Ethical Standards for Authors
At the Annals of Clinical Hypertension, ethical conduct in research and scholarly communication is regarded as the cornerstone of scientific integrity. Authors who submit their work to our journal carry a shared responsibility to uphold these principles, ensuring that their research not only advances clinical knowledge but also reflects honesty, transparency, and accountability. This Ethical Standards for Authors policy outlines, in comprehensive detail, the expectations we place upon our authors and the obligations they must fulfill from manuscript conception through to post-publication.
Authors are expected to uphold universal standards of honesty, integrity, and respect for scholarly contributions. These principles are not optional but form the ethical framework upon which the legitimacy of the academic record rests. Breaches of these principles compromise not only individual reputations but also the collective trust in science and medicine.
Originality and Avoidance of Plagiarism
All manuscripts must represent original work. Authors must not present data, text, or ideas of others without proper attribution. Plagiarism, whether direct (copying word-for-word without citation), mosaic (borrowing phrases without quotation or acknowledgment), or self-plagiarism (reusing one’s prior work without disclosure), is unacceptable. Every submission undergoes a similarity check using iThenticate, and manuscripts with significant overlap (generally exceeding 20–25% similarity) are returned or rejected. Authors are responsible for ensuring proper paraphrasing, accurate citation, and transparency regarding previously published material.
Data Accuracy, Integrity, and Transparency
Authors must present accurate data without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation. This includes ensuring that numerical data, clinical outcomes, and statistical analyses are reported truthfully. Raw data must be retained for verification and made available upon request by editors or reviewers. Transparency extends to data availability statements, acknowledging limitations in datasets, and providing supplementary information to allow replication or secondary analysis.
Authorship Criteria and Contribution
Authorship confers both credit and responsibility. The journal follows the criteria of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which require that all listed authors have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. Each author must approve the final version and agree to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work. Honorary, guest, or gift authorship—where individuals are included without meeting these criteria—is strictly prohibited. Conversely, ghost authorship—where individuals who contributed are not listed—violates transparency standards. Corresponding authors must ensure full disclosure of contributions.
Acknowledgment of Sources and Prior Work
Proper acknowledgment of prior work is critical in situating new research within the existing body of knowledge. Authors are responsible for citing all sources that have influenced their study, including foundational theories, datasets, and previous studies, whether supportive or contradictory. Failure to acknowledge relevant prior work misrepresents the scholarly context and diminishes the credibility of the manuscript.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Conflicts of interest—whether financial, institutional, personal, or professional—must be fully disclosed at the time of submission. Common conflicts include funding from commercial entities, consultancy roles, stock ownership, or personal relationships with individuals who may benefit from the research. Full transparency allows editors and readers to assess the potential influence of such interests on the research’s integrity. Failure to disclose conflicts undermines trust and may result in corrective action.
Funding Transparency
All sources of funding must be explicitly stated, including grants, institutional support, industry sponsorships, or philanthropic contributions. Funding disclosures help ensure transparency in how research was supported and prevent perceptions of hidden influence. Where no funding was received, this should also be clearly stated.
Research involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and secure approval from an institutional ethics review board. Authors must confirm that participants provided informed consent, and vulnerable populations must be afforded special protections. For clinical trials, registration in a recognized public registry is mandatory. Similarly, research involving animals must conform to internationally accepted welfare standards, minimizing harm and justifying the necessity of animal use. Manuscripts must clearly state ethical approval identifiers and compliance statements.
Clinical Trial and Patient Data Reporting
Authors reporting clinical trials must include trial registration details, CONSORT-compliant reporting, and ethical approval identifiers. Patient data must be anonymized to preserve confidentiality. Explicit patient consent is required if identifiable information is included. Data reporting must not exaggerate or selectively omit outcomes, as such practices distort evidence and can mislead clinical practice.
Duplicate and Redundant Publication
Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals concurrently, or fragmenting results across multiple papers without clear justification (“salami slicing”), is prohibited. Authors must disclose related manuscripts, whether published, in press, or under review elsewhere. Duplicate publication wastes editorial resources and pollutes the scholarly record with redundant information. Translations of previously published work must be identified as such and accompanied by appropriate permissions.
Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Duties
Authors remain accountable for their published work even after publication. If errors are discovered—whether minor (e.g., typographical errors) or major (e.g., incorrect data interpretation)—authors must promptly notify the editorial office so that corrections or retractions can be issued. Authors must cooperate with editors in investigating allegations of misconduct, responding to concerns, and maintaining the integrity of the journal’s record. Failure to comply may result in public corrections, retractions, or sanctions on future submissions.
Respect for Peer Review and Editorial Process
Authors must respect the confidentiality of peer review, not attempting to identify or influence reviewers. They must respond to reviewer comments constructively, addressing criticisms with evidence-based clarifications or revising manuscripts accordingly. Disrespectful, dismissive, or evasive responses to reviewers undermine the collaborative nature of peer review.
Authors are expected to ensure that their research design, reporting, and terminology respect cultural diversity and inclusivity. Research involving international populations must avoid bias, stereotyping, or misrepresentation. Respect for linguistic differences, cultural practices, and regional contexts enhances the global relevance of research in clinical hypertension.
Sanctions for Breaches
Breaches of authorial ethics—whether plagiarism, data falsification, or non-disclosure of conflicts—are taken seriously. Sanctions may include rejection of manuscripts, retraction of published work, notification of institutional authorities, and bans on future submissions. Authors are encouraged to be proactive in upholding standards rather than facing punitive measures.
Commitment to Continuous Improvement
Ethical standards are not static; they evolve alongside advances in research, publication technology, and societal expectations. The Annals of Clinical Hypertension periodically reviews and updates its authorial ethics policy, incorporating recommendations from COPE, ICMJE, and other international bodies. Authors are therefore encouraged to remain informed of these evolving standards.
Ultimately, the responsibility for ethical compliance lies with the authors themselves. While editors, reviewers, and publishers play roles in oversight, it is the authors who originate data, craft arguments, and present findings. Upholding the highest ethical standards is not merely a professional duty but a moral obligation to patients, fellow researchers, and society at large.
Contact for Clarification
For questions regarding specific ethical dilemmas or uncertainties in manuscript preparation, authors are encouraged to contact the editorial office. We are committed to providing guidance, ensuring fairness, and supporting authors in achieving the highest standards of scholarly integrity.