Research and Publication Ethics
Revised on March, 2020
This code aims to cure ethics and veracity of a field of study by promoting and encouraging members of the Society of Korean Medical Ophthalmology, Otolaryngology, and Dermatology and contributors of journal to perform a research and writing of thesis in ethical procedure.
2. Research ethics
2-1. Ethics for writer
The thesis submitted to journal should follow ethics ut infra.
2-1-1. Protection of human right for patient
When an object of study is human, predicate on Helsinki declaration, purpose and method of study, procedure, risk and benefit of study, and maintenance of secrete on object of study has to be given to a patient and protector, and voluntary agreement should be obtained. In the case of a young child and adolescent under 18, both patient and protector should write the agreement, however, when it is difficult to get agreement in writing by a young child under 14, oral explanation should be given under the attendance of a protector, and agreement should be obtained. However, in the case of natural observation, when observation is in public place, anonymity of object child is perfectly guaranteed, and it is judged that it has no negative influence on an object of study, then, written agreement does not have to be obtained.
2-1-2. Object of study (animal)
When an object of study is an animal, it needs to be considered that study method, species of animal used, and number of an animal is proper, and secure, take care, use and process the animal under the professional standard. Also, the effort must be made to duce pain and inconvenience of animal, and step made for this should be written.
2-1-3. Selection and Description of Participants
Clearly describe the selection of observational or experimental participants(healthy individuals or patients, includincontrols), including eligibility and exclusion criteria and a description of the source population. Because the relevance of such variables as age, sex, or ethnicity is not always known at the time of study design, researchers should aim for inclusion of representative populations into all study types and at a minimum provide descriptive data for these and other relevant demographic variables. Ensure correct use of the terms sex (when reporting biological factors) and gender (identity, psychosocial or cultural factors), and, unless inappropriate, report the sex and/or gender of study participants, the sex of animals or cells, and describe the methods used to determine sex and gender. If the study was done involving an exclusive population, for example in only one sex, authors should justify why, except in obvious cases (e.g.,prostate cancer). Authors should define how they determined race or ethnicity and justify their relevance. Authors should use neutral, precise, and respectful language to descirbe study participants and avoid the use of terminology that might stigmatize participants.
2-1-4. Research misconducts
The thesis with following research misconducts is not being published.
① “Counterfeit” is a behavior that creates data or research result that does not exist untruthfully.
② “Falsification” is a behavior that distorts contents or result of research by artificially controlling research material, device, and processing, deleting data randomly.
③ “Plagiarism” is a behavior that cites or pirates other`s idea, contents of research, and result without proper approval.
④ “Improper indication of thesis writer” is a behavior that does not give the qualification of thesis writer to a person who made scientific, technical contribution on contents or result of research without proper reason, or grant someone who did not make scientific, technical contribution on contents or result of research a qualification of thesis writer with a reasons such as token of appreciation or for respectful treatment.
⑤ “Multiple publications” is that multiply publishes the thesis with the same object of research and research method on other journal, or issue in multiple volumes of thesis.
⑥ Other research misconducts are; the behavior that intentionally disrupts investigation on suspicion about misconduct of oneself or others, or harms informant, the behavior that is significantly out of range that is usually accepted in scientific world.
2-1-5. Redundant publication
Submission and published thesis is limited to the original work.
① Thesis that is published or being submitted to other journal cannot be submitted to this journal, and the thesis that is published or being submitted to this journal cannot be published to other journals.
① Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
② Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
③ Final approval of the version to be published
④ Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved
2-2. Ethics for editing commission to follow
2-2-1. Edition staff should handle the thesis submitted to be published on journal fairly based on quality or thesis and submission rule disregard to any preconception or personal intimacy as well as gender, age, or affiliated organization of writer.
2-2-2. Edition staff should request evaluation of submitted thesis to judge with professional knowledge in concerned area and ability to fairly judge. In request of evaluation, try to make objective evaluation by avoiding judge with too much intimacy with writer, or excessively hostile evaluation. However, if evaluation on the same thesis significantly varies between judges, advice can be obtained from the third professional of concerned area.
2-2-3. Edition staff should not make profile of writer or contents of thesis public to people except judge until the publication of submitted thesis is determined.
2-3. Ethics for judge to follow
2-3-1. Judge must evaluate the thesis that editing commission of journal request faithfully within the period decided by evaluation regulation, and give notice about evaluation result to editing commission. If one considers oneself as not a well-qualified person to evaluate contents of thesis, give notice to editing commission without delay.
2-3-2. Judge should evaluate the thesis fairly based on objective standard without depending on personal academic belief. Judge should not eliminate the thesis without specifying sufficient reason, or eliminate for the reason that it contradicts with own point of view or interpretation, and should not evaluate subject thesis without carefully reading.
2-3-3. Judge should respect personality and independency of writer as a professional intellectual. Judge should speak own judgment on thesis on written opinion of evaluation, however, the reason should be explained in detail for the part that needs to be improved. Preferably use polite and smooth expression, and avoid expression that depreciates writer or offensive expression.
2-3-4. Judge should keep the secret of subject thesis. Except for the case that asks for special advice for evaluation of thesis, thesis cannot be shown to others, and contents of thesis should not be discussed with others. Also, contents of thesis cannot be cited without agreement of writer before the journal that thesis is published is published.
3. Index of enforcement for ethics
3-1. Oath of ethics
Members of the Society of Korean Medical Ophthalmology, Otolaryngology, and Dermatology should sign to follow this ethics.
3-2. Report violation of ethics
When a member recognizes that other member violated ethics, one must put effort to correct problem by arouse ethics to that member. However, when a problem cannot be corrected or the case that clearly violates ethics is revealed, one can report this to ethics commission of association. Ethics commission should not open the identity of member who reported problem to association to outside.
3-3. Composition of ethics commission
Ethics commission belongs to editing commission compose the members of 5 or more, and member is appointed by president with recommendation from editing commission. A chairperson is elected by mutual vote.
3-4. Authority of ethics commission
Ethics commission can propose a proper disciplinary action to president about the case reported as violation of ethics when violation of ethics is decided as a fact after broad investigation through informant, examinee, witness, and evidence.
3-5. Investigation and deliberation of ethics commission
The member reported for violation of ethics should cooperate with the investigation by ethics commission. Not being cooperated to this investigation is violation of ethics as itself.
3-6. Guarantee of opportunity to explain
Sufficient opportunity to explain should be given to the member who is reported for violation of ethics.
3-7. Secrete protection on target for investigation
Until the final disciplinary punishment of association is determined for the violation of ethics, members of ethics should not make identity of concerned member public.
3-8. Procedure and contents of disciplinary action
When there is discipline proposal from ethics commission, president summons board of directors, and finally determines whether to discipline and contents of disciplinary action. Disciplinary action such as warning, suspension or deprivation of qualification for membership can be given to the member who is judged to violate ethics, and can notice this action to other organizations or individual.
3-9. Amendment of ethics
Amendment procedure of ethics is based upon regulation amendment procedure of this association. Once the code of ethic is amended, it is considered that the members who signed to follow existing regulation are signed to follow the new regulation without additional sign.
This regulation is being enforced from April, 1st, 2008.
This regulation is written by referring research ethic regulation of Korea ethics society.