Policies on Conflicts of Interest for Authors

Authors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest as early as possible, typically by submitting a disclosure form during the submission process and including a statement within the manuscript. Potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial interests such as honoraria, educational grants, funding, participation in speakers' bureaus, employment, consultancies, stock ownership or equity interests, paid expert testimony, or patent-licensing arrangements. Non-financial conflicts, such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, or beliefs related to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript, must also be disclosed. Additionally, all sources of financial support for the work should be acknowledged, including grant numbers or other relevant references, if applicable.

Policies on Conflicts of Interest for Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring that all submitted manuscripts are handled confidentially, and that no content from the manuscripts is disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author and appropriate reviewers. Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have a real or potential conflict of interest due to competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships or affiliations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript. In such cases, the editor will assign the manuscript to another member of the editorial board.

Policies on Conflicts of Interest for Reviewers

Invited reviewers must immediately inform the editors if they have any conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript. In such cases, reviewers should decline the invitation to review, allowing alternative reviewers to be selected.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the explicit written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must remain confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. This obligation applies even to invited reviewers who choose to decline the review invitation.