Ethics for Editors
The Annals of Clinical Hypertension (ACH) requires editors to uphold the highest standards of ethical conduct in managing manuscripts, interacting with authors and reviewers, and safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record. These ethics principles align with international publishing standards established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
- Integrity in decision-making
- Impartiality and independence from bias
- Respect for confidentiality
- Accountability for editorial actions
1. Integrity and Impartiality
Editors must make decisions based solely on scholarly merit, originality, and relevance. Author identity, nationality, institutional affiliation, or personal characteristics must never influence editorial outcomes. Any potential bias—conscious or unconscious—must be actively recognized and mitigated.
2. Conflict of Interest Management
- Editors must disclose and avoid handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist.
- Manuscripts involving colleagues, co-authors, or research collaborators should be reassigned to an independent editor.
- Financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could influence editorial judgment must be declared transparently.
Editors are entrusted with confidential material. Manuscripts, reviewer identities, and editorial deliberations must not be disclosed outside the peer review process. Unpublished data must not be used for personal research or shared with third parties.
3. Ethical Oversight of Manuscripts
Editors must be vigilant in identifying potential ethical concerns in submitted manuscripts. This includes plagiarism, duplicate submission, inappropriate image manipulation, data fabrication, or questionable authorship practices. When concerns arise, editors should follow COPE flowcharts and consult with the editorial board as needed.
- Request clarifications or raw data from authors when needed.
- Pause the review process if ethical violations are suspected.
- Escalate confirmed issues to the Editor-in-Chief, who may issue corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern.
4. Transparency in Communication
Editors must communicate decisions clearly, respectfully, and promptly. Authors deserve transparent explanations regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection. Where manuscripts are rejected, feedback should be constructive, guiding authors toward improvement.
- Commercial interests, sponsorships, or institutional affiliations must not influence editorial decisions.
- Editors must resist pressure from stakeholders that could compromise integrity.
- Editorial judgment should remain aligned with ACH’s mission of advancing clinical hypertension knowledge.
5. Appeals, Complaints, and Disputes
Editors must ensure that a fair and transparent process exists for handling appeals and complaints. Authors may appeal decisions with supporting evidence, and complaints about editorial conduct will be investigated by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the board. All disputes must be managed respectfully, without retaliation or prejudice.
6. Accountability and Continuous Learning
Editors are accountable for their actions and decisions. They should maintain records of editorial communications and decisions for transparency. To remain effective, editors are encouraged to participate in training programs, attend workshops, and stay updated on emerging ethical standards in scholarly publishing.
The ethical obligations of editors safeguard not only the credibility of ACH but also the integrity of the wider scientific record. Upholding these standards ensures that clinical hypertension research is disseminated responsibly and ethically.