Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

BioMedicine is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical practice in all aspects of scholarly publishing. The journal follows the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and this page sets out the editorial, ethical, and publishing policies that apply to authors, reviewers, editors, and all other parties involved in the publication process. Submission of a manuscript to BioMedicine is understood to indicate that all listed authors have read and approved the submission and that the work complies with the journal’s policies, ethical requirements, and standards for responsible scholarly publishing.

Access, Copyright, and Licensing

Who Can Submit?

Manuscripts may be submitted to BioMedicine by authors who are submitting original work and who hold the copyright to that work, or who have obtained the necessary permission from the copyright holder(s) to submit and publish it. Submission to the journal indicates that the manuscript is original, has not been published previously in whole or in part, and is not under review or consideration for publication by another journal or publication outlet.

Open Access Statement

All articles published in BioMedicine are made freely and permanently available online immediately upon publication for reading and downloading. The journal is committed to open access publishing in order to support the broad dissemination of scholarly research and to enhance its visibility, accessibility, and potential impact within the scientific and medical communities. BioMedicine does not charge a submission processing fee or article processing charge, and publication in the journal is free of charge for authors.

Copyright Policy

Authors retain copyright in their work. Articles published in BioMedicine are made available under an open access license in order to support broad access to scholarly content. Submission to the journal indicates that the authors have the right to publish the work and to grant the journal the necessary permission to publish it under the open access license described below.

Licensing

All articles published in BioMedicine are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows published content to be read, downloaded, copied, distributed, shared, translated, and adapted for any purpose, including commercial use, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s), a link to the license is included, and any changes made are clearly indicated.

Acknowledgments

The Acknowledgments section is optional and may be used to recognize individuals, institutions, or organizations that contributed to the work but do not meet the journal’s criteria for authorship. This may include, for example, technical assistance, administrative support, language editing, general scientific advice, or institutional support.

Authors should ensure that all acknowledgments are accurate, specific, and limited to contributions that were actually provided. Individuals named in the acknowledgments section should have given permission to be acknowledged.

The acknowledgments section should not be used for formal declarations such as Funding, Conflicts of Interest, Author Contributions, Data Availability, or AI use disclosures, which should appear in their own designated sections of the manuscript where applicable.

BioMedicine does not accept advertisements from third parties. Advertising content is not published on the journal website, within journal issues, or alongside journal articles.

Editorial decisions are made independently of any commercial or promotional considerations. The presence or absence of advertising has no influence on editorial evaluation, peer review, acceptance, or publication decisions.

Affiliations

All authors must provide complete and accurate institutional affiliation information at the time of submission. Affiliations should reflect the institution or institutions where the work was conducted, supported, or formally approved, as applicable. For each listed affiliation, authors should provide the department, institution, city, and country.

If an author is affiliated with more than one institution, all relevant affiliations may be listed. Where appropriate, authors should ensure that the primary affiliation reflects where the main work was carried out.

If an author changes institution after completing the work, the affiliation connected to the research should remain listed, and the author’s current affiliation may be indicated separately as a note.

Affiliation information must be accurate and must not be misrepresented. Deliberate misrepresentation of institutional affiliation may be treated as a breach of publication ethics and handled in accordance with the journal’s policies.

Appeals and Complaints

Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they believe that the decision was based on a factual misunderstanding, a procedural concern, or where new information becomes available that could materially affect the evaluation of the manuscript. Appeals should be submitted in writing and should include a clear, evidence-based response to the comments raised by the editors and reviewers.

Appeals that simply disagree with the outcome, without substantive justification, are unlikely to be considered. Appeals will be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or by another appropriate editor who was not involved in the original decision, where applicable. The journal may seek additional editorial assessment or further peer review if needed.

Complaints

The journal welcomes complaints relating to editorial handling, peer review, authorship disputes, conflicts of interest, publication ethics, or post-publication concerns. Complaints should be submitted in writing and should include sufficient detail and any supporting documentation available.

All complaints will be reviewed fairly and confidentially and, where appropriate, investigated in accordance with the journal’s policies and COPE guidance . If a complaint involves an editor or raises a potential conflict of interest, the matter will be handled by another appropriate senior editor or editorial representative in order to ensure impartiality.

The journal distinguishes complaints from disagreements over editorial judgment. Decisions based on scope, priority, or editorial suitability will not usually be reconsidered unless there is a substantive basis for appeal.

First Point of Contact

Appeals and complaints should be sent to the journal’s editorial office at [email protected]. The journal will acknowledge receipt and will make reasonable efforts to review and address the matter promptly.

Authorship

Authorship Criteria

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the work and who are able to take public responsibility for its content. All listed authors should meet all of the following criteria:

made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;
participated in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
approved the final version of the manuscript to be published; and
agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work and to help resolve questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the manuscript.

Contributions such as general supervision, administrative support, technical assistance, language editing, or funding acquisition alone do not justify authorship and should be acknowledged where appropriate.

Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors meet the journal’s authorship criteria, that no qualified contributor has been omitted, and that all authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript before submission. The corresponding author is also responsible for ensuring that the author list and author order are correct at the time of submission.

Author Contributions Statement

BioMedicine requires a separate Author Contributions statement for all relevant article types. This statement should clearly describe the role of each author in the work, such as study conception and design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, statistical analysis, manuscript drafting, critical revision, supervision, or final approval.

The purpose of this requirement is to improve transparency, clarify individual responsibility, and support consistent reporting across published articles.

Changes to Authorship

Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be explained in writing and must include the agreement of all listed authors, and of any author being added or removed where applicable. Requests for authorship changes are subject to editorial review and approval.

If an authorship change is requested after publication, the journal may issue a correction or take other editorial action where appropriate.

Authorship Disputes

If a dispute arises regarding authorship, the journal may pause editorial or publication handling until the matter has been resolved by the authors and, where necessary, their institution(s). The journal may follow COPE guidance when handling authorship disputes, but responsibility for resolving such disputes ultimately rests with the authors and their institutions.

Citations

Authors are expected to cite sources accurately, appropriately, and responsibly. References should be relevant to the content of the manuscript, support the statements made, and reflect the scholarly context of the work.

Authors should ensure that all cited sources are reliable and, where appropriate, current. References should be checked CAREfully for accuracy, completeness, and consistency with the journal’s reference style. Authors are responsible for ensuring that cited works correspond to the correct sources and that quotations, data, ideas, and findings taken from other works are properly attributed.

Excessive self-citation, unnecessary citation of particular authors or journals, or any form of citation manipulation intended to inflate citation counts is considered unacceptable. The journal may request revision of citation practices where references appear inappropriate, unbalanced, or unrelated to the scholarly content of the manuscript.

For review articles and other non-research articles, citations should provide a fair and balanced representation of the relevant literature and should not selectively favor a particular author, institution, or journal without scholarly justification.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to BioMedicine are treated as confidential. Access to submitted materials is limited to individuals directly involved in editorial handling, peer review, and publication management, including editorial staff, editors, and invited reviewers, as appropriate.

Editors, editorial staff, and reviewers must not share, discuss, or use any part of a submitted manuscript for personal advantage or to disadvantage others. Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shown to or discussed with others except where authorized as part of the editorial process.

Unpublished information, ideas, data, images, or interpretations disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s or reviewer’s own work without the explicit written consent of the author(s).

If the journal needs to investigate suspected misconduct, ethical concerns, authorship disputes, or other integrity-related matters, relevant information may be shared on a limited and confidential basis with appropriate individuals or institutions, only to the extent necessary to review and resolve the matter responsibly.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose any financial or non-financial interests, relationships, or activities that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the content, interpretation, or presentation of their manuscript. Disclosure is required in the interest of transparency and does not automatically prevent publication.

Conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to, employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership, patents, advisory roles, paid expert testimony, personal or professional relationships, or other affiliations that could be viewed as relevant to the work.

BioMedicine requires a separate Conflict of Interest statement in all published articles. If no conflicts of interest exist, authors should include a clear statement such as: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all relevant interests are disclosed accurately at the time of submission and updated if circumstances change before publication. Failure to disclose a relevant conflict of interest may result in editorial action, including correction, rejection, or other post-publication measures where necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Data Sharing Policy

BioMedicine supports responsible data sharing in order to promote transparency, reproducibility, and verification of published research findings, while recognizing that ethical, legal, privacy, and confidentiality considerations may limit public sharing in some cases.

For all original research articles, the journal requires a separate Data Availability Statement in the manuscript. This statement should clearly explain whether the data supporting the findings of the study are publicly available, available upon reasonable request, restricted for ethical or legal reasons, or not applicable.

Where data can be shared, authors are encouraged to deposit them in an appropriate repository and provide a persistent link, DOI, accession number, or other relevant access information. Where data cannot be shared publicly, authors should explain the reason clearly, such as participant privacy, confidentiality obligations, legal restrictions, or intellectual property considerations.

If data are available only on reasonable request, the statement should indicate from whom the data may be requested and whether any conditions apply. If no new data were generated or analyzed, authors should state this explicitly.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that any sharing of data complies with applicable ethical approvals, consent requirements, legal obligations, and institutional policies.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions at BioMedicine are made independently and on the basis of scholarly merit, relevance to the journal, originality, clarity, and compliance with the journal’s ethical and editorial standards. Editorial evaluation and publication decisions must not be influenced by commercial interests, advertising, sponsorship, institutional pressure, or personal relationships.

The Editor-in-Chief and editors are responsible for ensuring that manuscripts are assessed fairly and objectively in accordance with the journal’s policies. No owner, sponsor, advertiser, publisher representative, or external party may interfere with editorial decisions.

Where an editor has a conflict of interest in relation to a manuscript, that editor must recuse themselves from handling the submission, and editorial responsibility should be reassigned to another appropriate editor.

Funding

All authors must disclose any financial support related to the work reported in the manuscript. BioMedicine requires a separate Funding statement in all published articles.

The Funding statement should identify the source or sources of support, including the name of the funding organization and grant number, project number, or other relevant funding identifier where applicable.

Authors should also state the role of the funder in the work, where relevant, including any involvement in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, manuscript preparation, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. If the funder had no such role, this should be stated clearly.

If no external funding was received, authors should include a clear statement such as: “The authors received no funding for this work.”

Funding information should be reported in a dedicated section of the manuscript and should not be included only in the Acknowledgments section. Accurate disclosure of funding helps support transparency, assists readers in evaluating potential sources of influence, and promotes consistency in the journal’s published articles.

Images and Figures

Images and figures should be included only where they are relevant to the manuscript and help to present, clarify, or support the scientific content of the work. Authors should ensure that all figures are clear, accurate, and prepared to a standard suitable for editorial assessment, peer review, and publication.

Figures must represent the original data faithfully. Any adjustment to an image, such as cropping or changes to brightness, contrast, or color balance, should be limited, applied to the whole image where appropriate, and must not misrepresent, obscure, enhance, remove, or otherwise distort the underlying information. Where relevant, important image processing or grouping should be explained in the manuscript or figure legend.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all images and figures are either original to the authors or used with appropriate permission or under a license that permits reuse. Any reproduced or adapted material must be properly credited, and any required permission should be obtained before submission.

Patient privacy must be protected in all figures and images. Identifying details should be removed or obscured unless their inclusion is scientifically necessary and appropriate consent for publication has been obtained in accordance with the journal’s policies.

The journal may request original, unedited, higher-resolution, or source image files at any stage of editorial review or after publication where needed to verify image quality, accuracy, authenticity, or compliance with publication ethics.

Misconduct

BioMedicine takes all forms of research and publication misconduct seriously and will address suspected misconduct in accordance with the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal’s aim is to protect the integrity of the scholarly record and to respond to concerns in a fair, consistent, and evidence-based manner.

Types of Misconduct

Misconduct may include a range of unethical practices that compromise the integrity of research or publication. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

Data Fabrication and Falsification: Inventing data, altering results, manipulating figures or tables, or selectively omitting findings in a misleading way is unacceptable and may lead to rejection, correction, retraction, or other editorial action.
Image Manipulation: Images should accurately represent the original observations or data. Adjustments such as cropping or changes to brightness or contrast are acceptable only where they do not distort, conceal, enhance, or otherwise misrepresent the underlying information. Misleading or fabricated image manipulation is not permitted.
Plagiarism: Plagiarism, including inappropriate text recycling and unattributed reuse of another person’s words, ideas, data, images, or other material, is prohibited. Authors must ensure that all sources are properly cited and acknowledged.
Duplicate Submission and Redundant Publication: Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time, or publishing substantially overlapping content without proper disclosure or justification, is considered misconduct and may distort the scholarly record.
Salami Publication: Inappropriate fragmentation of one study into multiple publications with overlapping data or findings, without proper disclosure, is unacceptable because it can mislead readers and artificially inflate publication output.
Citation Manipulation: Inappropriate citation practices, including excessive self-citation or coordinated citation intended mainly to influence metrics rather than support the scholarly content of the manuscript, are unacceptable.
Improper Authorship Practices: Ghost authorship, honorary authorship, omission of qualified contributors, or any other misrepresentation of authorship is considered misconduct. All listed authors must meet the journal’s authorship criteria and approve the final manuscript.

Paper Mills

The journal does not permit the submission or publication of manuscripts produced wholly or partly by paper mills or similar unethical services. Indicators of paper mill activity, including fabricated data, manipulated images, purchased authorship, falsified peer review, or repeated suspicious patterns across submissions, may be investigated in accordance with the journal’s misconduct procedures. Where concerns are identified, the journal may request supporting documentation, reject the manuscript, notify relevant institutions, or take post-publication action where necessary.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

When the journal receives a credible allegation of misconduct, it may take the following steps, as appropriate to the case:

Initial Assessment: The concern will be reviewed to determine whether it falls within the journal’s scope, whether it appears credible, and whether any conflict of interest exists in the handling of the matter.
Contact with Authors and Review of Evidence: Where appropriate, the corresponding author may be contacted on behalf of all authors and asked to provide an explanation, underlying data, image files, approvals, or other relevant documentation within a specified timeframe. The journal may also seek advice from editors or independent experts.
Institutional or External Referral: Where necessary, the journal may refer the matter to the relevant institution, ethics committee, funder, or other responsible body, recognizing that formal investigations of research misconduct are often best handled by institutions.
Evaluation and Editorial Action: After considering the available information, the journal may decide that no further action is required or may take appropriate editorial action, including rejection, correction, expression of concern, retraction, or notification of relevant parties, depending on the seriousness of the issue.

Throughout the process, the journal will seek to handle the matter as fairly and confidentially as possible, while ensuring that the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record are maintained.

Peer Review Policy

All manuscripts submitted to BioMedicine undergo editorial assessment and peer review to evaluate their scientific quality, originality, relevance, clarity, and compliance with the journal’s ethical and reporting standards. Manuscripts considered suitable for review are normally evaluated by at least two qualified reviewers, who may include Editorial Board members or external expert consultants, in order to support independent and rigorous assessment.

Type of Peer Review

BioMedicine uses a double-blind peer review process. Manuscripts considered suitable for review are evaluated in a manner intended to protect reviewer confidentiality and reduce bias in editorial assessment.

Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors, and authors’ identities are not disclosed to reviewers as part of the review process. Reviewer comments are shared with authors and editors as part of editorial decision-making. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and should not share or discuss a manuscript except where authorized by the journal as part of the review process.

Workflow and Stages

Initial Screening: Upon submission, the Editorial Office first checks the manuscript to ensure that it is complete and that all required materials and supporting documents have been provided. Manuscripts are then forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief for an initial assessment of their suitability, scientific merit, and relevance to the journal.
Assignment of Reviewers: If the manuscript passes the initial editorial assessment, it is normally sent to at least two qualified reviewers, who may be Editorial Board members or expert consultants assigned by the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers are selected on the basis of subject expertise and their ability to provide an independent scholarly evaluation.
Review Rounds: Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript’s originality, methodological soundness, clarity, presentation of results, relevance to the journal, and overall contribution to the field. Reviewers may also comment on whether the conclusions are supported by the findings, whether relevant prior literature has been adequately cited, and whether there are concerns relating to ethics, similarity, or overlap with previously published work.
Author Revisions:Where revision is requested, authors are invited to revise the manuscript in response to reviewer and editorial comments. Authors should submit a revised version together with a clear response explaining how each point has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned for further editorial review and, where appropriate, may undergo additional rounds of peer review.
Final Evaluation:The final editorial decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate handling editor on the basis of the reviewer reports and editorial assessment. Authors are usually notified within approximately 6 weeks whether the manuscript is accepted, rejected, or requires revision before acceptance, although delays may sometimes occur.

Decision Types

Editorial decisions may include the following:

Accept: the manuscript is suitable for publication without further changes;
Minor Revision: the manuscript requires limited clarification or correction before it can be accepted;
Major Revision: the manuscript requires substantial revision and may undergo further review; and
Reject: the manuscript is not suitable for publication on the basis of quality, originality, relevance, ethics, or other editorial considerations.

Supplementary Materials

Authors may submit supplementary materials, such as additional data, appendices, figures, multimedia files, or other supporting content, together with the manuscript. These materials may be made available to reviewers and may be considered during peer review where relevant. However, supplementary files are not necessarily reviewed to the same extent as the main manuscript. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, completeness, and appropriateness of all supplementary content.

Editorial Oversight

The peer review process is overseen by the Editor-in-Chief, who is responsible for ensuring that submissions are handled fairly, consistently, and in accordance with the journal’s editorial and ethical standards.

Editors and editorial staff must treat manuscripts and related correspondence as confidential and must not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own work without the explicit written consent of the author(s).

Desk Rejection Policy

The journal reserves the right to reject manuscripts without external peer review during the initial editorial screening stage. This helps ensure efficient editorial handling and allows authors to receive an early decision where the manuscript is clearly unsuitable for publication in BioMedicine.

Common reasons for desk rejection include, but are not limited to, the following:
the manuscript falls outside the journal’s Aims and Scope;
the submission is incomplete or does not comply with the journal’s submission requirements;
the manuscript lacks sufficient scientific quality, originality, or relevance;
there are major methodological, ethical, or reporting deficiencies;
there are concerns about plagiarism, duplicate submission, or substantial overlap with previously published material; and
the language or organization is not adequate for proper peer review.

Editors may submit manuscripts to the journal. To preserve fairness, transparency, and editorial independence, any editor who is an author or co-author of a submission must not be involved in the editorial handling, reviewer selection, peer review oversight, or decision-making for that manuscript.

Such submissions should be assigned to another appropriate editor who can manage the manuscript independently and according to the same standards and procedures applied to all other submissions.

Conflicts of Interest for Editors and Reviewers

Editors and reviewers must declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could affect, or reasonably be perceived to affect, their objectivity in relation to a manuscript.

Reviewers should decline to review a manuscript where they have a conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, personal, institutional, or other relevant relationships or connections with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the submission.

Editors who have a conflict of interest in relation to a manuscript must recuse themselves from editorial handling and decision-making, and responsibility for the manuscript should be reassigned to another appropriate editor.

Neither editors nor reviewers may use unpublished information, ideas, data, or interpretations disclosed through the editorial or peer review process for personal advantage or in their own work without the explicit written consent of the author(s).

Plagiarism

BioMedicine does not permit plagiarism in any form. All submitted manuscripts must be original and must properly acknowledge the work, words, ideas, data, and images of others where used.

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to, copying text without appropriate attribution, presenting another person’s work or ideas as one’s own, improper paraphrasing, unattributed reuse of figures, tables, or other content, and inappropriate reuse of an author’s own previously published material without disclosure or citation.

The journal may use similarity-detection tools, including iThenticate, as part of its editorial assessment. Similarity reports are considered as one part of the editorial evaluation, and editorial judgment is used to assess the nature, extent, and context of any overlap.

Where concerns about plagiarism, text recycling, or unattributed overlap are identified, the journal may request clarification or revision, reject the manuscript, or take post-publication action where necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions are original, properly cited, and compliant with the journal’s ethical standards.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

BioMedicine is committed to maintaining the accuracy, integrity, and transparency of the scholarly record. If concerns are raised after publication, the journal will assess them CAREfully and take appropriate action where necessary.

Authors are expected to notify the journal promptly if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work. Readers, reviewers, and other parties may also contact the journal if they identify possible errors, concerns about interpretation, ethical issues, or potential misconduct in a published article.

Post-Publication Discussion

The journal welcomes serious and evidence-based post-publication communication relating to published work. Concerns raised after publication will be considered CAREfully and, where appropriate, may lead to editorial review, requests for clarification from the authors, or formal correction of the record.

BioMedicine recognizes that post-publication discussion may also take place through external scholarly channels and platforms, such as PubPeer or other academic forums. In addition, post-publication discussion may take place within the journal itself, including through letters to the editor. Where substantive and evidence-based concerns about a published article are brought to the journal’s attention through any of these channels, the journal may review them and, where appropriate, take editorial action to clarify, correct, or otherwise maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

All post-publication matters will be handled as fairly and transparently as possible, with reference to relevant COPE guidance where appropriate.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Where a published article requires amendment, the journal may issue one or more of the following, depending on the nature and seriousness of the issue:

Corrections:A correction may be issued when an article contains an error or omission that does not invalidate the overall findings or conclusions of the work but should be corrected in the interest of accuracy, clarity, or transparency. Corrections will be linked to the original article.
Expressions of Concern:An expression of concern may be issued where serious questions have been raised about the reliability, integrity, or ethical basis of a published article, but the available evidence is not yet sufficient to justify a correction or retraction, or an investigation is still ongoing.
Retractions:A retraction may be issued where the findings of a published article are found to be unreliable due to major error, misconduct, plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, or other serious breaches of publication ethics. Retraction notices will state the reason for retraction and will remain linked to the original article, which will be clearly identified as retracted.

Publication Ethics

BioMedicine is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in scholarly publishing. The journal follows the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and expects editors, reviewers, and authors to act in accordance with accepted ethical and professional standards throughout submission, peer review, publication, and post-publication review.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editorial Decision-Making: Editors are responsible for making publication decisions on the basis of a manuscript’s scholarly merit, originality, clarity, relevance to the journal, and compliance with ethical and editorial standards. Editorial decisions should not be influenced by the authors’ nationality, ethnicity, institutional affiliation, race, religion, gender, political views, or other non-scholarly considerations.
Fairness, Integrity, and Oversight: Editors should ensure that the editorial and peer review process is fair, objective, timely, and consistent. They are responsible for selecting appropriate reviewers, assessing reviewer comments critically, and taking reasonable steps to identify and address concerns relating to plagiarism, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, undisclosed competing interests, data or image manipulation, or other potential misconduct.
Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must treat submitted manuscripts and related correspondence as confidential and should not disclose information about a submission beyond those directly involved in editorial evaluation and peer review, except where necessary to investigate ethical concerns or comply with legal or institutional requirements.
Conflicts of Interest: Editors must declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could affect, or reasonably be perceived to affect, their editorial judgment. Where such a conflict exists, the editor must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript, and editorial responsibility should be reassigned appropriately. Editors must not use unpublished information or ideas obtained through editorial handling for personal advantage or in their own work without the explicit written consent of the author(s).
Correction of the Scholarly Record: Editors are responsible for helping to maintain the accuracy and integrity of the published record. Where concerns arise before or after publication, editors should assess them CAREfully and take appropriate action, which may include requesting clarification, issuing a correction, publishing an expression of concern, or retracting an article where necessary.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review plays an important role in helping editors assess the suitability, quality, and scientific value of submitted manuscripts. Reviewers should provide clear, constructive, and evidence-based comments that assist editors in decision-making and, where appropriate, help authors improve their work.
Objectivity and Professionalism: Reviews should be conducted objectively, respectfully, and in a scholarly manner. Reviewers should avoid personal criticism of authors and should focus their comments on the content, methodology, interpretation, reporting, and contribution of the manuscript. Criticism should be supported by clear reasoning wherever possible.
Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use any part of a manuscript outside the review process except where expressly authorized by the journal. Information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal or professional advantage.
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment. Reviewers should decline to review a manuscript where competitive, collaborative, institutional, personal, financial, or other relevant relationships could affect, or reasonably be perceived to affect, their impartiality.
Timeliness and Competence: Reviewers should accept review invitations only where they have the appropriate expertise and can complete the review within a reasonable timeframe. If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess the manuscript, or knows that timely review will not be possible, they should notify the editor promptly and decline the invitation.
Acknowledgment of Relevant Work: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors where appropriate. They should also alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published work of which they are aware.

Responsibilities of Authors

Originality, Accuracy, and Responsible Reporting: Authors are responsible for presenting an accurate, honest, and clear account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Data, methods, and findings should be reported truthfully and in sufficient detail to allow understanding, assessment, and, where appropriate, replication. Fabrication, falsification, knowingly inaccurate statements, or misleading presentation of results are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their submitted work is original and that the work, words, data, images, and ideas of others are properly cited or quoted where used. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. Authors must also avoid duplicate submission and redundant publication.
Authorship and Acknowledgments: Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the work and who can take responsibility for its content. All listed authors should have reviewed and approved the final manuscript before submission. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the author list is accurate and complete.
Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest and Funding: Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial competing interests that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the work. Authors must also disclose all relevant sources of funding and support. These disclosures should be made clearly and accurately in the manuscript in accordance with the journal’s policies.
Ethics Approval, Consent, and Compliance: Authors are responsible for ensuring that research involving human participants, animals, identifiable personal information, or other ethically sensitive material has been conducted in accordance with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional standards. Where required, authors must obtain ethics approval, informed consent to participate, and consent for publication, and must report these matters transparently in the manuscript.
Data Access and Cooperation: Authors should retain underlying data and documentation where appropriate and should cooperate with reasonable editorial requests for clarification, supporting information, corrections, or investigation of concerns.
Correction of Errors: If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, they are expected to notify the journal promptly and cooperate in correcting or retracting the work where necessary.

Reporting Guidelines

BioMedicine requires authors to follow appropriate reporting guidelines where applicable in order to support clear, complete, transparent, and reproducible reporting of research.

Authors should use the reporting guideline most relevant to the design of their study. Depending on article type and methodology, these may include:

CONSORT for randomized controlled trials
STROBE for observational studies
PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses
STARD for diagnostic accuracy studies
SPIRIT for study protocols
ARRIVE for animal research
CARE for case reports
other relevant guidance available through the EQUATOR Network

Clinical Trials and Registration

For randomized controlled trials, authors must follow the relevant reporting standards and provide the required CONSORT materials where applicable. Clinical trials should also be registered in a public trials registry, and the manuscript should include the registry name and registration number where required.

Case Reports

All case reports submitted to BioMedicine must follow the CARE reporting guideline. The journal may require compliance with the CARE Checklist to support completeness, clarity, and consistency in case-report reporting.

Other Reporting Guidelines

For study types not covered above, authors are encouraged to consult the EQUATOR Network and apply the reporting guideline most appropriate to their study design. Where relevant, the journal may ask authors to confirm adherence to an applicable reporting guideline or provide a related checklist during submission or revision.

This policy is intended to improve the quality and consistency of published articles and to support good reporting practices across all article types.

Repository and Self-Archiving Policy

BioMedicine supports the broad dissemination and long-term accessibility of scholarly work. In line with the journal’s open access, copyright, and licensing policies, authors may deposit and share their manuscripts in institutional repositories, subject repositories, personal websites, or other appropriate scholarly platforms, provided that the version shared is described accurately and that the published article is properly cited where applicable.

Permitted Versions

Authors may deposit the following versions of their work:

Preprint: the version of the manuscript prior to peer review
Author Accepted Manuscript (AAM): the version accepted for publication after peer review but before final publisher formatting
Version of Record (VoR): the final published version of the article as it appears on the journal website

Preprints

Authors may post or deposit preprints at any time. Preprints should be clearly identified as versions that have not yet undergone peer review. Once the article has been published in BioMedicine, authors are encouraged to update the preprint record with the full citation and DOI of the published article.

Author Accepted Manuscript

Authors may deposit the accepted manuscript in repositories or other non-commercial scholarly platforms. This version should be clearly identified as the accepted version of the manuscript and should not be presented in a way that could be confused with the final published version. Once the article has been published, the deposited record should be updated to include the full citation and DOI of the published article.

Version of Record

Because BioMedicine publishes articles on an open access basis under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), authors may also share or deposit the final published version of the article, provided that full citation details and the DOI are included and the article is used in accordance with the applicable license terms.

Attribution and Linking

For all deposited versions, authors should ensure that the published article is properly identified once available. Deposited records should include, where applicable, the article title, journal title, author names, publication details, and DOI, so that readers can identify and cite the Version of Record correctly.

Research Ethics and Consent

BioMedicine requires that all research involving human participants, human data, human tissue, animals, or other ethically sensitive materials be conducted in accordance with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional standards. Authors are responsible for obtaining all required approvals, permissions, and consents before conducting and reporting the work.

Where applicable, ethics and consent information should be stated clearly in the Methods section of the manuscript and should also be included in a separate declaration section at the end of the manuscript for transparency and consistency.

Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, human tissue, identifiable personal data, or other human materials should be conducted in accordance with recognized ethical principles and applicable institutional and national requirements. Where required, authors must obtain approval from an appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB), ethics committee, or equivalent body before the study is conducted.

The manuscript should state the name of the approving ethics committee or IRB, the approval number or identifier where available, the date of approval where applicable, and, if approval was not required, waived, or exempted, a brief explanation of the basis for that determination. Authors should also indicate whether informed consent to participate was obtained, where required.

Research Involving Animals

Research involving animals should be conducted in accordance with applicable institutional, national, and ethical standards for animal CARE and use. Where required, authors must obtain approval from the relevant animal ethics committee or equivalent review body before conducting the study.

The manuscript should state the name of the approving body, the approval number or identifier where available, the date of approval where applicable, and, if approval was not required, a brief explanation where relevant. Authors should ensure that animal welfare considerations are respected throughout the research process.

Consent to Participate

For studies involving human participants, authors must state in the manuscript whether informed consent to participate was obtained. Where consent was not required, for example because of an ethics waiver, use of fully anonymized retrospective data, or use of public datasets, the manuscript should state this clearly and provide a brief justification where appropriate.

Consent for Publication

Where a manuscript includes case details, patient images, radiologic images, photographs, pedigrees, or any other material from which an individual could potentially be identified, authors must obtain written informed consent for publication.

For case reports, BioMedicine requires consent for publication in all cases, regardless of whether the patient appears to be directly identifiable. This requirement reflects the journal’s commitment to protecting patient privacy, recognizing that identification may sometimes be possible even when names and direct identifiers have been removed.

The manuscript should include a clear statement confirming that appropriate consent for publication was obtained. Authors are responsible for retaining the signed consent documentation and providing it to the journal upon request. Consent forms should not be submitted unless specifically requested by the journal.

Protection of Privacy and Identifying Information

Authors must protect the privacy and dignity of research participants and patients. Names, initials, hospital numbers, and other direct identifiers should not be included unless scientifically necessary and supported by appropriate consent for publication. Even where consent has been obtained, identifying details should be minimized wherever possible.

Documentation and Editorial Review

Authors must retain all relevant ethics approval and consent documentation and provide it to the journal if requested during editorial review or after publication. Failure to obtain appropriate ethics approval or consent, or failure to provide supporting documentation when requested, may result in rejection, correction, retraction, or other editorial action where necessary.

Special Issue Policy

Purpose and Scope

Special issues may be organized to address emerging, high-interest, or strategically important topics within the scope of BioMedicine. These themed collections are intended to bring together high-quality contributions on a focused subject area that is relevant to the journal’s readership and mission. Special issue topics may be identified by the journal’s editorial team or proposed by external scholars. All proposals are subject to editorial evaluation and must be formally approved by the journal before development proceeds.

Call for Papers

When a special issue is approved, the journal may publish a call for papers describing the theme, aims, scope, and submission requirements for that issue. Calls may be announced through the journal website and other appropriate academic communication channels. Authors submitting to a special issue should ensure that their manuscripts clearly fit the stated topic and also comply with the journal’s general submission, ethical, and reporting requirements.

Role of Guest Editors

The journal may appoint one or more Guest Editors for a special issue where subject-specific expertise would be beneficial. The appointment of Guest Editors is optional, and the journal may also manage special issues entirely through its own editorial team.

Where Guest Editors are appointed, their role may include helping refine the theme and scope of the special issue in consultation with the journal, supporting promotion of the call for papers, and assisting with reviewer identification and oversight of the review process.

Guest Editors do not have sole authority to accept or reject manuscripts. Final editorial decisions remain with the Editor-in-Chief or the journal’s designated editorial leadership. This is intended to preserve editorial independence, consistency, and compliance with the journal’s ethical standards and relevant COPE guidance on guest-edited collections.

Submission and Peer Review

Manuscripts submitted to a special issue are handled through the journal’s usual submission and editorial system. They are subject to the same editorial screening, peer review, ethical assessment, and quality standards as manuscripts submitted to regular issues.

Special issue submissions should undergo independent peer review in accordance with the journal’s peer review policy. The involvement of a Guest Editor, where applicable, does not alter the journal’s normal expectations regarding reviewer independence, conflicts of interest, editorial oversight, or final decision-making.

Editorial Independence and Conflicts of Interest

Special issues must be managed in a way that protects editorial independence and transparency. Guest Editors and editors involved in a special issue must declare any conflicts of interest and must not handle manuscripts where such conflicts could affect, or reasonably be perceived to affect, their judgment.

If a Guest Editor or editor is an author or co-author of a submission to the special issue, that manuscript must be handled independently by another appropriate editor. The same standards applied to editor-authored submissions in regular issues also apply to special issue submissions.

Publication and Transparency

Accepted special issue articles will be published according to the journal’s normal publication process and should be clearly identified as part of the special issue. The journal may promote the special issue through its regular communication channels to support visibility and dissemination.

All special issues are expected to meet the same scholarly, editorial, and ethical standards as regular issues of the journal.

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Authors’ Use of AI in Manuscript Preparation

BioMedicine recognizes that generative AI and AI-assisted technologies may be used in limited ways during manuscript preparation. Such tools may be used to support language improvement, readability, organization, or similar editorial assistance, but they must not replace the authors’ own scholarly judgment, scientific interpretation, or intellectual contribution. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and appropriateness of all content submitted to the journal.

Generative AI tools must not be used as authors or co-authors, because they cannot assume responsibility or accountability for the work. Authors must CAREfully review, verify, and edit any AI-assisted output before submission and must ensure that the manuscript is factually accurate, properly referenced, and free from misleading, fabricated, plagiarized, or biased content.

Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies where such use has made a substantive contribution to the wording, content, or preparation of the manuscript. The disclosure should appear as a separate statement at the end of the manuscript, not in the Acknowledgments section. The statement should identify the tool used, include the version where available, and describe the purpose and extent of its use.

Routine use of tools limited to spelling correction, grammar correction, formatting assistance, or reference management does not require formal disclosure, provided that such tools do not generate substantive new content.

Responsible Use, Privacy, and Confidentiality

Authors must use AI tools responsibly and in compliance with applicable standards of privacy, confidentiality, copyright, and data protection. Confidential, sensitive, unpublished, or third-party copyrighted material should not be entered into external AI systems unless the authors have the necessary rights, permissions, and appropriate safeguards in place.

Figures, Images, and Research Use

Generative AI must not be used to create, alter, enhance, or manipulate figures, images, or other visual materials in a way that could misrepresent the underlying data, observations, or findings. BioMedicine does not permit AI-generated images to be used as scientific figures where they could create confusion about the authenticity or origin of the underlying material.

If AI-based tools are used legitimately as part of the research methods, such as image analysis, data processing, or model-assisted interpretation, this use must be described transparently in the manuscript, including the name of the tool and how it was applied.

Use of AI in Peer Review

To protect the confidentiality and integrity of peer review, reviewers must not use generative AI or AI-assisted tools to assess a manuscript or to prepare a review report. Reviewers must not upload manuscript content, in whole or in part, into external AI systems for summarizing, analysis, translation, or text generation. Peer review is an expert intellectual activity requiring human judgment, and reviewers remain fully responsible for the content, fairness, and quality of their reports.

Ongoing Policy Development

Because AI technologies continue to evolve rapidly, BioMedicine may revise this policy over time to maintain appropriate standards of research integrity, transparency, confidentiality, and ethical publishing.

Use of Third-Party Material

Authors are responsible for ensuring that any third-party material included in a submission may be lawfully used, reproduced, and published in the journal. Third-party material may include, but is not limited to, text excerpts, tables, figures, photographs, illustrations, questionnaires, datasets, audio, video, or other content created by someone other than the submitting authors.

Such material may be included only where one of the following applies:

the material is in the public domain;
the material is available under a license that permits the intended reuse and is compatible with the journal’s publication and licensing terms;
the authors have obtained written permission from the copyright holder to use the material in the submitted work and to publish it in the journal.

Where reuse is permitted under an open license, including a Creative Commons license, authors must comply fully with the terms of that license, including any requirements relating to attribution, indication of changes, or restrictions on reuse. Where permission is required, authors must obtain it before submission and retain the relevant documentation.

All reused or adapted third-party material must be properly acknowledged in the manuscript. Appropriate credit should be provided in the text, table footnote, figure legend, acknowledgments, or other suitable location, depending on the type of material used.

Authors are fully responsible for obtaining, retaining, and, where requested, providing evidence of any permissions required for third-party material included in their submission. The journal cannot provide legal advice on copyright or licensing matters and accepts no responsibility for unauthorized use of third-party content.