Journal Pharmaceutical Innovation and Development (JPID) is committed to maintaining integrity, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing. This statement establishes the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher throughout submission, peer review, and publication.

The journal’s ethical framework is informed by guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and relevant recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). All parties involved in publication are expected to protect the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record. COPE | ICMJE Recommendations

1. Responsibilities of Authors

Originality and acknowledgment of sources

Authors must submit original work and appropriately acknowledge the ideas, methods, data, images, and words of others. Plagiarism, unattributed copying, and misleading reuse of previously published material are unacceptable.

Related manuscripts, preprints, theses, and other prior dissemination must be disclosed so that the editor can assess potential overlap.

Accurate reporting and data integrity

Authors must present their methods and findings accurately, including relevant limitations. Fabrication, falsification, selective omission intended to mislead, and inappropriate manipulation of images or data are prohibited.

Authors should retain supporting research records and provide relevant data for editorial assessment when reasonably requested, subject to ethical, confidentiality, and legal restrictions. Any restrictions on data access should be explained.

Authorship and accountability

Authorship should reflect substantial intellectual contributions, participation in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approval of the final version, and accountability for the work. Contributors who do not meet authorship requirements should be acknowledged with their permission.

All authors must approve the submission and author order. Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors must explain the reason and include agreement from all affected authors. Unresolved authorship disputes may be referred to the relevant institution.

Multiple submissions

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Substantially overlapping publications must be disclosed and appropriately referenced.

Disclosure of interests and funding

Authors must disclose financial and nonfinancial relationships that could influence the research or its interpretation. Funding sources and the funder’s role in study design, analysis, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions must be stated. Where no competing interests exist, authors should explicitly declare this.

2. Research Involving Humans and Animals

Research involving human participants, identifiable personal information, or human biological materials must receive appropriate ethical approval or a documented exemption. Manuscripts must identify the reviewing committee and provide approval details where applicable.

Authors must explain how informed consent was obtained or why an authorized waiver applied. Publication of identifiable participant information requires appropriate consent for publication. Confidential information must be protected. These requirements reflect the principles described in the ICMJE guidance on research participants.

Animal research must comply with applicable institutional and national requirements. Authors must report relevant approval details and describe measures to minimize pain, distress, and unnecessary animal use.

Clinical trial manuscripts should report the registry and registration number, where applicable, and explain any delayed or missing registration.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must assess manuscripts according to their scientific quality, methodological rigor, originality, ethical acceptability, and relevance to the journal.

Editorial decisions must remain independent of commercial interests, personal relationships, and discriminatory considerations. Any publication charges must not determine acceptance.

Editors must protect confidential submission information, select appropriately qualified reviewers, and manage competing interests. An editor with a conflict must withdraw from handling the manuscript. Submissions by editors or editorial board members must be assigned to an independent editor.

Editors are responsible for communicating decisions clearly and taking appropriate action when credible concerns arise before or after publication.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers should accept assignments only when they have suitable expertise and can complete the review within the agreed period. They must disclose competing interests and decline reviews when impartiality cannot be maintained.

Reviews must be objective, constructive, and supported by clear reasoning. Personal criticism and requests for unnecessary citations are inappropriate.

Manuscripts and associated materials are confidential. Reviewers must not share them, use unpublished findings for personal advantage, or involve another person without editorial permission. Suspected plagiarism, unreliable data, or other ethical concerns should be reported confidentially to the editor.

5. Artificial Intelligence and Assisted Technologies

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the work. Authors remain accountable for the accuracy, originality, references, and integrity of all submitted content.

Authors must disclose substantive use of AI in manuscript preparation, image creation, data processing, or analysis, identifying the tool and its purpose. AI must not be used to fabricate data, sources, or research findings. This policy follows the COPE position on authorship and AI tools.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts or research data to external AI services without appropriate authorization and confidentiality safeguards.

6. Allegations of Misconduct

Concerns about plagiarism, fabricated or falsified findings, manipulated peer review, undisclosed conflicts, or other misconduct should be submitted through the journal’s published editorial contact details, with supporting evidence.

The editor will assess the concern fairly, seek an explanation from the relevant parties, and consult institutions or other responsible bodies when necessary. A person implicated in a complaint must not lead its assessment.

Similarity scores or automated detection results alone do not establish misconduct. Decisions must consider the underlying evidence and context.

7. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-publication Discussion

Authors must promptly notify the journal of significant errors discovered in their published work. The journal will assess whether a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is appropriate.

Notices should explain the reason for the action and be linked to the affected article. Retraction serves to correct the scholarly record. The article should normally remain accessible with its retracted status clearly identified.

Reasoned scholarly criticism and evidence-based post-publication discussion are welcome.

8. Complaints and Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by providing a clear explanation and relevant evidence through the journal’s editorial contact. Appeals should identify a substantive scientific misunderstanding or procedural concern.

Complaints concerning editorial conduct will be assessed by an uninvolved editor or publisher representative. An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.

9. Responsibilities of the Publisher

The publisher must support editorial independence, confidentiality, ethical complaint handling, and the correction of the scholarly record. Copyright, licensing, fees, and peer-review policies should be publicly stated and consistent with the journal’s actual practices, in accordance with the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing