Ethical standards and procedures
General rules
The submitted manuscripts should meet the general standards and requirements agreed upon by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, known as “Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals”. They should also conform to the high-quality editorial procedures and practice (formulated by the Index Copernicus International Scientific Committee as Consensus Statement on Good Editorial Practice 2004).
The authors are required to follow the ethical principles for clinical research based on the Declaration of Helsinki. The Methods section in original articles and research-in-progress should clearly state that the study was approved by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee and that patients provided written informed consent to participate in the study. All personal details of patients must be kept confidential.
Papers describing animal experiments can be accepted for publication only if the experiment conforms to the legal requirements in Poland as well as with the European Communities Council Directive as of November 24, 1986 or the National Institutes of Health Guide (National Institutes of Health Publications No. 80-23, Revised 1978) for the care and use of laboratory animals for experimental procedure. Authors must provide a full description of their anesthetics and surgical procedures.
Duties and responsibilities of authors
The Authors are obliged to prepare and send the article in accordance with the requirements set out in Instructions for Authors. Moreover, the Authors are obliged to submit statements which will include: a statement about the originality of the content of the article (work not yet published anywhere), the integrity of the copyrights of others and about an existing conflict of interest or lack thereof, as well as the superior permission to publish an article in the journal. Authors are obliged to participate in peer review process, as well as to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes. They also should prepare a list of references following AMA style guide. https://www.amamanualofstyle.com/
Authors are responsible for disclosing all financial and personal relationships that might bias or be seen to bias their work. Authors may, at any time before accepting the article for publication, withdraw the article by submitting a statement in the Editorial System.
Declarations
All manuscripts must contain the following sections under the heading 'Declarations':
- Data availability
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
- Consent for publication
We often find that authors have confused consent for publication with consent for participation in their study. For the purpose of this document, "consent" refers to consent to publish personal information about an individual, and not informed consent for participation in a study.
- Use of AI and AI-assisted technology
See the Data sharing section below and our AI policy.
If any of the sections are not relevant to your manuscript, please include the heading and write 'Not applicable' for that section.
Complaints and appeals
If concerns are raised regarding scientific soundness or originality of a published manuscript, or figure manipulation or other forms of misconduct are alleged in a direct email to the editor or publisher, supported by sound evidence, the editor/publisher responds to the person who raised concerns saying that they are going to investigate and will let them know the outcome but will not necessarily be in contact regularly before then. If the evidence is not provided in the initial communication, the editor/publisher requests it. Based on the evidence material, the editor/publisher investigates according to the appropriate COPE flowchart. If there is an outcome to the investigation, such as a correction or retraction, the person who originally raised the concern is informed about the outcome of the case. Concerns raised via social media are treated in the same way as raised directly if evidence is provided in the initial claim or after a request.
Plagiarism and duplicate publications
All manuscripts submitted to Polymers in Medicine are checked for plagiarism using Similarity Check, a service enabling editors to screen published and submitted content for originality by providing access to the iThenticate software. Cases of suspected scientific misconduct, including plagiarism and duplicate publications, are handled according to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ Core Practices guidance.
Data falsification/fabrication
Data falsification means manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images (e.g. micrographs, gels, radiological images), removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc. Suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript will be investigated according to the relevant COPE procedure. Suspected fabricated data in a published manuscript will also be dealt with following the appropriate COPE procedure.
Data fabrication is understood as making up research findings. Cases of suspected data fabrication will be investigated according to relevant COPE procedure.
Journal policy on data sharing and reproducibility
The journal Polimery w Medycynie - Polymers in Medicine strongly encourages authors to include as supplementary material data sets and code that demonstrate the results shown in their final article. At the end of each paper, the following disclaimer is placed:
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
We require that the supplementary files are always available to the readers. The authors are encouraged to deposit them [with a single DOI but as separate files] in a free of charge repository:
and provide the editorial office with this DOI together with a short description of the contents of the package. We will publish both the description and DOI at the end of the manuscript, as a “Data availability statement” subsection.
Neither Polimery w Medycynie - Polymers in Medicine nor the publisher of this journal (Wroclaw Medical University) are in any way associated with the Zenodo repository – neither financially nor organizationally. We are simply recommending this entity as a reliable and cost-free third-party data storage opportunity.
Citation manipulation
Citation manipulation is a problem when references do not contribute to the scholarly content of the article, and are included solely to increase citations. Any party which includes or requests to add citations where the motivations are merely self-promotional violates publication ethics. Cases of suspected citation manipulation will be investigated according to appropriate COPE document.
Duties and responsibilities of reviewers
Articles are selected for publication in double-blind selection system and published in open access mode. Reviewers review manuscripts via Editorial System on the basis of questions prepared by journal’s Editorial Board. It is also possible for a reviewer to send individual comments to be published in the article content. All judgements and findings in the peer-review process should be objective. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest (they submit an appropriate statement before proceeding to review). Reviewers – if there is a legitimate need – should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited. The articles reviewed by them should be treated confidentially prior to their publication.
Duties and responsibilities of editors
Editors are responsible for deciding which articles are accepted for publication. Editors act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors. Publisher and Editors are always ready to publish corrections, clarifications, withdrawals, and apologies if there is a legitimate need. In the situation when there is a suspicion that an inappropriate research procedure described in the work sent by authors has taken place, the authors are obliged by the Editorial Office – if not yet submitted – to submit information regarding the approval of the described research procedure by a properly established ethics committee to conduct clinical trials.
Research involving human subjects
When reporting on research that involves human subjects, human material, human tissues, or human data, authors must declare that the investigations were carried out following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/), revised in 2013. According to point 23 of this declaration, an approval from the local institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee must be obtained before undertaking the research to confirm the study meets national and international guidelines. As a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ of the article.
Example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."
For non-interventional studies (e.g. surveys, questionnaires, social media research), all participants must be fully informed if the anonymity is assured, why the research is being conducted, how their data will be used and if there are any risks associated. As with all research involving humans, ethical approval from an appropriate ethics committee must be obtained prior to conducting the study. If ethical approval is not required, authors must either provide an exemption from the ethics committee or are encouraged to cite the local or national legislation that indicates ethics approval is not required for this type of study. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee which provided this should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ with a full explanation regarding why ethical approval was not required.
A written informed consent for publication must be obtained from participating patients. Data relating to individual participants must be described in detail, but private information identifying participants need not be included unless the identifiable materials are of relevance to the research (for example, photographs of participants’ faces that show a particular symptom). Patients’ initials or other personal identifiers must not appear in any images. For manuscripts that include any case details, personal information, and/or images of patients, authors must obtain signed informed consent for publication from patients (or their relatives/guardians) before submitting to an MDPI journal. Patient details must be anonymized as far as possible, e.g., do not mention specific age, ethnicity, or occupation where they are not relevant to the conclusions. Editors reserve the right to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.
You may refer to our sample form and provide an appropriate form after consulting with your affiliated institution. For the purposes of publishing in Polim Med, a consent, permission, or release form should include unlimited permission for publication in all formats (including print, electronic, and online), in sublicensed and reprinted versions (including translations and derived works), and in other works and products under open access license. To respect patients’ and any other individual’s privacy, please do not send signed forms. The journal reserves the right to ask authors to provide signed forms if necessary.
If the study reports research involving vulnerable groups, an additional check may be performed. The submitted manuscript will be scrutinized by the editorial office and upon request, documentary evidence (blank consent forms and any related discussion documents from the ethics board) must be supplied. Additionally, when studies describe groups by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, disease, etc., explanation regarding why such categorization was needed must be clearly stated in the article.
Ethical guidelines for the use of animals in research
The editors will require that the benefits potentially derived from any research causing harm to animals are significant in relation to any cost endured by animals, and that procedures followed are unlikely to cause offense to the majority of readers. Authors should particularly ensure that their research complies with the commonly-accepted '3Rs':
- Replacement of animals by alternatives wherever possible,
- Reduction in number of animals used, and
- Refinement of experimental conditions and procedures to minimize the harm to animals.
Authors must include details on housing, husbandry and pain management in their manuscript.
For further guidance authors should refer to the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Used in Scientific Procedures, American Association for Laboratory Animal Science or European Animal Research Association.
If national legislation requires it, studies involving vertebrates or higher invertebrates must only be carried out after obtaining approval from the appropriate ethics committee. As a minimum, the project identification code, date of approval and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated. Research procedures must be carried out in accordance with national and institutional regulations. Statements on animal welfare should confirm that the study complied with all relevant legislation. Authors are responsible for correctness of the statements provided in the manuscript.
If ethical approval is not required by national laws, authors must provide an exemption from the ethics committee, if one is available. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee that provided this should be stated with a full explanation on why the ethical approval was not required.
If no animal ethics committee is available to review applications, authors should be aware that the ethics of their research will be evaluated by reviewers and editors. Authors should provide a statement justifying the work from an ethical perspective, using the same utilitarian framework that is used by ethics committees. Authors may be asked to provide this even if they have received ethical approval.
Adv Clin Exp Med endorses the ARRIVE guidelines (arriveguidelines.org/) for reporting experiments using live animals. Authors and reviewers must use the ARRIVE guidelines as a checklist, which can be found at https://arriveguidelines.org/sites/arrive/files/documents/ARRIVE%20Compliance%20Questionnaire.pdf. Editors reserve the right to ask for the checklist and to reject submissions that do not adhere to these guidelines, to reject submissions based on ethical or animal welfare concerns or if the procedure described does not appear to be justified by the value of the work presented.
- NSW Department of Primary Industries and Animal Research Review Panel. Three Rs. Available online: https://www.animalethics.org.au/three-rs
- Home Office. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Bred, Supplied or Used for Scientific Purposes. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388535/CoPanimalsWeb.pdf
- American Association for Laboratory Animal Science. The Scientific Basis for Regulation of Animal Care and Use. Available online: https://www.aalas.org/about-aalas/position-papers/scientific-basis-for-regulation-of-animal-care-and-use
- European Animal Research Association. EU regulations on animal research. Available online: https://www.eara.eu/animal-research-law
Research involving cell lines
Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines the provenance should be stated and references must also be given to either a published paper or to a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin.
An example of Ethical Statements:
The HCT116 cell line was obtained from XXXX. The MLH1+ cell line was provided by XXXXX, Ltd. The DLD-1 cell line was obtained from Dr. XXXX. The DR-GFP and SA-GFP reporter plasmids were obtained from Dr. XXX and the Rad51K133A expression vector was obtained from Dr. XXXX.
Sex and gender in research
We encourage our authors to follow the ‘Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines’ and to include sex and gender considerations where relevant. Authors should use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully in order to avoid confusing both terms. Article titles and/or abstracts should indicate clearly what sex(es) the study applies to. Authors should also describe in the background, whether sex and/or gender differences may be expected; report how sex and/or gender were accounted for in the design of the study; provide disaggregated data by sex and/or gender, where appropriate; and discuss respective results. If a sex and/or gender analysis was not conducted, the rationale should be given in the Discussion.
Borders and territories
Potential disputes over borders and territories may have particular relevance for authors in describing their research or in an author or editor correspondence address, and should be respected. Content decisions are an editorial matter and where there is a potential or perceived dispute or complaint, the editorial team will attempt to find a resolution that satisfies parties involved.
Adv Clin Exp Med stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliation.
Image integrity
Images submitted with a manuscript for review should be minimally processed. No specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced. The grouping or consolidation of images from multiple sources must be made explicit by the arrangement of the figure and in the figure legend. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they are applied to the whole image and if they do not obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information present in the original, including backgrounds.
Unprocessed data files may be requested to help in manuscript evaluation during the peer review process or may be needed to respond to post-publication issues that may arise with published papers. Unprocessed data and metadata files should be retained, ideally forever.
Authorship and AI tools – COPE position statement
The use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT or Large Language Models, in research publications is expanding rapidly. COPE joins organisations, such as WAME and the JAMA Network among others, to state that AI tools cannot be listed as an author of a paper.
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 in disclosing in the Materials and methods (or similar section) of the paper 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.
The above statement has been published by the Committee on Publication Etics (COPE) and is available on the official website of COPE:
Please consult also our guidelines regarding the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies.
Ethical consideration
The authors are required to follow the ethical principles for clinical research based on the Declaration of Helsinki. The Methods section in original articles and research-in-progress should clearly state that the study was approved by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee and that patients provided written informed consent to participate in the study. All personal details of patients must be kept confidential.
Papers describing animal experiments can be accepted for publication only if the experiment conforms to the legal requirements in Poland as well as with the European Communities Council Directive as of November 24, 1986 or the National Institute of Health Guide (National Institute of Health Publications No. 80-23, Revised 1978) for the care and use of Laboratory Animals for experimental procedure. Authors must provide a full description of their anesthetics and surgical procedures.