Ethics | Journal of Associated Medical Sciences

Ethics Statement

Where applicable, the Journal of Associated Medical Sciences requires that authors provide an Ethics statement detailing the relevant ethical standards met when conducting the research.
Ethics statements are required whenever research is conducted on humans or animals, or when approval from an institutional review board is required.
In addition to providing an Ethics statement upon submission, this statement must be included in the “Materials and methods” section of the manuscripts, detailing complete information regarding approval (including the name of the granting organization, the approval reference number, and the date of approval). However, if an approval reference number is not provided, written authorization must be submitted as a confidential supplemental file upon submission.

Human Rights and Informed Consent

All individuals have the right to protect themselves from being infringed upon. Individual participants in research studies have the right to decide how their personally identifiable information, as well as any interview materials or photographs, is used. Identifying details such as personal names, dates of birth, biometric characteristics (facial features, fingerprints, handwriting, DNA, or other distinguishing characteristics), geolocation information, and the health status of research subjects should not be used without the subjects' or guardians' permission. Under some circumstances, consent is not required if personally identifiable information is not collected. However, masking the eye region in participants' photographs is inadequate for protecting anonymity, and informed consent is required. Exceptions to the need for consent may include anonymized radiographic images, ultrasound images, or pathology slides.

Consent and Already Available Data and Biologic Materials

Whether the material is collected from living or dead subjects, written permission must be obtained from the subjects, their families, or guardians if written premortem consent has not yet been provided.

Data Protection, Confidentiality, and Privacy

When biological material is donated, or data are generated as part of a research project, authors should ensure, as part of the informed consent procedure, that participants are fully aware of what information will be used, how it will be used, and for what purpose. If data are acquired through a biobank, the authors must strictly follow the biobank's data protection policy and obtain approval from the Institutional Review Board for the ethics of this type of data collection.

Consent to Participate

For all research involving human subjects, freely given, informed consent to participate in the study must be obtained from participants (or their parents or legal guardians in the case of children under 18 years old), and a statement to this effect should appear in any published paper. In the case of articles describing human transplantation studies, authors must include a statement declaring that no organs or tissues were obtained from prisoners and must also name the institution(s)/clinic(s)/department(s) via which organs or tissues were obtained.

Consent to Publish

Individuals may participate in the study but refuse to have their data published in a journal article. Authors should seek consent from participants to publish their data before submitting the manuscripts.

Summary of Requirements

The above statement should be summarized and included in an appropriate publication section where data or information is used.

Plagiarism

Plagiarized content will not be considered for publication. The manuscripts may be rejected if plagiarism is detected during the peer review. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we may issue a correction or retract the paper as appropriate. We reserve the right to inform authors' institutions about plagiarism detected before or after publication.

The Journal of Associated Medical Sciences uses Turnitin, supported by Chiang Mai University, and CopyCatch by ThaiES, TCI, to screen submitted content for originality. Plagiarism is suspected when the similarity index percentage exceeds 25%. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief will be informed. Most importantly, clear indications of plagiarism will result in immediate rejection.

Consent for Disclosure of Personal Data under PDPA

As part of the editorial workflow, manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using standard software, which requires disclosing the corresponding author's name, affiliation, and email address. Therefore, authors must indicate their consent in the checklist.

A CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy)

The author(s) statement provides a standardized way to acknowledge the specific contributions of each author to a research article. It lists each author's name and the CRediT roles they fulfilled, ensuring accurate recognition of individual roles.

Publication Ethics

Duties of Authors

Originality and Prior Publication: Authors must ensure that their submitted manuscript is entirely original and has not been previously published in any language or in any other journal.
Data Integrity and Authenticity: Authors must present an accurate account of the research performed. All data must be authentic and free from manipulation, fabrication, or intentional misrepresentation.
Acknowledgement of Sources and Citations: Authors must ensure that the work, ideas, and words of others are appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is strictly unacceptable.
Adherence to Submission Guidelines: Manuscripts must be prepared in strict accordance with the journal’s "Submission Preparation Checklist" and "Author Guidelines" to ensure technical and formal consistency.
Criteria for Authorship: Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Disclosure of Funding Sources: Authors must clearly identify and acknowledge the institutions or individuals that provided financial support or research grants for the study.
Ethical Approval and Informed Consent: For research involving human subjects, authors must provide the formal ethical approval code from an institutional review board (IRB) and affirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Animal Welfare Statement: For research involving animal subjects, authors must include a clear statement affirming that all experimental procedures were conducted in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines for animal welfare.
Conflict of Interest: Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest or vested interests (financial or otherwise) that could be perceived to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

Note:

The names and number of authors, the first author, the corresponding author, and the funding sources cannot be changed after acceptance for publication.
Authors cannot withdraw their manuscript once it has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication.

Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies for the Authors

Scope of Policy

The Journal of Associated Medical Sciences policy applies specifically to the preparation of the manuscript. It does not restrict the use of AI or AI-assisted tools for data analysis or deriving research insights, provided these are part of the formal research methodology.

Linguistic Enhancement and Human Oversight

Authors are encouraged to utilize AI-assisted tools to improve the readability and linguistic quality of their manuscripts. However, all AI-generated suggestions must undergo rigorous human oversight. Authors must carefully review and edit the output to ensure accuracy, as AI technologies can produce authoritative-sounding content that may be factually incorrect, incomplete, or biased.

Originality and Intellectual Property

Prior to submission, authors must ensure that the work is entirely original and does not infringe upon the intellectual property or proprietary rights of any third party.

Authorship and Accountability

Authorship carries inherent responsibilities and ethical obligations that only humans can fulfill. Consequently, AI and AI-assisted technologies cannot be credited as authors or co-authors, nor should they be cited as such. Authors remain solely responsible and legally accountable for the entire content and integrity of their submitted work.

Disclosure and Transparency

To maintain transparency and foster trust among readers, reviewers, and editors, authors must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in their manuscript. A formal disclosure statement must be included in the submitted work and will be featured in the published article. This statement should specify the tool used and how it was applied.

Using AI and AI-Assisted Tools in Creating the Figures, Images, and Artwork

AI or AI-assisted tools cannot be used to create figures or pictures or alter images in manuscripts. The tools can be used only to adjust color, brightness, contrast, or balance without obscuring or eliminating any information.

The exception applies only when AI or AI-assisted tools are used or are part of the research design, materials, and methods. If they are used, the authors must explain how they are used in creating the images or the alteration process. Moreover, the model or tool, version, extension numbers, and manufacturer must be indicated.

Duties of Editors

Editorial Responsibility and Quality Assurance: Editors are responsible for evaluating the academic quality and rigor of all manuscripts submitted for publication, ensuring they meet the journal's standards.
Confidentiality and Anonymity: Editors must maintain strict confidentiality throughout the assessment process. They are prohibited from disclosing the identities of both authors and reviewers to any unauthorized parties, adhering to the journal’s double-blind peer-review policy.
Objectivity in Decision-Making: The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript must be based solely on its intellectual merit, scientific validity, and alignment with the journal’s established policies and scope.
Originality and Prior Publication: Editors must ensure that the journal does not publish any work that has been previously published elsewhere, in whole or in significant part, to maintain the integrity of original research.
Evidence-Based Evaluation: Editors must not reject a manuscript based on mere suspicion or uncertainty. In cases of doubt regarding any part of the submission, editors are required to conduct a thorough investigation and secure concrete evidence before reaching a final decision.
Impartiality and Conflict of Interest: Editors must remain impartial and must not act in their own personal interest or the interests of authors, reviewers, or the administrative board. Any potential conflict of interest must be disclosed and managed appropriately.
Plagiarism Prevention: Editors are responsible for ensuring the originality of submitted work by using reliable plagiarism-detection software and tools to identify potential academic misconduct.
Handling Research Misconduct: If plagiarism or other ethical concerns are detected, the editorial process must be suspended. The editors must immediately contact the corresponding author to request a formal explanation. A final decision on the manuscript (acceptance or rejection) will only be made after a comprehensive review of the author’s response and the evidence provided.

Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Journal Editorial Process

Confidentiality and Data Privacy

A submitted manuscript is a strictly confidential document. Editors are prohibited from uploading any manuscript, in whole or in part, into generative AI or AI-assisted tools. Such actions may compromise the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights. Furthermore, if the manuscript contains personally identifiable information, using these tools may breach data privacy regulations and ethical standards.

Editorial Correspondence and Accountability

Editors must not utilize AI-assisted tools to process or rephrase authors’ correspondence, including letters to the editor, even for the purpose of improving language or readability. The editor-in-chief and the editorial board must remain fully responsible and accountable for the integrity of the editorial process, final decisions, and all formal communications with the authors.

Integrity of the Review and Evaluation Process

Using generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to assist in the scientific evaluation or peer-review management of a paper is strictly forbidden. The critical thinking, nuanced judgment, and original assessment required for editorial decisions are outside the functional scope of these technologies. Reliance on AI risks producing incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions about the manuscript’s merit.

Responsibility for Content

The editors maintain ultimate responsibility and accountability for the editorial quality and the integrity of the work accepted for publication. All editorial judgments must be based on human expertise and professional discretion.

Duties of Reviewers

Confidentiality. Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding all information contained within the submitted manuscript. Under no circumstances may any part of the manuscript be disclosed to, or discussed with, individuals outside of those explicitly authorized in the editorial and review process.
Conflict of Interest. Upon receiving a manuscript, reviewers must immediately disclose any potential conflicts of interest to the editors. This obligation applies, but is not limited to, situations where the reviewer maintains a personal or professional relationship with the author(s), is a co-author, or possesses a vested interest in the research. In such instances, the reviewer must recuse themselves from the evaluation process.
Objectivity and Expertise. Reviewers are encouraged to accept only those manuscripts that fall within their specific areas of expertise. The evaluation must be conducted with utmost objectivity, focusing on the manuscript’s intellectual merit, methodological rigor, and substantive contribution to the field. Reviewers must refrain from personal bias or groundless judgments and provide constructive, evidence-based feedback.
Acknowledgement of Sources and Similarity. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Furthermore, reviewers are urged to notify the editors if they detect substantial similarities or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published papers or studies.

Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Peer-Reviewed Process

Confidentiality and Proprietary Rights

All manuscripts under review are strictly confidential. Reviewers are prohibited from uploading any part of a submitted manuscript into generative AI or AI-assisted tools. Such actions may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights, and may further breach data privacy regulations if the manuscript contains personally identifiable information. Additionally, review reports must not be uploaded into these tools for any purpose, including linguistic enhancement or rephrasing.

Integrity of Scientific Assessment

Using generative AI or AI-assisted technologies to conduct scientific reviews is strictly forbidden. The critical thinking, nuanced analysis, and original assessment fundamental to the peer-review process remain beyond the current capabilities of these technologies. Using AI for this purpose risks generating incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions. Reviewers remain solely responsible and accountable for the entire content and integrity of their review reports.

Editorial Decision-Making

Reviewers must not rely on AI or AI-assisted tools for the evaluation or final recommendation of a manuscript. Because these technologies can generate inappropriate or biased outcomes, the final judgment must be based on the reviewer’s professional expertise and human discretion.