Information

Research and Publication Ethics

Biologica Aid Limited statement

Biologica Aid Limited is committed to advancing scientific communication, research integrity, and global accessibility of scholarly knowledge through the development and support of high-quality academic publishing platforms. The organization operates with a strong emphasis on ethical publishing practices, transparency, and long-term contribution to the scientific community. All journals published under Biologica Aid Limited are guided by internationally recognized standards, including the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as established best practices in scholarly publishing. The publisher ensures that editorial independence is fully respected, and that all editorial decisions are made solely by qualified academic editors based on scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal scope.

Biologica Aid Limited does not interfere with peer review processes or editorial decision-making. The publisher’s role is strictly limited to providing technical infrastructure, publication support, and compliance oversight to ensure that all published content meets ethical, legal, and professional standards. The organization applies systematic quality checks to all submitted manuscripts to ensure compliance with ethical publishing requirements. These checks include screening for plagiarism, ethical approval verification, authorship transparency, conflict of interest disclosure, and compliance with data integrity standards. Where concerns are identified, manuscripts are referred back to the editorial board for further evaluation and decision-making.

Biologica Aid Limited is committed to promoting open access publishing and supports licensing models that enhance the dissemination and reuse of scientific knowledge. The organization encourages authors to share their research widely and ensures that published content remains freely accessible to the global research community. Through its publishing activities, Biologica Aid Limited aims to foster innovation, interdisciplinary collaboration, and responsible scientific communication while maintaining strict adherence to ethical publishing principles and international standards.

Publication ethics statement

Integrative Bioscience Nexus (IBN) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity across all stages of the scholarly communication process. The journal adheres to the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and follows internationally accepted guidelines for ethical publishing, transparency, accountability, and reproducibility in research. All submitted manuscripts must comply with the ethical standards outlined by the journal. Ethical oversight applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher alike, ensuring that published content contributes reliably and responsibly to scientific knowledge. Any form of research misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship practices, or unethical research conduct, is strictly prohibited.

IBN maintains full editorial independence. Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit, methodological rigor, originality, and relevance to the journal scope. The publisher does not interfere with editorial decisions under any circumstances. However, where ethical, legal, or research integrity concerns are identified at any stage of submission, peer review, or post-publication, the journal reserves the right to take corrective action, including rejection, revision, correction, or retraction. To ensure integrity in the scholarly record, IBN applies a combination of automated screening tools and manual editorial assessment for all submissions. When potential ethical issues are detected, these are further evaluated by human editors and, when necessary, in consultation with the editorial board or external experts.

The guiding principles of the journal include prevention of misconduct through early detection, neutrality in assessment, transparency in handling ethical issues, and consistency in applying COPE-recommended procedures.

Ethical guidelines for authors

Authors submitting to IBN are expected to uphold the highest standards of research ethics, scientific integrity, and responsible reporting. Manuscripts must represent original work that has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration by any other journal. Authors must ensure that all data presented are accurate, complete, and reproducible. Selective reporting, data manipulation, or omission of critical findings that may influence interpretation is strictly prohibited. Research methods must be described in sufficient detail to allow independent verification and replication of results.

All authors are required to disclose funding sources, institutional affiliations, and any potential conflicts of interest that may influence the interpretation or presentation of the research. Transparency in disclosure is considered an essential component of ethical publishing. Authors must ensure that proper acknowledgment is given to all sources of information, including previously published work, datasets, figures, or ideas. Plagiarism in any form—including self-plagiarism or redundant publication—is considered a serious ethical violation.

Research involving humans, animals, or sensitive biological materials must comply with relevant institutional, national, and international ethical standards. Appropriate ethical approval must be obtained prior to conducting the study, and documentation must be provided when requested. Simultaneous submission to multiple journals is strictly prohibited. Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submission complies with all journal policies and applicable research integrity standards.

Authorship policy

General principles of authorship

Integrative Bioscience Nexus (IBN) adopts a strict and internationally harmonized authorship policy aligned with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations and COPE Core Practices. Authorship is not a symbolic attribution but a declaration of intellectual responsibility, scientific contribution, and accountability for the integrity of the entire research process. Authorship in IBN is reserved exclusively for individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the conception, design, execution, interpretation, and intellectual refinement of the research. The journal emphasizes that authorship confers both credit and responsibility, and therefore cannot be assigned casually, honorary, or by administrative default. Individuals who contribute to a study but do not meet all authorship criteria must not be listed as authors. Instead, their contributions should be appropriately acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section. This ensures transparency in distinguishing between intellectual contribution and supportive or technical assistance. The journal recognizes that authorship practices may vary across disciplines, but maintains a unified minimum standard: every listed author must be able to take public responsibility for the content of the work and defend its scientific integrity if questioned.

ICMJE authorship criteria

IBN strictly follows the four criteria established by the ICMJE. To qualify as an author, an individual must meet all four conditions simultaneously:

  • Substantial contribution to research design or data work

Authors must have made meaningful intellectual contributions to the conception, design, acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data. Routine data collection without intellectual input does not qualify an individual for authorship.

  • Drafting or critical intellectual revision

Authors must have participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content. Simple proofreading, language correction, or administrative formatting does not meet this requirement.

  • Final approval of the version to be published

Each author must approve the final manuscript before submission and publication. This ensures that all authors agree with the content, conclusions, and presentation of the work.

  • Accountability for the entire work

Authors must agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including resolving questions related to accuracy, integrity, and ethical compliance. This includes both their own contributions and the collective integrity of the study. Failure to satisfy any one of these four conditions excludes authorship eligibility.

Discipline-specific authorship considerations

IBN recognizes that authorship conventions differ across scientific fields. Biomedical sciences often follow ICMJE guidelines, psychology follows APA standards, chemistry may adopt EuChemS recommendations, and humanities may emphasize single-author contributions. Despite disciplinary differences, IBN maintains a universal principle: authorship must reflect substantial intellectual contribution and accountability. Administrative authority, funding acquisition alone, or general supervision does not justify authorship unless combined with intellectual involvement in the research process.

Author contribution transparency (CRediT taxonomy)

To promote transparency and accountability, IBN requires all manuscripts to include a detailed Author Contributions section based on the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework. Each author’s role must be clearly specified, such as:

  • Conceptualization
  • Methodology
  • Software development
  • Validation
  • Formal analysis
  • Investigation
  • Resources
  • Data curation
  • Writing (original draft)
  • Writing (review and editing)
  • Visualization
  • Supervision
  • Project administration
  • Funding acquisition

A standardized statement should be included in all manuscripts, clearly mapping contributions to individual authors. This ensures that responsibility is distributed transparently and appropriately. The corresponding author bears responsibility for ensuring accuracy of contribution statements and confirming agreement among all co-authors prior to submission.

Corresponding author responsibilities

The corresponding author plays a central administrative and ethical role in the publication process. This individual acts as the primary liaison between the journal and all co-authors. Responsibilities include:

  • Ensuring that all co-authors meet authorship criteria
  • Verifying that all authors approve the submitted and revised versions
  • Coordinating communication between the journal and co-authors
  • Managing disclosures of conflicts of interest
  • Ensuring compliance with ethical and reporting standards

The corresponding author must ensure that no individual is included or excluded from authorship without collective agreement.

Equal contribution and joint authorship

IBN permits the designation of equal contribution where two or more authors have contributed at comparable levels to the research. This is typically indicated using statements such as “These authors contributed equally to this work.” However, equal contribution does not override accountability. All listed authors, including co-first authors, must still satisfy all four ICMJE authorship criteria. Equal contribution must be explicitly described in the Author Contributions section to maintain clarity in responsibility distribution.

Authorship in review articles

For narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, authorship attribution may not always align directly with experimental contribution roles. In such cases, authors must clearly define:

  • Who conceptualized the review
  • Who performed literature searches and data extraction
  • Who conducted analysis or synthesis
  • Who drafted and critically revised the manuscript

Even in review-based manuscripts, intellectual contribution and accountability remain mandatory for authorship eligibility.

Thesis-based and student research authorship

When a manuscript is derived from a student thesis or dissertation, IBN encourages the student to be listed as the principal or first author, provided they meet authorship criteria. Supervisors and academic mentors should be included as co-authors only if they have made substantial intellectual contributions beyond routine supervision. Administrative supervision alone does not qualify for authorship.

Consortium and group authorship

IBN allows consortium or group authorship when research is conducted under collaborative frameworks involving multiple institutions or large-scale networks. In such cases:

  • The consortium may be listed as the primary author
  • Individual contributors must still meet ICMJE authorship criteria
  • The corresponding author must ensure accurate representation of contributors

Where appropriate, manuscripts may list “Author A on behalf of the XYZ Consortium.” However, consortium membership does not automatically confer authorship unless individual criteria are fulfilled. A complete list of consortium members and their roles should be provided in the Acknowledgments or Supplementary Materials.

Deceased authors

If an author passes away before or during the publication process, their contributions may still be recognized provided they met authorship criteria prior to death. In such cases:

  • The corresponding author must inform the Editorial Office
  • Contribution of the deceased author must be verified by co-authors
  • A note acknowledging the contribution will be included in the published article

If the deceased author was the corresponding author, another qualified co-author must assume responsibility for correspondence with the journal.

Changes to authorship

Authorship is considered a formal declaration at the time of submission. Any changes—including addition, removal, or rearrangement of authors—must be carefully justified and approved by all listed authors. Changes are permitted only during the editorial process before acceptance and require:

  • Written consent from all authors
  • A formal explanation for the modification
  • Submission of an authorship change request form

Post-acceptance changes are strongly discouraged and may result in publication delays. After publication, any authorship modification requires issuance of a formal correction notice. IBN reserves the right to request documentary evidence supporting authorship claims at any stage of the publication process.

Authorship disputes

IBN follows COPE guidelines in addressing authorship disputes, whether they arise before publication, during review, or after publication. The journal does not function as an arbiter of institutional or interpersonal authorship conflicts. When disputes arise:

  • The Editorial office encourages resolution among authors
  • If unresolved, the matter may be referred to affiliated institutions
  • Final adjudication rests with institutional authorities or governing bodies

The journal may revise authorship listings only when officially instructed by an authorized institution or ethics committee. Importantly, authorship disputes alone do not typically justify retraction unless the validity of the scientific findings is compromised.

Ethical integrity and authorship accountability

Authorship in Integrative Bioscience Nexus is fundamentally linked to scientific responsibility. Every author is accountable not only for their individual contribution but also for the integrity of the entire published work. This includes responsibility for:

  • Data accuracy and reproducibility
  • Ethical compliance in research design and execution
  • Transparency in reporting methods and results
  • Proper acknowledgment of contributions and funding sources

Artificial Intelligence (AI) policy

IBN recognizes the increasing role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Generative AI tools in academic research and scientific communication. While such tools may assist in certain aspects of manuscript preparation, their use must remain transparent, responsible, and strictly limited to non-intellectual contributions. AI tools may be used to support language editing, grammar correction, formatting, data organization, or code refinement. However, they must not be used to generate scientific hypotheses, interpret research findings, fabricate data, or produce core intellectual content of the manuscript. Scientific reasoning, analysis, and conclusions must remain the sole responsibility of the human authors.

Authors are required to disclose any use of AI tools in the preparation of their manuscript. This disclosure should include the name of the tool, version (if available), and the specific purpose for which it was used. Such disclosure ensures transparency and allows editors and reviewers to assess the integrity of the submitted work. AI systems cannot be credited as authors or co-authors under any circumstances, as authorship requires accountability, intellectual ownership, and the ability to take responsibility for the content of the manuscript. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of all content, including any portions assisted by AI tools. They must carefully review and verify all AI-generated outputs to ensure compliance with ethical, legal, and scientific standards.

The journal reserves the right to request additional information regarding AI usage and may reject or retract manuscripts where AI-generated content is found to compromise scientific validity, transparency, or ethical integrity.

Plagiarism, data fabrication, and image manipulation

IBN maintains a strict zero-tolerance policy toward all forms of plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, and inappropriate image manipulation. These practices are considered serious violations of publication ethics and research integrity and are not acceptable under any circumstances. Plagiarism includes the direct or indirect use of text, ideas, figures, tables, datasets, or intellectual output from other sources without proper attribution. This also includes self-plagiarism, where authors reuse substantial portions of their previously published work without appropriate citation or justification. All submitted manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection systems, and any overlap beyond acceptable thresholds is subject to editorial investigation.

Data fabrication refers to the creation of data that were never obtained through actual experimentation or observation, while data falsification involves the selective modification, omission, or alteration of research data to misrepresent findings. Both practices compromise the validity of scientific conclusions and undermine trust in the scholarly record. Image manipulation is only acceptable when it does not alter the scientific interpretation of the data. Acceptable adjustments include uniform changes to brightness, contrast, or color balance, provided they do not obscure, enhance, or eliminate specific information. Unacceptable manipulation includes splicing images without disclosure, selective enhancement of features, or removal of data points or experimental evidence. Authors may be required to provide original raw data, unprocessed images, and laboratory records during the editorial review process or after publication. Failure to provide such evidence when requested may result in rejection, correction, or retraction of the manuscript.

Research involving human subjects

All research involving human participants, human tissues, human biological materials, or identifiable human data must comply with internationally recognized ethical standards, including the Declaration of Helsinki and applicable national and institutional regulations. Prior approval from a recognized Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee is mandatory before the commencement of the study. Manuscripts must clearly state the name of the approving body, approval reference number, and date of approval. Studies lacking documented ethical approval will not be considered for publication.

Informed consent must be obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study. Consent must be voluntary, informed, and appropriately documented. For studies involving minors or vulnerable populations, consent must be obtained from legal guardians or authorized representatives in accordance with applicable regulations. Authors must ensure that participant confidentiality and privacy are strictly protected. Any identifying information, including images, clinical data, or personal identifiers, must be anonymized unless explicit written consent for publication has been obtained. For non-interventional studies such as surveys or observational research, ethical approval is still required unless a formal exemption is granted by the relevant ethics committee. Authors must clearly justify such exemptions in the manuscript.

The journal reserves the right to request supporting documentation, including consent forms and ethics approval certificates, during editorial review or post-publication evaluation.

Registration of clinical trials

IBN requires prospective registration of all clinical trials in publicly accessible, recognized trial registries as a condition for publication consideration. This policy aligns with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) requirements and aims to promote transparency, accountability, and reproducibility in clinical research. A clinical trial is defined as any study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of participants to one or more interventions, with or without control groups, to evaluate health-related outcomes. This definition includes randomized controlled trials as well as other interventional study designs involving allocation to treatment or comparison groups.

Clinical trials must be registered in an approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov, the European Union Clinical Trials Register, or any registry listed in the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). Registration must occur prior to or at the time of first participant enrollment. Manuscripts must include the trial registration number, registry name, and date of registration within the Materials and Methods section or Institutional Review Board Statement. Failure to provide valid prospective registration may result in rejection without peer review.

Observational studies, including cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional designs, are generally exempt from mandatory trial registration. However, the editorial office may recommend registration in certain cases to enhance transparency and methodological rigor. In addition to registration, randomized clinical trials must comply with recognized reporting standards such as CONSORT guidelines, including submission of a completed CONSORT checklist and flow diagram where applicable.

Research involving the use of animals in research

All research involving animals must be conducted in accordance with internationally accepted ethical principles and regulatory frameworks governing animal welfare. Integrative Bioscience Nexus requires that animal studies demonstrate strong scientific justification and adherence to ethical standards that minimize harm and maximize scientific value. Authors must obtain prior approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or equivalent ethics review body before conducting animal experiments. The manuscript must include a clear statement specifying the name of the approving committee, approval number, and date of authorization.

Animal research must follow the principles of the 3Rs framework: Replacement of animals with alternative methods wherever possible, Reduction in the number of animals used to the minimum necessary for statistically valid results, and Refinement of experimental procedures to minimize pain, distress, and suffering. Manuscripts must provide detailed information on animal species, strain, sex, age, housing conditions, feeding, anesthesia protocols, analgesia, and humane endpoints. Any deviation from standard welfare practices must be scientifically justified and ethically approved.

Studies involving client-owned animals must include documented informed consent from owners, and must ensure that veterinary care standards are maintained throughout the study. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all procedures comply with national legislation and institutional guidelines. The journal endorses the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research and may require submission of an ARRIVE checklist. Manuscripts that fail to meet ethical standards for animal welfare or reporting transparency may be rejected at any stage of review.

Research involving cell lines

Research involving established or newly developed cell lines must adhere to strict standards of transparency, traceability, and ethical compliance. Authors are required to clearly state the origin, source, and authentication status of all cell lines used in the study within the Materials and Methods section. For commercially available or widely recognized cell lines, authors must provide appropriate references to the original publication or supplier. For cell lines obtained from other laboratories, documentation confirming transfer agreements or permissions should be included where applicable. Newly established or genetically modified cell lines must be fully described, including derivation methods and validation procedures.

Where human-derived cell lines are used, ethical approval from a recognized Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee must be obtained, and evidence of informed consent from donors must be provided when applicable. The journal reserves the right to request documentation confirming ethical compliance during peer review or post-publication review. Cell line authentication is strongly recommended to prevent misidentification or cross-contamination. Authors are encouraged to use recognized methods such as short tandem repeat (STR) profiling and should indicate authentication status and passage number at the time of experimentation. Any research involving cell lines must ensure compliance with applicable biosafety and bioethics regulations. Manuscripts that fail to provide sufficient detail regarding origin, authentication, or ethical approval may be rejected or returned for revision.

Research involving plants

Research involving plants, including cultivated species, wild populations, genetically modified organisms, and rare or endangered species, must comply with relevant national and international biodiversity, conservation, and biosafety regulations. Authors must provide detailed information on plant material sources, including scientific names, voucher specimen identifiers (where applicable), and geographic origin with precise collection details such as coordinates, habitat description, and collection date. For field-collected specimens, compliance with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), where applicable, must be ensured.

Voucher specimens should be deposited in recognized herbaria or institutional repositories to allow future verification and reproducibility. For rare or protected species where collection is restricted, authors must clearly justify any exemptions and provide appropriate permits or ethical approvals. Studies involving genetically modified plants must include details of genetic constructs, transformation methods, and biosafety approvals from relevant regulatory authorities. Any potential ecological risks associated with field release or environmental exposure must be explicitly addressed. Authors must ensure that plant research does not involve illegal collection, trade, or exploitation of protected species. The journal reserves the right to request supporting documentation such as collection permits, herbarium records, or institutional approvals.

Dual-use research of concern

Dual-use research of concern (DURC) refers to scientific work that is intended for beneficial purposes but could potentially be misapplied to pose risks to public health, agriculture, the environment, or national and global security. Integrative Bioscience Nexus recognizes the importance of balancing scientific advancement with responsible oversight of sensitive research areas. Authors are required to clearly identify and disclose any research that may fall under dual-use considerations at the time of submission. Such disclosures should be included in both the cover letter and manuscript, outlining the potential risks and the measures taken to mitigate them.

Examples of dual-use concerns may include, but are not limited to, research involving highly pathogenic organisms, genetic modification with enhanced virulence or transmissibility, synthetic biology applications, or studies with potential military or biosecurity implications. Manuscripts identified as DURC will undergo additional editorial scrutiny and may be subject to specialized peer review. The journal will evaluate whether the potential benefits of the research outweigh the risks associated with misuse or unintended consequences. Authors must confirm compliance with all applicable national and international laws, institutional biosafety regulations, and export control requirements. Failure to disclose dual-use potential may result in rejection or post-publication action.

Sex and gender in research

Integrative Bioscience Nexus strongly encourages the integration of sex and gender considerations into all relevant areas of biological and biomedical research to ensure scientific rigor, reproducibility, and inclusivity. Authors should clearly distinguish between sex (biological attributes such as chromosomes, hormones, and anatomy) and gender (socially and culturally constructed roles, behaviors, and identities). Proper use of these terms is essential to avoid conceptual ambiguity and misinterpretation of findings.

Where applicable, study designs should incorporate sex as a biological variable, ensuring balanced representation of male and female subjects or clearly justifying any exclusions. Data should be disaggregated by sex and/or gender whenever possible, and statistical analyses should assess sex- or gender-based differences where relevant. Manuscripts should explicitly state whether sex and/or gender was considered in the study design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. If such analysis was not performed, authors must provide a scientific justification in the Discussion section. Failure to account for sex and gender dimensions where relevant may limit the scientific validity of the study. The journal encourages authors to consult the SAGER (Sex and Gender Equity in Research) guidelines to ensure best practices in reporting.

Borders and territories

IBN maintains a neutral stance regarding jurisdictional claims, territorial disputes, and geopolitical boundaries in all published content. The journal is committed to ensuring that scholarly communication remains focused on scientific merit and evidence-based research, without being influenced by political considerations. Authors are responsible for ensuring that any references to geographic locations, maps, institutional affiliations, or territorial descriptions are presented in a neutral and academically appropriate manner. The journal does not endorse or take positions on disputed territories, sovereign claims, or boundary delineations, regardless of how such regions are represented in submitted manuscripts.

When presenting maps or spatial data, authors must ensure that all representations are scientifically justified and appropriately sourced. Any potentially sensitive geographic depictions should be clearly labeled, and where necessary, accompanied by disclaimers clarifying that the representation does not imply political endorsement. Institutional affiliations must reflect the official naming conventions of the authors’ organizations, while maintaining neutrality in cases where geopolitical sensitivities exist. The Editorial Office reserves the right to request modifications to geographic references or institutional descriptors to maintain consistency with international publishing standards. This policy ensures that scientific discourse remains inclusive, unbiased, and focused on research integrity, while respecting the diversity of the global research community.

Potential conflicts of interest

Core principles and ethical foundation

IBN is committed to maintaining the highest standards of transparency, objectivity, and scientific integrity in scholarly publishing. The journal fully aligns with the principles of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ensuring that all published research is free from undue influence, bias, or undisclosed competing interests. A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary research goal—such as the validity of research or the integrity of data—may be influenced or perceived to be influenced by secondary interests. These secondary interests may be financial, institutional, personal, ideological, or professional in nature. The existence of a conflict of interest does not automatically invalidate research; however, failure to disclose such conflicts undermines transparency and may compromise the credibility of the scientific record. IBN therefore requires full and proactive disclosure of all potential conflicts by authors, reviewers, and editors. The journal strongly emphasizes that scientific independence must be preserved at all stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis, interpretation, and publication. Authors must retain full autonomy over their data and publication decisions without restriction from funding bodies or sponsoring organizations.

Independence from study sponsors

IBN adopts the ICMJE principle that researchers must avoid entering into agreements with sponsors—whether commercial, governmental, or non-profit—that limit their access to data or restrict their ability to independently analyze, interpret, or publish research findings. All authors must ensure that:

  • They have full access to all relevant data used in the study
  • They retain the right to analyze and interpret data independently
  • They are free to publish results regardless of sponsor preferences or outcomes
  • No contractual obligations restrict publication timelines or findings

Any deviation from these principles may result in manuscript rejection or post-publication investigation. The integrity of scientific communication requires that authors remain fully independent of external influence in all scholarly decisions.

Definition and scope of conflicts of interest

IBN recognizes that conflicts of interest may arise in both obvious and subtle forms. Authors are required to disclose any situation that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their research outcomes or interpretation.

  • Financial conflicts of interest

Financial conflicts include, but are not limited to:

  • Employment or consultancy relationships with relevant organizations
  • Research grants or funding from commercial or non-commercial entities
  • Stock ownership, equity interests, or shareholding in companies related to the subject matter
  • Honoraria, speaker fees, or travel reimbursements
  • Paid expert testimony or advisory roles
  • Patent ownership, licensing agreements, or intellectual property interests
  • Royalties or commercial benefits derived from published findings

Even indirect financial interests that may benefit from the publication of results must be declared.

  • Non-financial conflicts of interest

Non-financial conflicts may be equally important and include:

  • Personal relationships (family, close friendship, or mentorship ties)
  • Professional competition or rivalry between researchers or institutions
  • Academic affiliations that may influence interpretation of results
  • Ideological, political, or religious beliefs that may affect objectivity
  • Intellectual passion or commitment to a specific hypothesis or theory

These conflicts must also be disclosed if they could reasonably be perceived as influencing research outcomes.

  • Institutional and collaborative conflicts

Conflicts may arise when authors are affiliated with organizations that have a direct or indirect interest in the research outcome. This includes collaborations with industry partners, governmental agencies, or NGOs that may benefit from the study results. All institutional relationships that could be perceived as influencing the study must be transparently disclosed.

Role of funding sources

Transparency regarding funding is a core requirement of IBN’s publication ethics framework. Authors must clearly describe the role of funding bodies in all aspects of the research process.

Specifically, authors must disclose whether funders had any involvement in:

  • Study design and conceptualization
  • Data collection and management
  • Statistical analysis and interpretation
  • Manuscript writing and editorial decisions
  • Decision to submit or publish the work

If funders had no involvement in any of these stages, authors must explicitly state:

“The funding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.”

This statement is required to ensure clarity and eliminate ambiguity regarding sponsor influence.

Disclosure requirements and submission process

All authors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest at the time of manuscript submission. This can be completed through:

  • The journal’s online submission system
  • Standardized conflict of interest disclosure forms
  • A dedicated “Conflicts of Interest” section within the manuscript

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have provided complete and accurate disclosures. Any omission or misrepresentation of conflicts may lead to editorial action, including rejection, correction, or retraction. The conflict of interest statement must be placed in a separate section of the manuscript immediately before the reference list to ensure visibility and transparency.

Standard disclosure statements

To maintain consistency and clarity, IBN recommends standardized wording for conflict of interest declarations.

  • When conflicts exist

Example:

“Conflicts of Interest: Author A has received research grants from Company A. Author B has received speaker honoraria from Company X and holds stocks in Company Y. Author C has served as a consultant and expert witness for Company Z. Author D is an inventor on patent X related to the subject of this work.”

This format ensures transparency regarding the nature and source of potential bias.

  • When no conflicts exist

If no conflicts are present, authors must explicitly declare:

“Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

A positive declaration is required even in the absence of competing interests to confirm that disclosure has been considered.

Editorial and reviewer conflicts of interest

The principles of conflict disclosure extend beyond authors to include reviewers and editors. Individuals involved in the peer review process must disclose any circumstances that may influence their impartiality. Editors and reviewers must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts if they:

  • Have recent or ongoing collaborations with the authors
  • Belong to the same institution as the authors
  • Have personal, financial, or academic relationships with the authors
  • Hold competing intellectual or commercial interests in the research topic

Failure to disclose conflicts may result in removal from the editorial process or reassignment of responsibilities. IBN enforces strict confidentiality in managing such situations to protect the integrity of peer review.

Tobacco industry and sensitive funding policies

IBN acknowledges the importance of publishing research in areas related to public health, including smoking cessation and harm reduction. However, the journal maintains a strict ethical boundary regarding funding sources. Manuscripts that are partially or fully funded by the tobacco industry will not be considered for publication, regardless of scientific merit. This policy is consistent with global ethical publishing standards aimed at minimizing conflicts of interest in public health research. For other industries, including pharmaceutical, food, biotechnology, or chemical sectors, authors must clearly disclose the role of funding organizations in study design, execution, analysis, and publication decisions. Transparency in funding relationships is essential to allow readers to evaluate potential biases in the interpretation of research findings.

Evaluation and editorial oversight

Declared conflicts of interest are carefully reviewed by the editorial team during the submission process. Where necessary, editors may request additional clarification, supporting documentation, or revised declarations. The presence of a conflict of interest does not automatically disqualify a manuscript from publication. Instead, it is assessed in relation to:

  • The magnitude of the conflict
  • Its relevance to the study subject
  • The transparency of disclosure
  • The robustness of the study design and methodology

Where conflicts are deemed to significantly compromise objectivity, the manuscript may be rejected or subject to additional independent review.

Intellectual property (copyright, patent, and licensing)

IBN supports the principles of open science and equitable access to scholarly knowledge. All articles published in the journal are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, unless otherwise specified. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, adaptation, and reproduction in any medium, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors and source. Authors retain copyright of their work while granting the publisher a non-exclusive license to publish and disseminate the article. This model ensures both author ownership and maximum visibility of published research.

Authors must ensure that all submitted materials are original or that appropriate permissions have been obtained for any third-party content, including figures, tables, datasets, or textual excerpts. It is the responsibility of authors to secure written permission from copyright holders when required and to properly acknowledge reused material. In cases where research results may be subject to patent protection, authors are responsible for addressing intellectual property considerations prior to publication. The journal does not delay publication due to pending patent applications, and authors must ensure that intellectual property rights are resolved in advance. Any potential licensing restrictions imposed by funding bodies must be disclosed at the time of submission. Exceptions to CC BY 4.0 licensing may be considered only under exceptional circumstances and at the discretion of the publisher.

Citation policies

Proper citation practices are fundamental to scholarly integrity and the accurate attribution of intellectual contributions. Integrative Bioscience Nexus requires authors to ensure that all sources of data, ideas, text, and methodologies are appropriately acknowledged through accurate and transparent citation. Authors must cite original sources rather than secondary or derivative works whenever possible. Copying references from other publications without consulting the original sources is strictly discouraged, as it increases the risk of propagating errors and misinterpretations.

Excessive self-citation, citation stacking, or preferential citation of colleagues, institutions, or journals is considered unethical and may result in editorial action. Citations must be included only when they are scientifically relevant and directly support the content being discussed. Direct quotations from published works must be clearly indicated using quotation marks and properly referenced. This requirement applies equally to an author’s own previously published work to prevent self-plagiarism.

Citation manipulation, including coordinated citation practices intended to artificially inflate metrics, is strictly prohibited. The journal follows COPE guidelines in identifying and addressing such behavior. Editors and reviewers may assess citation quality and relevance during peer review, and authors may be asked to revise manuscripts where citation practices are deemed inappropriate or insufficiently rigorous.

Biologica Aid Limited research data policies

Biologica Aid Limited is committed to promoting transparency, reproducibility, and long-term accessibility of scientific data across all journals, including IBN. The publisher strongly supports open scientific exchange and encourages authors to share the underlying data that support their research findings whenever ethically and legally permissible. Authors are expected to ensure that all datasets associated with their work are managed in accordance with the FAIR principles—Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. This includes raw data, processed data, statistical code, software scripts, experimental protocols, and any supplementary materials required to validate or replicate the study outcomes.

Whenever possible, authors should deposit their datasets in recognized, trusted public repositories that provide stable identifiers such as DOIs. Examples include discipline-specific repositories or institutional data archives that guarantee long-term preservation. Where public sharing is not possible due to ethical, privacy, or legal constraints, authors must clearly state the reason in a Data Availability Statement and indicate how qualified researchers may request access. Biologica Aid Limited encourages data citation as an integral component of scholarly communication. Datasets should be cited in the reference list with sufficient detail to ensure traceability and attribution. Authors are also encouraged to retain original data for a minimum period following publication, typically no less than five years, to support post-publication verification or replication requests.

The publisher reserves the right to request underlying data during peer review or post-publication review to verify research integrity. Failure to provide requested data without justified reasons may result in rejection, correction, or retraction.

Ethical guidelines for reviewers and editors

IBN, published by Biologica Aid Limited, upholds a rigorous, transparent, and ethically grounded peer review system aligned with internationally recognized publication ethics standards, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. All participants in the editorial and peer review process—including Editors-in-Chief, Section Editors, Editorial Board Members, Guest Editors, Managing Editors, and reviewers—share collective responsibility for safeguarding the scientific integrity, transparency, and credibility of the journal. The editorial process is designed to ensure that all submitted manuscripts are evaluated fairly, objectively, and confidentially, with decisions based solely on scientific merit, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Responsibility for ethical oversight in peer review

All individuals involved in the peer review process are required to actively participate in maintaining ethical standards throughout manuscript evaluation. If any editor or reviewer identifies a potential ethical concern—whether during initial review, peer evaluation, or after publication—they must promptly notify the Editorial Office. Such concerns may include issues related to data integrity, authorship disputes, plagiarism, ethical approval, image manipulation, or undisclosed conflicts of interest. The Editorial Office will investigate all reported concerns in accordance with COPE guidelines and the journal’s internal policies. Investigations are conducted in a structured and confidential manner, ensuring fairness to all parties involved. Where necessary, the Editorial Office may consult independent experts or institutional representatives to assist in resolving complex ethical cases. Decisions arising from such investigations are guided by principles of fairness, transparency, and scientific accountability.

Editorial screening and integrity checks

Before and during peer review, all submissions undergo multiple layers of editorial screening conducted by Managing Editors and Assistant Editors. These checks are intended to identify potential ethical or procedural issues at an early stage. Reviewers and editors are encouraged to reinforce this process by reporting any concerns that may not have been detected during initial screening. Editorial checks typically include verification of ethical approval for studies involving human participants, animals, or cell lines; confirmation of clinical trial registration where applicable; and assessment of compliance with relevant reporting standards. Manuscripts are also screened for plagiarism, redundant publication, improper data presentation, and missing permissions for copyrighted material such as figures, tables, or datasets. Where concerns arise, the manuscript may be returned to authors for clarification or subjected to additional investigation prior to peer review progression.

Responsibilities in editorial decision-making

When evaluating manuscripts, reviewers and editors are expected to base their recommendations strictly on academic merit, methodological soundness, originality, and relevance to the scope of IBN. Personal opinions, institutional affiliations, or external influences must not affect editorial judgment. Editors and reviewers must ensure that manuscripts are assessed in a fair, consistent, and evidence-based manner. In particular, editors and reviewers should verify that:

  • Any potential conflicts of interest have been appropriately disclosed by authors.
  • The research findings are presented accurately and interpreted objectively.
  • Methods and data are described in sufficient detail to allow reproducibility.
  • The submission aligns with the scientific scope and thematic focus of the journal.
  • Peer review feedback is constructive, evidence-based, and scientifically justified.

Decisions must be made independently and without undue influence from authors, institutions, funding bodies, or external stakeholders.

Conflict of interest in peer review and editorial processes

IBN maintains a strict policy requiring full disclosure of any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest. All participants in the editorial workflow must assess whether their professional, personal, or financial relationships could compromise—or appear to compromise—the objectivity of the review process. Conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to, personal relationships with authors, institutional affiliations, ongoing collaborations, competitive research interests, or financial ties to organizations that may benefit from the publication or rejection of a manuscript. Financial conflicts may involve employment, consultancy, funding, stock ownership, honoraria, patent rights, or other commercial interests. Non-financial conflicts may include academic competition, ideological positions, or personal biases. Where a conflict of interest exists, the concerned reviewer or editor must immediately recuse themselves from handling the manuscript. In such cases, the Editorial Office will assign alternative reviewers or editors with no conflicting interests to ensure an unbiased evaluation process. If an Editor submits a manuscript to the journal, the manuscript will be handled independently by another qualified editor with no involvement in the original decision-making process.

Confidentiality and data protection

Confidentiality is a fundamental principle of the IBN peer review system. All manuscripts, including abstracts, figures, tables, supplementary materials, and reviewer communications, are treated as strictly confidential documents. Editors and reviewers are prohibited from sharing, discussing, or disclosing manuscript content with unauthorized individuals. Reviewers must not distribute or use unpublished material for personal research or advantage. If assistance from a colleague or student is required to complete a review, prior approval must be obtained from the Editorial Office, and the contributing individual must also agree to maintain confidentiality. Manuscripts under review must not be uploaded to external platforms, databases, or artificial intelligence systems under any circumstances, as this may compromise confidentiality and violate ethical publishing standards. All editorial communications are similarly confidential and must not be disclosed or referenced without explicit permission from the Editorial Office.

Anonymity and peer review integrity

IBN employs a structured peer review system, which may include single-blind or double-blind review depending on the article type and editorial decision. Reviewers are expected to maintain anonymity throughout the review process and must avoid any disclosure of their identity within review reports, comments, or file metadata. Even in systems where reviewer identities may be revealed post-publication with consent, anonymity must be preserved during the evaluation phase to ensure impartiality. Reviewers are advised to carefully check document metadata to prevent accidental disclosure of identity. IBN also supports transparency initiatives, including the optional publication of peer review reports alongside accepted manuscripts. However, reviewer names are only disclosed after publication and only with explicit consent. This approach ensures a balance between transparency in scientific communication and protection of reviewer integrity.

Ethical conduct and professional standards

Editors and reviewers are expected to uphold the highest standards of professionalism, objectivity, and scientific integrity. Evaluations must be conducted respectfully, avoiding discriminatory, biased, or unconstructive language. The journal strongly discourages any form of discrimination based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, disability, religion, or socioeconomic status. All feedback provided during peer review should focus on scientific content and methodological rigor rather than personal attributes of the authors. Constructive criticism is encouraged, provided it is evidence-based and contributes to improving the quality of the manuscript.

Handling ethical violations and misconduct

In cases where ethical misconduct is suspected—such as plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication, or manipulation of the peer review process—reviewers and editors are required to immediately report such concerns to the Editorial Office. The journal will initiate a formal investigation in accordance with COPE guidelines and internal procedures. Depending on the severity of the issue, actions may include requesting clarification from authors, rejecting the manuscript, notifying affiliated institutions, or retracting published work. The primary objective of such actions is to preserve the integrity of the scientific record.

Comments and complaints

IBN and Biologica Aid Limited are committed to maintaining transparency, accountability, and responsiveness in addressing concerns raised by authors, readers, reviewers, or institutions. The journal provides a structured mechanism for handling comments and complaints related to published content or editorial processes. Concerns should initially be directed to the corresponding author(s) for clarification or resolution. If issues cannot be resolved at this level, or if the nature of the concern involves ethical, scientific, or procedural misconduct, the matter may be escalated to the Editorial Office.

The Editorial Office will conduct a preliminary assessment of the complaint and, where necessary, initiate a formal investigation in accordance with COPE guidelines. This may involve consultation with the Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board members, independent experts, or relevant institutional authorities. All complaints are treated seriously and investigated objectively, regardless of the source or anonymity of the complainant. However, investigations must be supported by sufficient evidence to proceed. Frivolous, defamatory, or unsubstantiated claims may not be pursued further.

Outcomes of investigations may include no action, clarification, correction, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the severity and validity of the issue identified. All decisions are made with the primary objective of preserving the integrity of the scholarly record. Confidentiality is maintained throughout the process. Complainants may not receive detailed updates during ongoing investigations, but will be informed of the final outcome where appropriate.

Updating published papers

IBN, published by Biologica Aid Limited, is committed to maintaining the integrity, accuracy, and reliability of the scholarly record. The journal recognizes that despite rigorous peer review, editorial scrutiny, and production checks, published research may occasionally require post-publication modification. These modifications may arise due to honest errors, methodological clarifications, ethical concerns, or, in rare cases, serious scientific or legal issues that compromise the validity of the published record. IBN follows international best practices in scholarly publishing, including the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), to ensure that any updates to published articles are handled transparently, consistently, and responsibly. The overarching objective of this policy is to preserve the integrity of the scientific literature while ensuring that authors, readers, indexing databases, and the broader academic community are clearly informed about any post-publication changes. All updates to published papers are carried out with a strong emphasis on transparency, traceability, and accountability. The Version of Record (VoR) remains the authoritative scientific record, but where necessary, it may be amended or accompanied by formal notices that describe the nature and reason for the changes.

Non-notified updates

Non-notified updates refer to minor editorial or technical modifications made directly to the published article without issuing a separate correction notice. These updates are only implemented in exceptional cases where the change does not affect the scientific interpretation, validity, or conclusions of the work. Such updates may include correction of typographical errors, formatting inconsistencies, metadata adjustments, author affiliation formatting, broken hyperlinks, or minor editorial inconsistencies introduced during production. These modifications are carefully assessed by the Editorial Office before implementation to ensure that they do not alter the scientific content or mislead readers. Once approved, the updated version of the article is republished on the journal website as the current Version of Record. All relevant indexing and abstracting databases are notified to ensure consistency across platforms. Although no formal correction notice is issued, a record of the update is maintained internally for editorial transparency and audit purposes. Non-notified updates are applied cautiously and only when the editorial team is fully satisfied that the scientific integrity of the article remains unaffected.

Corrections

Corrections are formal mechanisms used to address errors in published articles. IBN distinguishes between Minor Corrections and Major Corrections based on the severity and impact of the issue on the scientific content of the article.

  • Minor corrections

Minor corrections refer to amendments that do not alter the scientific findings, interpretation, or conclusions of the article. These may include small errors in data labeling, minor figure adjustments that do not change interpretation, author name spelling corrections, reference inaccuracies, or minor textual clarifications. When a minor correction is approved, the article is updated in the Version of Record, and a correction statement is added to the article’s backmatter or footnote. The PDF version is updated accordingly, with a clear indication that a correction has been made. However, no separate correction article is published in the journal issue. The goal of minor corrections is to ensure precision and clarity while maintaining continuity in the scholarly record. Although the scientific validity of the paper remains unchanged, transparency is ensured through visible documentation of the correction.

  • Major corrections

Major corrections are issued when errors or omissions significantly affect the interpretation, analysis, or conclusions of the published work. These may include substantial errors in data analysis, incorrect methodological descriptions, missing ethical approvals, or inaccuracies that could mislead readers or affect reproducibility. In such cases, the article is formally updated, and a separate correction notice is published in the journal. This notice is indexed and linked to the original article, clearly explaining the nature of the changes and the reasons for the correction. The corrected version of the article replaces the earlier version on the journal website, and a clear notice is displayed to indicate that the article has been updated. Major corrections are treated with high editorial priority, as they directly impact the scientific integrity of the published work. All indexing databases are promptly notified to ensure synchronization of corrected records across bibliographic systems.

Author name change policy

IBN recognizes that authors may request name changes after publication due to personal, cultural, legal, or identity-related reasons, including but not limited to changes related to gender identity, marital status, religious reasons, or other personal circumstances. Upon receiving a valid request, the journal will update the author’s name in the published article and associated metadata. The updated version will be redistributed to indexing and abstracting services to ensure consistency across bibliographic records. To protect author privacy, such updates are handled sensitively. No formal correction notice is issued, and co-authors are not notified unless the requesting author explicitly consents or institutional policy requires disclosure. The primary objective is to ensure accurate attribution while maintaining confidentiality and respect for author identity. The journal reserves the right to verify requests and may request supporting documentation in cases where identity changes affect scholarly attribution.

Retractions

Retractions are issued when a published article is found to contain serious flaws or ethical violations that invalidate its findings or compromise the integrity of the scientific record. Retractions may result from data fabrication, plagiarism, unethical research practices, serious methodological errors, duplicate publication, or other forms of scientific misconduct. IBN follows COPE retraction guidelines to ensure that retraction decisions are fair, transparent, and evidence-based. When a paper is retracted, it remains accessible on the journal website but is clearly marked with a “Retracted” watermark. A formal retraction notice is published and linked to the original article, explaining the reasons for retraction and ensuring transparency for readers. Importantly, retracted articles remain part of the scholarly record but are clearly identified as unreliable and should not be cited as valid scientific evidence. The original authorship and affiliation details are preserved to maintain transparency and traceability. In exceptional circumstances, complete removal of an article from the website and databases may occur. This is limited to cases such as legal directives, violations of privacy laws, unlawful research publication, or situations where continued availability poses serious risk to public health or safety. In such cases, only bibliographic metadata is retained, and the reason for removal is clearly documented.

Expression of concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when there are unresolved or ongoing investigations into a published article but insufficient evidence is available to warrant immediate correction or retraction. This notice serves as a temporary alert to readers, indicating that the reliability of the article is under review. It is linked directly to the original publication and clearly outlines the nature of the concerns and the status of ongoing investigations. Expressions of Concern are published to maintain transparency while ensuring that premature editorial decisions are avoided. Once investigations are completed, the notice may be replaced by a correction, retraction, or formal clarification depending on the outcome. Authors are typically informed prior to publication of such notices and are given an opportunity to respond within a defined timeframe.

Comments and replies

IBN supports post-publication scholarly dialogue through structured Comments and Replies. Readers who identify concerns regarding published work may submit a formal Comment to the Editorial Office. If the Comment is deemed scientifically valid and relevant, it may be peer-reviewed and considered for publication. Once a Comment is accepted for review, the authors of the original paper are invited to submit a Reply. The Reply provides an opportunity to address the concerns raised and clarify or defend the original findings. Both Comments and Replies undergo editorial assessment to ensure that they remain scientifically focused, constructive, and respectful. The journal ensures that discourse does not devolve into personal criticism and maintains a professional academic tone at all times. If concerns raised in a Comment are substantiated and cannot be adequately addressed by the authors, the journal may issue a correction or, in serious cases, a retraction of the original article. If authors fail to respond within the designated timeframe, the Comment may still be published with a note indicating the absence of a response.