Arch AHS policies allow authors to use AI tools to enhance language and readability during manuscript preparation, provided that such use is disclosed in a separate section before the references. Any suspected misconduct or misuse of AI should be reported to the publisher.

ROLES AND DUTIES OF THE EDITOR

An assigned editor is responsible for evaluating the quality, integrity, and suitability of manuscripts submitted for publication. Throughout the assessment process, the editor must maintain strict confidentiality and must not disclose the identities of authors or reviewers to any third party.

Editorial decisions regarding publication are based solely on the intellectual merit of the manuscript and its compliance with the journal’s editorial policies and ethical standards. Editors must ensure that submitted manuscripts have not been previously published elsewhere and meet the journal’s originality requirements.

Manuscripts must not be rejected solely on the basis of doubt or uncertainty. When questions arise regarding any aspect of a submission, editors are required to seek clear and objective evidence to resolve such concerns before making a final decision.

Editors must act impartially and independently, without defending or advancing their own interests or those of the authors, reviewers, or the administrative board. To uphold academic integrity, editors are responsible for screening all submissions for plagiarism using reliable plagiarism detection tools. If potential plagiarism is identified, the editorial assessment process must be suspended immediately. The corresponding author should be contacted promptly and given an opportunity to provide an explanation for the content in question before a final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made.

GENERATIVE AI AND AI-ASSISTED TECHNOLOGIES IN THE JOURNAL EDITORIAL PROCESS

All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors must not upload a submitted manuscript, or any portion of it, into generative AI or AI-assisted tools, as doing so may compromise author confidentiality, proprietary rights, and data privacy, particularly when manuscripts contain personally identifiable information.

Editors are also prohibited from uploading authors’ correspondence, including letters to the editor, into AI-assisted tools, even for the purpose of improving language or readability. Editors remain fully responsible and accountable for the editorial process, all editorial decisions, and all communications with authors.

Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies must not be used to support or conduct the scientific evaluation of manuscripts. The critical judgment and independent assessment required for peer review cannot be replicated by such technologies, which may produce incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions. Ultimately, editors bear full responsibility and accountability for the integrity, content, and handling of all submitted work throughout the editorial process.

ROLE AND DUTIES OF THE JOURNAL OWNER

The Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Thailand, provides financial support to enable Arch AHS to maintain high publication standards, a rigorous peer-review process, and open-access availability for researchers and readers worldwide. The faculty does not, however, exert any influence over editorial decisions or the selection of articles for publication.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR HUMAN AND ANIMAL RESEARCH

Research involving human participants or animals must be conducted in accordance with internationally recognized ethical standards, including the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant  COPE guidelines. Authors are responsible for ensuring the safety, rights, and welfare of all research participants.

For studies involving human participants, informed consent must be obtained prior to participation. Participants must be adequately informed of the study’s purpose, procedures, potential risks, and benefits, and participation must be voluntary.

All research involving humans or animals must receive prior approval from an appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee. An ethics statement must be included in the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript, clearly stating the name of the approving body and the approval reference number. If an approval reference number is unavailable, written authorization must be submitted as a confidential supplemental file at the time of submission.

Authors must protect participant privacy and maintain the confidentiality of personal data. Data must be handled and reported accurately, transparently, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation. Failure to comply with these ethical requirements may result in manuscript rejection or further editorial action in accordance with journal policies.

CORRECTIONS AND RETRACTIONS

When errors are identified in published articles, the editors will assess the appropriate course of action to preserve the integrity and accuracy of the scholarly record. Errors attributable to authors may be corrected through a corrigendum, while errors introduced by the publisher may be addressed through an erratum.

In cases where errors substantially affect the validity of the findings, or where there is evidence of research or publication misconduct, the editors may issue a retraction or an expression of concern in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

All authors will be requested to agree to the content of any correction, retraction, or expression of concern notice prior to publication.

SANCTIONS

If Arch AHS identifies breaches of its publication ethics policies, appropriate sanctions will be imposed in accordance with the severity of the misconduct. Such measures may include rejection of the affected manuscript and any other manuscripts submitted by the author(s), a prohibition on new submissions for a minimum period of one year, and disqualification from serving as an editor or reviewer for the journal.