Research Ethics Regulations 

Chapter 1. General Provisions

Article 1. Title

These regulations shall be referred to as the Research Ethics Regulations of the “Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP)” journal.

Article 2. Purpose

Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP) is the official scholarly journal of the Global Health Research Network (GHRN). HRP aims to advance interdisciplinary research in healthcare science by publishing high-quality academic articles in areas including but not limited to aging, chronic disease prevention, digital health innovation, health equity, translational medicine, and public health practice. Article types include original research, reviews, short communications, case reports, and commentaries.

The purpose of these regulations is to define the ethical principles and standards that all researchers involved—directly or indirectly—in academic activities related to HRP are required to follow, thereby ensuring research integrity and scientific responsibility in all stages of publication.

Chapter 2. Scope of Research Misconduct 

Article 1. The following acts are considered research misconduct under the ethical policies of Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP):

1. Fabrication
   The act of inventing data or research outcomes that do not exist, and recording or reporting them as if they were real.

2. Falsification
   The act of distorting the content or results of research by artificially manipulating materials, equipment, or processes, or by selectively modifying or omitting data.

3. Plagiarism
   The act of using another person’s original ideas or work—excluding commonly known facts—without proper attribution, thereby presenting them as one’s own. This includes:
   ① Using all or part of another researcher’s work without proper citation
   ② Paraphrasing or partially modifying the wording or structure of another's work without appropriate credit
   ③ Using someone else’s original ideas without acknowledgment
   ④ Translating and using another person’s work without citation

4. Inappropriate Authorship Assignment
   The act of either excluding rightful contributors or including individuals without significant contribution for reasons such as courtesy or favor. This includes:
   ① Granting authorship to individuals who did not contribute meaningfully to the intellectual content
   ② Omitting individuals who did substantially contribute to the research
   ③ Publishing a student’s thesis or dissertation in a journal listing only the advisor as the author

5. Duplicate Submission or Publication
   The act of submitting or publishing content that is identical or substantially similar to previously published work without proper disclosure, in order to unfairly gain credit (e.g., for grants or evaluations).
   However, a secondary publication may be allowed under the following conditions:
   ① Both journals' editorial boards approve the secondary publication
   ② The secondary publication clearly indicates prior publication of the content
   ③ The secondary version is preferably an abridged form and includes the same authors
   ④ The secondary publication targets a different audience than the original

6. Other serious deviations
   Any other actions that significantly violate generally accepted research norms and ethical standards may also be considered misconduct.

Article 2. Criteria for Authorship 

Authorship for manuscripts submitted to Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP) must adhere to the authorship standards set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Individuals designated as authors must meet all four of the following criteria. Those who do not fulfill all of these criteria should instead be listed in the Acknowledgments section as contributors.

1. Made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; AND

2. Participated in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND

3. Provided final approval of the version to be published; AND

4. Accepted responsibility for the entire work, ensuring that any questions regarding the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are properly investigated and resolved.

Article 3. Ethics Guidelines for the Editorial Board and Peer Reviewers

1. Fairness
   The Editorial Board holds full responsibility for deciding whether a submitted manuscript will be accepted or rejected. Editors must treat all submissions with respect for the author’s academic work and contributions to healthcare and nutrition science, without discrimination based on race, gender, religion, educational background, or any other unrelated factor.

2. Confidentiality
   Editorial Board members shall maintain strict confidentiality and must not disclose the identity of the manuscript’s authors to reviewers or any external party.

3. Selection of Reviewers
   Editors are responsible for selecting peer reviewers who have appropriate expertise in the subject matter and are capable of conducting objective, fair, and impartial evaluations.

4. Duties of Reviewers
   Reviewers must adhere to the review timeline, evaluate the manuscript with diligence and professionalism, and provide constructive, detailed feedback in their review reports.

5. Reviewer Responsibilities
   If a reviewer considers themselves unqualified to assess a particular manuscript, they must notify the Editorial Board immediately. Any suspicion of research misconduct identified during the peer review process must also be reported to the Editorial Board without delay.

6. Objectivity in Peer Review
   Peer reviewers must evaluate manuscripts based on objective criteria, avoiding influence from personal beliefs or relationships with the authors. Manuscripts should not be rejected without reasonable justification, nor solely because the content conflicts with the reviewer’s viewpoint. Reviewers must carefully read the manuscript before providing their recommendations.

Article 4. Specification of Publication Achievements 

1. Authors should receive credit only for work in which they have made a direct and meaningful contribution, and they must be prepared to take responsibility for the integrity of that work.
2. The authorship order, including that of translators or collaborators, should accurately reflect the level of contribution made by each individual, regardless of institutional rank or position. Individuals should not be listed as first author, corresponding author, or co-author solely on the basis of their administrative role or seniority. Similarly, excluding individuals who made substantial intellectual contributions is not ethically permissible. Minor contributions should be recognized appropriately through footnotes, introductory statements, or the acknowledgments section.

Article 5. Guide for Citation and Referencing

1. Authors are responsible for citing sources accurately and transparently. All references to previously published work must include appropriate citations. Unpublished data or personal communications may be cited only with the explicit permission of the original source.
2. When referencing or quoting the work of others, authors must clearly indicate the origin of the ideas or data through footnotes or endnotes. The author’s own interpretations or conclusions must be distinctly separated from the results or opinions of the cited works.

Chapter 3.  Implementation of the Research Ethics Regulations 

Article 1. Applicability

All individuals participating in academic research activities under the Global Health Research Network (GHRN), including members, authors, reviewers, and editors affiliated with Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP), are deemed to have agreed to comply with these Research Ethics Regulations from the time of implementation.

Article 1. Applicability

All individuals participating in academic research activities under the Global Health Research Network (GHRN), including members, authors, reviewers, and editors affiliated with Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP), are deemed to have agreed to comply with these Research Ethics Regulations from the time of implementation.

Article 2. Organization of the Research Ethics Committee (REC)

1. A special Research Ethics Committee (REC) shall be established to deliberate and resolve matters related to research misconduct and ethical compliance.

2. The REC shall consist of at least five members appointed by the GHRN Executive Board, based on the recommendation of the HRP Editorial Board.

3. Meetings of the REC shall be convened by the Chairperson, either at the Chairperson’s discretion or at the request of the President of GHRN.

4. A meeting of the REC requires a majority quorum, and decisions are made by a majority vote of those present. The Chairperson is counted toward quorum but does not have voting rights.

5. If the subject under investigation is a current member of the REC, a temporary replacement shall be appointed by the Chairperson from among eligible delegates of the GHRN.

6. All REC members are required to maintain strict confidentiality regarding all deliberations and proceedings.

Article 3. Authority of the Research Ethics Committee

The REC is authorized to conduct thorough investigations into any suspected violations of these research ethics guidelines. The committee may collect evidence from the complainant, the accused, witnesses, and any relevant data sources. If misconduct is confirmed through the committee’s review, the REC shall recommend appropriate disciplinary actions to the Chairperson of GHRN.

Article 4. Matters Subject to the Deliberation of the Research Ethics Committee (REC) 

The REC shall be responsible for reviewing and deciding on the following matters:

1. Allegations of research misconduct related to manuscripts, abstracts, reports, or research proposals associated with Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP) or the Global Health Research Network (GHRN), including violations of Articles 2 and 3 of these Ethics Regulations.

2. Issues pertaining to research ethics education and training.

3. Research ethics concerns involving principal investigators or project managers affiliated with GHRN-supported research.

4. Revisions to the Research Ethics Regulations and other related matters as proposed by the Chairperson.

Article 5. Investigation and Deliberation Procedure of the Research Ethics Committee

The REC shall follow these procedures in addressing suspected research misconduct:

1. Duty to Cooperate: The Respondent (the individual accused) must fully cooperate with the REC investigation. Failure to do so constitutes a violation of the Ethics Regulations.

2. Right to Respond: The Respondent shall be provided with adequate opportunity to explain, respond to, and defend against the allegations.

3. Confidentiality of the Complainant: The identity of the Complainant shall remain confidential. In principle, the Complainant must report under their real name.

4. Confidentiality of the Respondent: The identity of the Respondent shall remain undisclosed until the investigation is complete and a final determination is made. Exceptions apply only in cases where public safety, legal violations, or serious harm is at risk.

5. Protection of Rights: Care must be taken to avoid unnecessary harm to the Respondent’s reputation or infringement on their rights.

       Detailed Procedure

1. The REC Chairperson shall conduct a preliminary review within one week of receiving a complaint to determine whether a formal investigation is warranted. If deemed unnecessary, the Chairperson must inform the committee members and notify the Complainant in writing or via email.

2. If a formal investigation is initiated, the Respondent must be notified within one week, and be given an opportunity to submit a defense, either in writing or by email, prior to the investigation.

3. Upon receiving the Respondent’s statement (or if no statement is received, which is considered a waiver of defense), the REC shall begin its investigation and complete the review within two months.

4. The results of the investigation shall be communicated to both the Complainant and the Respondent in writing and by email.

5. If either party disputes the result, they may file an appeal within two weeks. A reinvestigation will be conducted if the appeal is considered valid.

6. In cases involving sponsored research, the final decision shall be reported to the funding agency within 10 days. In publication-related misconduct, a full report will be sent to relevant institutions, and a public notice will be issued through the GHRN website to prevent recurrence.

7. All records of the investigation and outcome must be securely stored as both digital and printed files for at least five years from the conclusion date.
   

Article 6. Disciplinary Measures for Research Misconduct

If a case of research misconduct is confirmed through investigation and deliberation by the Research Ethics Committee (REC), the GHRN Executive Board shall convene to make a final determination regarding disciplinary action. The nature and severity of the sanction shall be based on the seriousness of the misconduct, as recommended by the REC. The following measures may be imposed:

1. Written Warning
   A formal letter of warning is issued to the individual who committed the misconduct.

2. Submission Ban
   The individual is prohibited from submitting manuscripts to Healthcare Research and Practice (HRP) or other GHRN-affiliated journals. The ban will be for a minimum of three years, with the exact duration determined by the REC based on the severity of the case.

3. Notification to Institutions and Retraction
   If the misconduct involves a published article, the corresponding institutions will be informed. The policies outlined in HRP’s "Guidelines for Authors" and external ethical standards (e.g., COPE guidelines) will be followed. In cases of duplicate publication, the other journal involved will be notified and asked to retract the article and apply appropriate sanctions.

4. Dismissal from GHRN Research Activities
   Researchers engaged in GHRN projects who commit misconduct will be removed from their role and banned from participating in future GHRN-sponsored research activities for up to five years, depending on the gravity of the offense.

5. Public Disclosure
   All confirmed cases of research misconduct shall be publicly posted on the GHRN website and announced to members in order to raise awareness and prevent recurrence.

Article 7. Research Ethics Education

All members of the GHRN and individuals participating in academic activities related to Healthcare Research and Practice shall receive prior education on the Research Ethics Regulations. This is to ensure awareness and compliance before involvement in any research or publication activities.

Article 8. Amendments to the Regulations

Amendments to these Research Ethics Regulations must be made in accordance with the official bylaws and amendment procedures of the Global Health Research Network (GHRN) and are subject to approval by the GHRN Executive Board.

Chapter 4. GHRN Code of Ethics for Scientists and Engineer 

All members of the Global Health Research Network (GHRN) and individuals involved in its academic and scientific activities must adhere to the following Code of Ethics, which aligns with globally accepted standards including those set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

1. Social Responsibility

Researchers must conduct scientific and intellectual activities with an awareness of their professional and societal responsibilities. Scientific knowledge and technological innovations should ultimately serve to improve human well-being, public health, and environmental sustainability.

2. Core Research Ethics Principles

Honesty, integrity, and accuracy are foundational to reliable science. All research activities—proposal development, experimental execution, data analysis, and reporting—must reflect these principles. Research misconduct such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and duplicate publication is strictly prohibited.

3. Principle of Equality and Fairness

All scientists and engineers must be treated equally, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, educational background, or personal beliefs. Equal rights and responsibilities in research activities must be upheld.

4. Professional Conduct

Researchers are expected to maintain professionalism and dignity in all research activities, upholding the highest ethical and scientific standards in pursuit of knowledge and innovation.

5. Legal and Regulatory Compliance

All research must comply with applicable international laws, institutional regulations, and ethical codes. Researchers are responsible for understanding and adhering to these requirements.

6. Respect for Research Subjects

Human subject research must respect dignity, autonomy, and privacy, in accordance with IRB-approved protocols and bioethical standards. For animal studies, researchers must follow IACUC guidelines and treat animals ethically. Environmental research must respect biodiversity and promote sustainability.

7. Data Integrity and Record Keeping

Researchers must maintain accurate, verifiable records of data and samples throughout the research lifecycle. All records must be preserved for the period required by institutional or funding agency policy.

8. Authorship and Intellectual Property

Only individuals who made a substantial contribution to the research should be listed as authors. Contributions may include study conception, design, execution, data analysis, or interpretation. Proper citation and acknowledgment of prior work is mandatory. All authors share collective responsibility for the published content.

9. Commitment to Society

Researchers have both the right to disseminate their findings and the duty to engage with society in a responsible and transparent manner. They must respond constructively to societal needs and expectations.

10. Conflict of Interest Disclosure

All actual or potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed at the time of manuscript submission or funding application. In all cases, public interest should take precedence over private or financial gain.

11. Fostering a Responsible Research Culture

Researchers must help cultivate a culture of intellectual openness, respect, fairness, and collaboration. This environment should encourage ethical inquiry and protect the freedom to pursue responsible research.

12. Ethics Education

Principal investigators and academic leaders must promote ethical literacy by educating team members and collaborators about responsible research practices. Ethical training is essential to ensure full compliance with this Code.