1. Introduction and Scope

This Publishing Policy sets out the standards, procedures, and ethical principles that govern the publication of scholarly work in the Journal of Medicine, Law & Public Health (JMLPH). It applies to all stakeholders involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, and the publisher.

The policy is designed to:

• Ensure the highest standards of research integrity, publication ethics, and editorial independence
• Provide clear guidance on author, reviewer, and editor responsibilities
• Protect the rights and interests of research participants, authors, and the academic community
• Maintain transparency, accountability, and compliance with applicable laws and professional standards
• Support open access to scientific knowledge

This policy is consistent with internationally recognised standards and guidance from:

• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
• World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
• American Medical Association (AMA) Manual of Style

2. About ARETION Publishing Group and JMLPH

2.1 Publisher Identity

The Journal of Medicine, Law & Public Health (JMLPH) is published by ARETION Publishing Group as of 2026, a subsidiary of ARETION & Company.

ARETION & Company operates through three principal subsidiaries:

• ARETION Informatics Solutions – providing health information technology, digital solutions, data platforms, data analytics, and technology-enabled consulting to healthcare organisations
• ARETION Publishing Group – producing healthcare publications, research, evidence synthesis, policy analysis, and knowledge dissemination to advance healthcare practice and policy
• ARETION Healthcare Consulting – delivering strategy consulting, operational improvement, workforce development, clinical pathway redesign, digital health implementation, and advisory services to healthcare providers, commissioners, and systems

2.2 Journal Mission and Scope

JMLPH publishes high-quality, peer-reviewed research at the intersection of medicine, law, and public health. The journal welcomes original research articles, reviews, case studies, policy analyses, and commentary that advance understanding of:

• Healthcare law and regulation
• Medical ethics and bioethics
• Public health law and policy
• Health systems governance
• Patient rights and healthcare access
• Legal and ethical aspects of medical practice
• Health equity and social determinants of health
• Global health law and comparative health systems

2.3 Editorial Independence

JMLPH maintains strict editorial independence. Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit, methodological quality, ethical standards, and relevance to the journal's scope. The journal does not accept advertising of any kind and is free from commercial influence.

ARETION Publishing Group supports the editorial team but does not interfere with editorial decisions. The Editor-in-Chief and editorial board retain full autonomy over content, peer review, and publication decisions.

3. Legal and Regulatory Framework

3.1 Primary Jurisdiction: United Kingdom

ARETION Publishing Group and JMLPH operate under the laws of England and Wales as the primary legal framework. This includes compliance with:

• UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and Data Protection Act 2018
• Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
• Equality Act 2010
• Human Rights Act 1998
• Defamation Act 2013
• Computer Misuse Act 1990
• Common law principles governing contract, tort, and intellectual property

All contractual relationships, disputes, and legal obligations relating to JMLPH and ARETION Publishing Group are governed by UK law unless otherwise specified.

3.2 Gulf Region Context

JMLPH operates internationally and works with authors, reviewers, editors, and institutions in the Gulf region, including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Oman.

The journal recognises and respects applicable legal, ethical, and professional frameworks in Gulf countries, including:

Saudi Arabia

• Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL)
• National research ethics regulations and guidelines
• Healthcare regulatory requirements of the Ministry of Health and Saudi Commission for Health Specialties

United Arab Emirates

• Federal Decree-Law No. 45 of 2021 on Protection of Personal Data
• Federal Law No. 2 of 2015 (Commercial Companies Law)
• Healthcare regulations of the Ministry of Health and Prevention, Dubai Health Authority, and Department of Health (Abu Dhabi)

Qatar

• Law No. 13 of 2016 on Cybercrime
• Personal Data Privacy Law
• Healthcare regulations of the Ministry of Public Health

Kuwait

• Law No. 20 of 2014 on Electronic Transactions
• Healthcare regulations of the Ministry of Health

3.3 Harmonisation and Compliance

Where research involves multiple jurisdictions, authors must:

• Clearly indicate the jurisdiction(s) in which research was conducted
• Confirm compliance with applicable ethics approvals, data protection laws, and regulatory requirements in all relevant jurisdictions
• Describe any jurisdiction-specific constraints on data sharing, publication, or participant consent

The journal seeks to harmonise UK and Gulf region requirements whilst prioritising:

• Participant safety and privacy
• Research integrity and transparency
• Compliance with applicable law in the jurisdiction(s) where research was conducted

Where conflicts arise between jurisdictional requirements, the journal will seek legal and ethical advice and may adjust publication, anonymisation, or correction strategies to manage risk whilst maintaining transparency.

4. Open Access, Publication Charges, and Copyright

4.1 Open Access Policy

JMLPH promotes unrestricted access to scientific research and encourages authors to publish under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. Users may read, download, distribute, copy, and link to full-text articles with proper attribution. The journal publishes articles continuously on its website.

4.2 Publication Charge Policy

For articles submitted before 1 June 2026

JMLPH does not charge:

• Publication fees
• Submission charges
• Peer review fees
• Article Processing Charges (APCs)

For articles submitted on or after 1 June 2026

JMLPH does not charge submission or peer review fees. However, a publication charge of £70 will apply to accepted articles only. Authors will be notified of this charge upon acceptance and before final publication.

Exemptions from publication charges:

Authors associated with institutions and academic bodies wishing to be exempt from publication charges are encouraged to contact the editorial office at publishing@aretion.co.uk to discuss agreements and partnerships.

Authors affiliated with institutions in low-income and lower-middle-income countries, as classified by the World Bank, are automatically exempt from publication charges. The journal will verify country classification at the time of acceptance based on the World Bank's current income classification list.

To claim an exemption, corresponding authors should:

• Indicate their country affiliation clearly in the manuscript
• Contact the editorial office (Editorial.Board@JMLPH.net) upon acceptance if clarification is needed

This approach aims to maintain financial sustainability whilst minimising barriers for authors, particularly those from resource-constrained settings.

4.3 Copyright and Licensing

Authors retain copyright to their work and grant JMLPH the right of first publication and the right to share, reproduce, and distribute the work worldwide without fees.

Under the CC BY 4.0 licence, authors and users may:

• Share: copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt: remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial uses

These freedoms cannot be revoked if licence terms are followed. Users must:

• Provide appropriate credit and a link to the licence and indicate changes, without implying endorsement by the licensor
• Refrain from adding legal or technological restrictions that limit others from using the material as permitted by the licence

Authors must avoid unlawful or offensive content. By following CC BY 4.0, JMLPH aligns with open-access principles and promotes broad accessibility and impact.

4.4 Permissions and Third-Party Content

When authors include material (figures, tables, text excerpts) previously published elsewhere or owned by third parties, they must:

• Obtain all necessary permissions from copyright holders
• Clearly attribute the original source
• Provide evidence of permissions upon request
• Ensure the majority of the manuscript is original work

5. Editorial and Archiving Policies

5.1 Editorial Policy and Ethical Framework

JMLPH upholds ethical conduct and scientific integrity, following ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. All parties involved are expected to comply with these standards. JMLPH does not accept advertising of any kind and maintains strict editorial independence from commercial interests.

5.2 Editorial Governance

Editor-in-Chief

• Holds final responsibility for all editorial decisions
• Ensures compliance with publication ethics and policies
• Manages the editorial board and peer review process
• Maintains editorial independence

Editorial Board

• Provides expert guidance on journal scope and standards
• Handles manuscripts in their areas of expertise
• Supports the peer review process
• Upholds publication ethics

Editorial Office

• Manages submissions, correspondence, and production workflow
• Ensures compliance with policies and procedures
• Maintains confidentiality and data protection

5.3 Archiving and Preservation

To ensure long-term preservation and accessibility, JMLPH uses:

1. LOCKSS – distributed preservation across multiple servers to maintain perpetual access
2. CLOCKSS – a community-governed dark archive, making content openly available if it becomes unavailable from the publisher
3. Internet Archive – an additional public digital repository
4. Open Journal Systems (OJS) – to manage submissions, peer review, publication workflows, and metadata, facilitating indexing and archiving
5. Comprehensive Metadata (authors, dates, licensing, identifiers) – to enhance discoverability

The journal is indexed with SherpaRomeo for repository policy transparency.

Publisher Continuity: In the unlikely event that ARETION Publishing Group ceases operation or JMLPH is discontinued, all published content will remain publicly accessible through the LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, and Internet Archive systems. ARETION & Company commits to ensuring continuity of access and, where possible, transferring the journal to a successor publisher with equivalent ethical and archiving standards.

6. Originality, Authorship, and Affiliations

6.1 Originality and Reporting Standards

Submissions must:

• Be original, not previously published or under review elsewhere
• Report methods and findings accurately, with sufficient detail for reproducibility
• Avoid overstatement or misinterpretation of results

6.2 Authorship Criteria and Contributions

Each author must have:

• Made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research
• Approved the final version for publication
• Accepted responsibility and ability to publicly defend the work

Additional points:

• A contribution statement may specify individual roles, following ICMJE recommendations
• Individuals not meeting authorship criteria should be acknowledged separately
• All co-authors and contributors must consent to submission

Authorship disputes may be the subject of a complaint regarding procedural fairness. If a complaint is upheld, the remedy is typically a fresh review by an independent editor, not an automatic acceptance or overturning of the scientific judgement.

6.3 Corresponding Author and Co-First Authors

The corresponding author:

• Oversees submission and compliance with JMLPH policies
• Confirms all authors agree on order and contributions
• Serves as main contact and responds promptly to queries after publication

Co-first authors may be designated; the basis for name order (e.g., seniority or alphabetical) should be explained on the first page.

6.4 Affiliations and Impartiality

Authors should include only essential affiliations directly relevant to the research:

• Primary institution (e.g., university, hospital, research institute)
• Department or unit, where applicable
• City, state/province, and country
• Multiple affiliations listed in order of relevance

To promote impartiality, do not include:

• Academic ranks (e.g., Professor)
• Professional memberships (e.g., fellowship titles)
• Managerial positions (e.g., Director, Chair)
• Honorary titles or non-institutional affiliations

If relevant to conflicts of interest, such details should appear only in the Conflicts of Interest section.

7. Handling Papers Authored by Editorial Board Members

7.1 Principles

JMLPH is committed to avoiding real or perceived conflicts of interest in the editorial evaluation of manuscripts authored by members of its editorial board, including the Editor-in-Chief, associate editors, and editorial advisers. Editorial decisions for such manuscripts must be independent, transparent, and consistent with COPE and ICMJE guidance on conflicts of interest and editorial conduct.

7.2 Scope

This policy applies when any of the following are authors or co-authors:

• Editor-in-Chief
• Associate or section editors
• Members of the editorial board or advisory board
• Editorial staff with decision-making authority

It also applies to manuscripts where an editor has a close personal, institutional, or financial relationship with any author or funder.

7.3 Editorial Handling and Recusal

• Any editor who is an author of a submitted manuscript, or who has a relevant conflict of interest, must not participate in any part of the editorial decision-making for that manuscript
• The manuscript will be assigned to an independent handling editor (e.g., a senior editor or guest editor) who has no conflicts of interest with the authors, institutions, or funders
• The conflicted editor will have no access to reviewer identities, reviewer reports, or internal editorial deliberations whilst the manuscript is under consideration
• All communications with authors and reviewers will be managed by the independent handling editor or editorial office staff, not by the conflicted editor

7.4 Peer Review and Transparency

• Manuscripts authored by editorial board members are subject to the same double-blind peer review standards and criteria as all other submissions, including use of at least two independent expert reviewers
• Reviewers will not be informed that the manuscript is authored by an editor, to the extent compatible with maintaining blinding
• If the manuscript is accepted, the published article may include a statement of editorial handling, such as: "This article was handled by an independent editor with no involvement of the author-editor in the peer review or editorial decision process."
• Where required by indexing services or best practice guidance, the journal will document internally how conflicts of interest were managed for these submissions

7.5 Appeals and Complaints

• Appeals or complaints regarding manuscripts authored by editorial board members will be handled by an editor, board member, or external adviser who has no conflicts of interest and was not involved in the original decision
• In complex or disputed cases, the journal may seek advice from COPE or relevant institutional bodies, consistent with COPE flowcharts on conflicts of interest and complaints
• These procedures operate in conjunction with the general Complaint Policy in section 19

8. Peer Review Policy

8.1 Process and Structure

JMLPH uses a rigorous double-blind peer review process for all manuscripts that pass initial editorial assessment and are sent for external review. Key stages:

8.1.1 Initial Editorial Assessment and Triage

• Check scope, originality, formatting, and ethics
• Manuscripts with major methodological, ethical, or topical deficiencies, or that clearly fall outside the journal's scope, may be desk rejected without external peer review

8.1.2 Reviewer Identification and Assignment

• At least two independent experts with relevant subject expertise are selected using criteria such as publication history, methodological skills, citation impact, and professional credentials

8.1.3 Comprehensive Manuscript Evaluation

Reviewers assess:

• Conceptual innovation and scholarly contribution
• Methodological robustness
• Structural organisation and clarity
• Integration of research ethics, including consent, data handling, conflicts of interest, and attribution practice

8.1.4 Reviewer Commentary and Recommendations

• Recommendations: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject
• Feedback is constructive and aimed at improving rigour, analysis, and clarity

8.1.5 Author Revisions

• Authors respond systematically to each comment with a detailed response document
• Further review cycles may occur as needed

8.1.6 Editorial Decision

• The editorial team synthesises reviewers' assessments and author responses to make a final decision (accept, conditional accept, or reject) and provides rationale

JMLPH aims to avoid unnecessary delays and may decline publication if quality standards are not met.

8.2 Peer Review Timelines

JMLPH is committed to efficient peer review:

• Initial editorial assessment: typically within 5–7 working days
• Peer review: typically 3–4 weeks (may vary depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity)
• Editorial decision: typically within 1–2 weeks of receiving reviewer reports
• Revision deadlines: authors typically have 30–60 days to submit revisions, depending on the extent of revisions required

Authors will be notified if delays occur and provided with revised timelines.

9. Ethical Guidance for Reviewers

9.1 Role and Responsibilities

Reviewers:

• Provide objective, evidence-based, constructive assessments of scientific merit, methods, ethics, and clarity
• Support adherence to ICMJE, COPE, and reporting guidelines (CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, COREQ)
• Help authors improve manuscripts with clear, respectful feedback

9.2 Confidentiality and Data Protection

Reviewers must:

• Treat manuscripts, supplementary materials, reports, and (when published) identities of authors/reviewers as confidential
• Not upload non-public, identifiable, or confidential content to unauthorised external AI tools or cloud services. Use of journal-approved, secure screening tools is permitted
• Refrain from using information obtained through review for personal or competitive advantage

9.3 Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must declare any real or perceived conflicts (financial, collaborative, personal, or ideological) before accepting a review and decline when impartiality could be compromised, following COPE guidance.

9.4 Fairness and Respect

Reviews should:

• Be unbiased by personal or institutional characteristics of authors
• Focus criticism on the work, not individuals
• Use professional and respectful language

9.5 Scientific and Ethical Assessment

Reviewers evaluate:

• Originality and integrity of the work
• Appropriateness and robustness of design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation
• Compliance with ethical approval and consent for human/animal research
• Protection of privacy and handling of identifiable images or information
• Transparency regarding limitations, bias, and conflicts of interest, and whether conclusions reflect the data

9.6 Misconduct, AI Use, and Timeliness

Reviewers should:

• Report suspected plagiarism, redundant publication, fabrication, image manipulation, or authorship problems to the editor, without directly accusing authors
• Not upload non-public, identifiable, or confidential material to generative AI tools; only use secure, approved tools for minor checks, maintaining human judgement
• Accept reviews only if they can meet deadlines, notify editors of delays, and provide structured reports with confidential recommendations and detailed feedback for authors

10. Ethical Guidance for the Editorial Team

10.1 Editorial Independence and Fairness

Editors:

• Make decisions independently of sponsors or institutions
• Base decisions on scientific merit, methodological quality, ethics, and relevance to the journal's scope
• Ensure author affiliations do not bias decisions and maintain efficient, non-discriminatory processes

10.2 Conflicts of Interest and Confidentiality

Editors must:

• Declare and manage their own conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when necessary
• Maintain confidentiality of manuscripts, reviewer identities, and correspondence; avoid sharing non-public or confidential content or uploading it to external AI systems without permission

10.3 Management of Peer Review and Standards

Editors:

• Conduct initial assessments for scope, methods, and ethics
• Select qualified reviewers without conflicts, and provide clear guidance on responsibilities and AI use
• Ensure reviewer comments are constructive and may edit or omit inappropriate remarks before sharing with authors
• Verify compliance with ethical approvals, data integrity, and adherence to reporting guidelines; may request approvals, data, or clarifications

10.4 Misconduct, AI Use, Appeals, and Complaints

For allegations of plagiarism, data fabrication, authorship disputes, or other misconduct, editors follow COPE guidance, which may involve:

• Seeking explanations from authors
• Contacting institutions or funders
• Issuing expressions of concern, corrections, or retractions
• Banning future submissions in serious cases

AI tools may assist with administrative tasks, language checks, or plagiarism screening, but not replace human judgement. Editors enforce AI policies for authors and reviewers.

Appeals and complaints are handled through a transparent, documented process, with conflict-free editors making final, reasoned decisions. Policies are periodically reviewed and updated in line with ICMJE, COPE, WAME, and major reporting standards.

11. Redundant or Duplicate Publications and Reuse

11.1 Redundant or Duplicate Publications

Authors must not submit manuscripts that substantially overlap with already-published work in any language. The journal may reject or withdraw overlapping articles unless they qualify as clearly identified secondary publications (e.g., translations or summaries), which must:

• Be transparently labelled and justified
• Be approved by the primary publisher when required
• Fully reference the original article, following ICMJE and COPE guidance

11.2 Reproduction of Previously Published Material

When reusing previously published material:

• Obtain all necessary permissions if under copyright
• Clearly attribute the original source
• Provide a rationale for inclusion and demonstrate added value
• Ensure the majority of the manuscript is original, not a compilation of previous work

The journal may reject manuscripts that do not meet these requirements.

12. Copyediting, Production, and Metadata

After acceptance, manuscripts proceed through:

1. Copyediting – Language, formatting, references, and style compliance are refined
2. Typesetting and Proofreading – Final layout is prepared; authors review page proofs and suggest minor corrections
3. DOI Assignment and Metadata – A unique DOI is assigned and metadata prepared to improve discoverability
4. Online Publication – The article is published on the journal website for global access

13. Conflicts of Interest

JMLPH follows COPE guidance and dedicated flowcharts for handling conflicts of interest in submitted and published articles. Relevant COPE resources for authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers are provided on the journal's website.

13.1 Author Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest, including:

• Financial interests (employment, consultancy, stock ownership, honoraria, patents)
• Research funding sources
• Personal or professional relationships with individuals or organisations that could influence the work
• Institutional or organisational affiliations that could create bias

COI declarations must be included in manuscripts at submission. Where no conflicts exist, authors must state this explicitly.

13.2 Reviewer and Editor Conflicts

Reviewers and editors must declare conflicts and recuse themselves where appropriate, as described in sections 9.3 and 10.2.

13.3 Managing Conflicts

Suspected conflicts are managed following COPE tools and internal procedures. The journal may:

• Request additional disclosure or clarification
• Implement management measures (e.g., independent review, disclosure in published article)
• Reject manuscripts where conflicts cannot be appropriately managed
• Issue corrections or expressions of concern for undisclosed conflicts discovered after publication

14. Scientific Integrity, Misconduct, and Ethics

14.1 Scientific Integrity and Misconduct

All articles undergo rigorous peer review, including evaluation of findings and statistical analysis. Fabrication, falsification, or modification of data is strictly prohibited; the journal may request original datasets.

In cases of proven misconduct, the article will be rejected or retracted; authors may be barred from future submissions, and institutions may be notified. JMLPH follows COPE guidance in all such cases.

14.2 Ethical Approval and Patient Consent

Studies involving humans, animals, or sensitive data require prior ethics committee approval (e.g., IRB); documentation may be requested. For other studies, IRB approval is recommended but not mandatory.

Authors must:

• Obtain informed consent for human participants
• Protect privacy and de-identify personal information
• Obscure images to prevent identification or obtain explicit permission when identification is possible

JMLPH may request written consent where applicable and may withhold publication if consent is inadequate.

14.3 Compliance with Ethical Standards and Reporting

Authors must:

• Justify study aims and relevance
• Clearly describe design, methodology, participant selection, outcomes, and analyses
• Identify limitations and potential biases
• Provide a balanced assessment of evidence strength

Where applicable, authors must follow CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, or COREQ, indicate the guideline used in Methods, and supply checklists upon request.

14.4 Animal Research

Research involving animals must:

• Comply with applicable national and international standards (e.g., ARRIVE guidelines)
• Be approved by an appropriate animal ethics committee
• Demonstrate that suffering was minimised and the 3Rs principle (replacement, reduction, refinement) was considered
• Provide full details of species, housing, procedures, and humane endpoints

15. Plagiarism and Overlap Policy

15.1 Definition and Scope

Plagiarism includes:

• Verbatim copying without quotation and citation
• Close paraphrasing without proper attribution
• Self-plagiarism and redundant publication of one's own prior work without citation or disclosure
• Unacknowledged use of others' ideas or internal documents
• Image/data plagiarism and manipulation

These rules apply to all content, including AI-assisted text that reproduces protected material without acknowledgement.

15.2 Standards, Responsibilities, and Screening

JMLPH follows COPE and ICMJE guidance. Authors must:

• Ensure originality and avoid duplicate submissions
• Cite all sources (quotes, paraphrased ideas, datasets, figures, tables, instruments)
• Disclose preprints and conference abstracts
• Obtain permissions for copyrighted material
• Ensure AI use complies with journal policy and does not reproduce copyrighted content unacknowledged

Submissions are screened using tools such as Grammarly and Turnitin and manual checks; similarity is interpreted in context, but substantial uncredited overlap is unacceptable.

15.3 Handling Suspected Plagiarism and Sanctions

Following COPE guidance, the journal:

• Performs preliminary assessment of similarity and context
• Contacts authors for explanation in minor cases or for detailed responses in serious cases, potentially notifying institutions
• Before publication, may request correction, reject the manuscript, and notify institutions if needed
• After publication, may publish corrections, expressions of concern, or retract the article, in line with the Retraction Policy

16. Preprint Policy

JMLPH supports the use of preprint servers (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, SSRN) to foster early dissemination and feedback. Authors must:

• Post preprints before formal submission and inform the journal
• Acknowledge the journal and link to the final version if accepted
• Ensure consistency between preprint and published versions, whilst making distinctions clear
• Retain copyright and use preprint licences that allow reuse and redistribution

Posting to preprint servers does not constitute prior publication and will not affect consideration by JMLPH.

17. Retraction and Correction Policies

17.1 Retraction Policy

JMLPH follows COPE Retraction Guidelines. Retractions occur in cases of:

• Proven misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, manipulation)
• Significant errors or inaccuracies that undermine validity
• Ethical violations (e.g., lack of consent, breach of confidentiality, undisclosed conflicts)
• Duplicate publication
• Authorship disputes that cannot be resolved

Retracted articles remain part of the public record with clear notices on the journal website and indexing services; reasons are explained transparently.

17.2 Correction Policy and Post-Publication Notices

The journal distinguishes:

• Minor errors that do not affect interpretation (handled without formal notices)
• Substantive errors affecting understanding or the record
• Serious issues requiring retraction or expressions of concern

Types of notices:

• Erratum – Journal/publisher errors (e.g., production, author details, figures, references)
• Corrigendum – Author-originated errors affecting accuracy but not overall conclusions
• Addendum – Additional information improving understanding without correcting an error
• Expression of Concern – When integrity or ethics are in question pending investigation
• Retraction – For confirmed misconduct or invalidating errors

17.3 Process for Requesting Corrections

Requests may come from authors, readers, institutions, or others and must include:

• Full citation
• Description of errors
• Proposed corrections
• Supporting documents

The editorial office reviews requests, considers evidence, and may decide on no action, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

17.4 Publication of Notices

Corrections and related notices:

• Are separate citable items with their own DOIs
• Are clearly labelled and bidirectionally linked with the original article
• Do not remove the original article but add clear notes and watermarks where needed

All notices are preserved in archiving systems (LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Internet Archive, OJS).

18. Explicit Jurisdiction Framing

18.1 General Jurisdictional Framework

JMLPH operates under the laws of England and Wales as its primary legal framework and collaborates internationally, particularly across the Gulf region. This jurisdictional perspective is particularly relevant to:

• Ethics review and oversight of human and animal research
• Privacy and confidentiality of health and personal information
• Professional conduct and accountability of healthcare and legal practitioners
• Public health and legal implications of published content

18.2 United Kingdom Content

JMLPH operates primarily under UK legal and regulatory frameworks, including:

• UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018
• Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
• Equality Act 2010
• Human Rights Act 1998
• Defamation Act 2013
• Common law principles governing contract, tort, and intellectual property

18.3 Gulf Region Context

Saudi Arabia

• Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL)
• National research ethics regulations and guidelines
• Healthcare regulatory requirements of the Ministry of Health and Saudi Commission for Health Specialties

United Arab Emirates

• Federal Decree-Law No. 45 of 2021 on Protection of Personal Data
• Federal Law No. 2 of 2015 (Commercial Companies Law)
• Healthcare regulations of the Ministry of Health and Prevention, Dubai Health Authority, and Department of Health (Abu Dhabi)

Qatar

• Law No. 13 of 2016 on Cybercrime
• Personal Data Privacy Law
• Healthcare regulations of the Ministry of Public Health

Kuwait

• Law No. 20 of 2014 on Electronic Transactions
• Healthcare regulations of the Ministry of Health

18.4 Managing Conflicts Between Jurisdictions

• The Journal will prioritise participant safety, privacy, and research integrity whilst respecting applicable legal obligations in the primary jurisdiction(s) of the research
• Editors may request clarification from authors, ethics committees, or institutional officials regarding how overlapping requirements were addressed
• When necessary, the Journal may obtain legal or ethics advice and may decide to adjust publication, anonymisation, or correction strategies
• Where international guidance and local law differ, the Journal will not require authors to act contrary to applicable law but may decline or modify publication if ethical concerns cannot be resolved

18.5 Disclosure and Transparency

• Where jurisdiction-specific constraints affect methods, data availability, consent procedures, or reporting, authors should explicitly discuss these in the Methods, Ethics, or Limitations sections
• If corrections or post-publication notices are influenced by jurisdictional legal or ethical requirements, this will be reflected in the wording and timing of the notice, whilst maintaining as much transparency as feasible

19. Appeals, Complaints, and Advertising

19.1 Appeal Process

Authors may appeal revision or rejection decisions only after peer review (not desk rejections). Appeals:

• Must be submitted by the corresponding author with consent of all co-authors within 30 days of the decision
• Must respond to editor and reviewer comments, explain disputed points, and present supporting evidence; new data or procedural issues may be included
• Must not be concurrent with transfer requests to other journals; if the appeal is rejected, transfer may then be considered

Only one appeal is permitted per manuscript; the Editor-in-Chief or delegate, free of conflicts, evaluates the appeal and may consult others. The final decision after appeal is conclusive.

Authors cannot appeal desk rejections. Concerns about desk rejections may instead be raised under the Complaint Policy, which focuses on process and fairness rather than revisiting scientific judgement.

20. Complaint Policy with a Broader Perspective

20.1 Purpose and Scope

JMLPH views complaints as opportunities to improve quality, transparency, and trust. This policy applies to complaints raised by any stakeholder, including:

• Authors and co-authors
• Reviewers and editors
• Readers, patients, research participants, and members of the public
• Institutions, funders, regulatory and professional bodies

Complaints may relate to editorial decisions, peer review, authorship, research ethics, patient safety, legal or public health implications, conflicts of interest, bias or discrimination, or alleged misconduct.

For authors, desk rejections are not subject to the formal appeal process in section 19.1 but may be the subject of a complaint regarding procedural fairness or potential bias. In line with section 19.1, the scientific judgement itself will not normally be revisited.

20.2 Principles

• Accessibility: Clear contact routes are provided on the Journal website (e.g., Editorial.Board@JMLPH.net, Info@JMLPH.net).
• Fairness and impartiality: Complaints are reviewed by individuals without relevant conflicts of interest; additional advisors may be involved when needed.
• Confidentiality: Personal and sensitive information is handled in line with applicable privacy and data-protection laws and ethical standards (see jurisdiction-specific sections above).
• Timeliness: Acknowledgement is typically sent within 1–2 working days and a substantive response aimed within approximately 30 days, or with an interim update if more time is required.
• Alignment with COPE/WAME/ICMJE: Handling of complaints, including those about misconduct or conflicts of interest, follows COPE flowcharts and international best practice.

20.3 Types of Complaints

Examples include, but are not limited to:

• Editorial process (delays, communication, alleged bias or unfair treatment)
• Peer review quality, tone, or alleged unprofessional conduct
• Authorship disputes or incorrect acknowledgements
• Research ethics concerns, including consent, privacy, or participant protection
• Allegations of plagiarism, redundant publication, data fabrication, or image manipulation
• Conflicts of interest or undisclosed relationships involving authors, reviewers, or editors
• Concerns about public health, legal, or clinical harm arising from published content

20.4 Submission and Initial Assessment

• Complaints should be submitted in writing, ideally to the Journal's official email addresses, including sufficient detail, supporting documents, and contact information.
• The journal manager or designated staff member conducts an initial review and determines whether:
  • The issue can be resolved administratively (e.g., minor errors, clarification), or
  • It requires escalation to an editor, Editor-in-Chief, or external body.

20.5 Escalation and Resolution

Stage 1 – Handling Editor or Section Editor: Reviews the complaint and relevant documents, may seek input from involved parties, and proposes a resolution.

Stage 2 – Editor-in-Chief or Designate: If unresolved or serious (e.g., alleged misconduct, legal risk), the Editor-in-Chief or a conflict-free senior editor reviews the case and makes a final journal-level decision.

Stage 3 – External Review: For unresolved issues regarding ethics or misconduct, complainants may be advised to contact institutional officials, funders, or professional regulators.

For disputes involving publication ethics where internal procedures are exhausted, parties may seek advice from COPE or relevant external bodies, consistent with COPE membership obligations.

Outcomes may include: no action; clarification; correction or corrigendum; expression of concern; retraction; revision of policies; or changes to editorial assignments or processes.

For complaints involving manuscripts authored by editorial board members or staff, or where editors have conflicts of interest, handling will follow section 7 on "Handling Papers Authored by Editorial Board Members". Complaints will be managed by an editor, board member, or external advisor with no relevant conflicts, and not by anyone involved in the original handling.

20.6 Protection from Retaliation

The Journal will not tolerate retaliation or victimisation against individuals who raise complaints in good faith. Identities will be protected as far as legally and practically possible, consistent with duties to investigate and to protect participants and the public.

20.7 Complaints and Authorship Issues

Complaints (including authorship disputes) are treated as opportunities for improvement and must be submitted via the official email.

For authorship complaints:

• The journal may need to inform all authors and relevant institutions
• The process includes initial review by the journal manager, possible escalation to senior staff, and ultimately to the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision is final

Standard timeframes:

• Acknowledgement within 1–2 working days
• Substantive response within approximately 30 days

Unresolved complaints may be taken to external bodies such as COPE. The journal adheres strictly to COPE guidance in handling complaints and misconduct.

20.8 Editorial Independence and Advertising

JMLPH is committed to a transparent and efficient publishing process and manages conflicts of interest professionally, consistent with its policy of not accepting advertising and maintaining strict editorial independence.

21. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

21.1 Authorship, Accountability, and Permitted Uses

AI systems (e.g., ChatGPT) cannot be authors or sign disclosures. Human authors remain fully responsible for:

• All content, including AI-assisted text, data, figures, and references
• Ensuring accuracy, proper referencing, and the absence of "hallucinated" content

Permitted uses:

• Grammar, clarity, organisation, and formatting improvements
• Drafting or phrasing assistance, summarising public content, generating outlines, or checking against reporting guidelines, with full human oversight
• The primary intellectual content, argument, and interpretation must originate from the authors. AI must not be used to generate or substantially draft the core scientific narrative or conclusions (e.g., the main logic of the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion), even if such use were to be disclosed.

For those whose work contains a significant percentage of AI-generated writing, it may be necessary to include a disclaimer such as the following:

21.2 Restrictions and Required Disclosures

Authors must not:

• List AI as an author or as making qualifying intellectual contributions
• Cite AI outputs as primary or secondary sources
• Input patient-identifying or confidential data into AI tools
• Submit substantial AI-generated content without disclosure. "Substantial" includes, for example, using AI to generate large sections of the manuscript (e.g., most of the Introduction, Methods, Results, or Discussion), to draft the full first version of the manuscript, or to create key elements of data analysis, figures, or tables. Where such substantial AI use would affect the core scientific narrative or conclusions, it is not permitted under section 21.1, irrespective of disclosure.
• Violate research integrity, copyright, or data protection rules

Authors must provide a "Use of AI Tools" statement:

• In Methods for research articles, or in Acknowledgements/Transparency Statement for others
• Specifying tool name, version/date, purpose, and assurance of human oversight

All facts, references, and content generated with AI must be verified; submissions may be screened for plagiarism and manipulation.

21.3 Data Protection, Editorial Use, and Peer Review

Authors must not enter protected health information or confidential legal documents into AI tools unless fully de-identified and legally permissible.

The journal may use AI tools for plagiarism checks, language support, or administrative tasks but not for final editorial judgements, and will ensure that any such tools comply with applicable privacy, data protection, and confidentiality requirements, using only secure, vetted systems.

The same standard of not exposing identifiable or confidential information to insecure external systems applies to the Journal as to authors, reviewers, and editors.

If AI is used substantively for data analysis or figure generation, Methods must describe tools, parameters, validation, and reproducibility; prompts and outputs may be requested as supplementary material, with no confidential data included.

Non-compliance with AI policies can result in rejection, request for revision, retraction, or institutional notification in line with COPE.

A checklist is provided to ensure:

• AI disclosure is included
• All AI-assisted text is fact-checked
• References are verified
• No confidential data are shared
• AI-generated figures, tables, and code are reproducible and validated

22. Data Protection and Privacy

Data protection and privacy are fundamental to JMLPH's commitment to research integrity and participant protection. The journal adheres to applicable data protection laws, including UK GDPR, Data Protection Act 2018, and equivalent legislation in Gulf region jurisdictions, and implements the following principles:

• Confidentiality of Research Data: Authors must protect the privacy of research participants by de-identifying personal information and obtaining informed consent for data use.
• Secure Handling by All Parties: Authors, reviewers, and editors must not upload identifiable or confidential information to insecure external systems, including unauthorised AI tools.
• Compliance with Jurisdiction-Specific Requirements: Where research involves multiple jurisdictions, authors must comply with applicable data protection laws and demonstrate appropriate safeguards.
• Data Retention and Access: The journal maintains secure systems for data management and ensures that archived content preserves privacy protections.

For detailed guidance on data protection in specific contexts (e.g., ethical approval, AI use, jurisdiction-specific constraints), see the relevant sections of this policy.

23. Policy Governance and Updates

JMLPH policies align with guidance from ICMJE, COPE, WAME, and the AMA Manual of Style; where JMLPH is more specific, its policies prevail. Queries may be directed to the editorial office at Editorial.Board@JMLPH.net.