Peer-Review, Publication Ethics, and Malpractice Statement
Peer-Review
Submissions are considered on the condition that they are previously unpublished and are not concurrently submitted elsewhere; that all authors have read and approved the content and declared all competing interests; and that the work complies with the ethical approval and has been conducted under internationally accepted ethical standards. If ethical misconduct is suspected, the Editorial Board will act according to the relevant international rules of publication ethics (i.e., COPE guidelines).
The editorial policies of the journal are consistent with the rules recommended by the Council of Science Editors and reflected in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication (http://www.icmje.org/). Accordingly, authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to adhere to the best practice guidelines on ethical behavior contained in this statement.
Submitted manuscripts are subjected to double-blinded peer review. The scientific board guiding the selection of papers to be published in the journal consists of elected specialists of the journal and, if necessary, selected national and international experts in the relevant field of research. All manuscripts are reviewed by the editor, section associate editors, and independent expert reviewers.
Human and Animal Rights
For experimental, clinical, and drug human studies, approval by an ethics committee and a statement confirming adherence of the study protocol to international agreements (World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki "Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects," amended October 2013) are required. For experimental animal studies, the authors should obtain animal ethics committee approval and indicate that the procedures followed complied with animal rights (Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals). Ethics Committee approval documents should be submitted to the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology together with the manuscript.
Ethics committee approval and statements regarding adherence to the abovementioned international guidelines and obtaining patient informed consent should be indicated in the "Materials and Methods" section and are required for case reports whenever data/media used could reveal the identity of the patient. Any conflicts of interest among the authors or institutions and receipt of any financial or material support must be declared by authors submitting a manuscript. These statements should appear at the end of the manuscript. Reviewers must also report if any potential conflict of interest exists between the reviewer and the authors of the manuscript or their institutions.
To align with our established protocols and ethical standards, it is crucial that patients provide explicit consent, signifying their approval for the use of photographs or images that reveal their identity. This consent is granted by signing the designated permission form.
Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct
This journal uses "iThenticate" to screen all submissions for plagiarism before publication.
Authors must avoid plagiarism and ethical misconduct, as represented below:
We disapprove of such unethical practices as plagiarism, fabrication, duplication, data manipulation/falsification, and divide and publish, as well as efforts to influence the review process through practices such as gifting authorship, inappropriate acknowledgments, and references, in line with the COPE flowcharts.
Submitted manuscripts are also evaluated for plagiarism and duplicate publication by automatic software. Authors are obliged to acknowledge if they published study results in whole or in part in the form of abstracts.
Use of Large Language Models and Generative AI Tools
AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. As non-legal entities, they cannot assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest nor manage copyright and license agreements. Authors who use AI tools in the writing of a manuscript, production of images or graphical elements of the paper, or in the collection and analysis of data, must be transparent how the AI tool was used and which tool was used. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics.” COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI tools. Detailed information about the statement can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author
After reviewing the COPE statement, the editors of the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology have decided that papers should include a statement in a section called “Declaration Regarding the Use of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies” to let readers know if AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the writing process. It's important to remember that all authors are responsible for the content of their work. This declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, or references (such as Mendeley, EndNote, Zotero, and others). If there is nothing to declare, there is no need to add a statement.
It is suggested that authors follow this format when preparing their statement:
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) utilized [NAME OF TOOL(S) USED] to [DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE TOOL(S) WERE UTILIZED AND HOW THE VALIDITY OF THE OUTPUTS WAS EVALUATED]. After carefully reviewing and editing the content as necessary, full responsibility for the publication's content is taken by the author(s). This incorporation of AI tool usage primarily impacted [SPECIFY WHICH ASPECTS OF THE STUDY, ARTICLE CONTENTS, DATA, OR SUPPORTING FILES WERE AFFECTED/GENERATED].
Example:
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) utilized OpenAI's ChatGPT to generate summaries of research articles related to the topic. These summaries were evaluated by comparing them to manually written summaries by experts in the field. Upon confirming the accuracy and relevance of the generated summaries, they were integrated into the literature review section of the manuscript. After carefully reviewing and editing the content as necessary, full responsibility for the publication's content is taken by the author(s). This incorporation of AI tool usage primarily impacted the efficiency of literature review process and the comprehensiveness of the gathered research insights.
DUTIES OF THE PUBLISHER:
Handling of Unethical Publishing Behavior
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher will take all appropriate measures to modify the article in question, in close cooperation with the editors. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, disclosure, or retraction of the work in the most extreme case. Together with the editors, the publisher will take reasonable steps to detect and prevent the publication of articles in which research misconduct has occurred and will not knowingly promote or allow such abuse to occur.
Editorial Autonomy
The Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology is committed to ensuring the autonomy of editorial decisions without influence from any person or commercial partner.
Intellectual Property and Copyright
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology protects the property and copyright of the articles published in the journal and maintains each article's published version. The journal ensures the integrity and transparency of each published article.
Scientific Misconduct
The publisher of the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology takes all appropriate measures to prevent fraudulent publication and plagiarism.
DUTIES OF THE EDITORS:
Publication Decisions and Responsibility
The editor of the journal stays abreast of everything in the journal and strives to meet the needs of readers and authors. The editor is also responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published and which should be subjected to legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with reviewers while making publication decisions. The editor is responsible for the contents and overall quality of publications and should strive to ensure a fair and appropriate peer-review process.
Objectivity
The editor evaluates all articles submitted to the journal without bias.
Confidentiality
The editor must not disclose any information about a submitted article to anyone other than the editorial staff, reviewers, and publisher.
Conflicts of Interest and Disclosure
The editor of the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology does not allow any conflicts of interest between the authors, reviewers, and editors. Unpublished materials must not be used in a submitted article without the author's express written consent.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
Authors are obliged to notify the journal's editors or publisher immediately and to cooperate with them to correct or retract the article if a published work is found to contain significant errors or inaccuracies. If the editors or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, the authors must promptly correct or retract the article or provide the journal editors with evidence of the article's accuracy.
DUTIES OF THE REVIEWERS:
Evaluation
Reviewers evaluate submitted manuscripts without knowledge of the origin, gender, sexual orientation, or political philosophy of the authors and ensure a fair blinded peer-review.
Confidentiality
All information related to submitted articles is kept confidential. The reviewers must not discuss with others unless authorized by the editor.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Reviewers should have no conflict of interest regarding parties such as the authors, funders, editors, etc.
Objectivity
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts objectively and express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Contribution to the Revision and Decision Process
Reviewers may provide feedback to the authors to assist in improving their manuscript. Reviewers also help the editor make decisions on whether or not to publish the relevant work.
Acknowledgement of Sources
If the reviewers notice that the scientific study is not cited, it should be stated by the reviewers.
Reviewers will also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
