ICR Publications Ltd UK

Author Resources

Peer Review

The editor shall ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary, the editor should seek additional opinions. The editor shall select reviewers who have suitable expertise in the relevant field, considering the need for appropriate, inclusive, and diverse representation. The editor shall follow best practices in avoiding the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers8. The editor shall review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citation made by reviewers to determine whether there is any potential for bias.

Fair Play

The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. When nominating potential editorial board members, the editor shall consider the need for appropriate, inclusive, and diverse representation. The editorial policies of the journal should encourage transparency and complete, honest reporting, and the editor should ensure that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected of them. The editor shall use the journal’s standard electronic submission system for all journal communications. The editor shall establish, along with the publisher, a transparent mechanism for appeal against editorial decisions.

Journal Metrics

The editor must not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons. Authors should not be required to include references to the editor’s own articles or products and services in which the editor has an interest.

Confidentiality

The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals, institutions, and other organizations that investigate cases of research misconduct where deemed necessary to investigate suspected ethical breaches9. Unless the journal is operating an open peer-review system and/or reviewers have agreed to disclose their names, the editor must protect reviewers’ identities. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Journal Editorial Process

This policy has been established in response to the emergence of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies* and aims to provide clear guidance and transparency for authors, editors, and reviewers. ICR Publications (ICRP) will closely monitor ongoing developments in this area and will update or refine the policy as necessary. The following guidelines are specifically for editors.

A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors must not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool, as this could violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, if the manuscript contains personally identifiable information, could breach data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the manuscript, including any notification or decision letters, as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. Therefore, editors should not upload their letters into an AI tool, even if it is just to improve language and readability.

Peer review is central to the scientific ecosystem, and ICRP adheres to the highest standards of integrity in this process. Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript involves responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript, as the critical thinking and original assessment required for this work are beyond the scope of this technology. There is a risk that the technology could generate incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The editor is responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision, and the communication thereof to the authors.

ICRP’s AI author policy states that authors are permitted to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper, with appropriate disclosure as per our instructions in ICRP’s Guide for Authors. Editors can find such disclosure at the bottom of the paper in a separate section before the list of references. If an editor suspects that an author or a reviewer has violated our AI policies, they should inform the publisher.

Please note that ICRP employs identity-protected AI-assisted technologies such as those used during the screening process to conduct completeness and plagiarism checks and identify suitable reviewers. These in-house or licensed technologies respect author confidentiality. Our programs are subject to rigorous evaluations of bias and comply with data privacy and data security requirements.

ICRP embraces new AI-driven technologies that support reviewers and editors in the editorial process and continues to develop and adopt in-house or licensed technologies that respect the confidentiality and data privacy rights of authors, reviewers, and editors.

Generative AI is a type of artificial intelligence technology that can produce various types of content including text, imagery, audio, and synthetic data. Examples include ChatGPT, NovelAI, Jasper AI, Rytr AI, DALL-E, etc.

Declaration of Competing Interests

Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to ICR Publications (ICRP) in writing prior to the appointment of the editor and updated if and when new conflicts arise. ICRP may publish such declarations in the journal.

The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which they have written themselves or that have been written by family members or colleagues, or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Furthermore, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures; peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there should be a clear statement to this effect on any such paper that is published10.

The editor shall apply ICRP’s policy relating to the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers, e.g., the ICMJE guidelines1.

Vigilance Over the Published Record

The editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer, and editorial) in conjunction with ICRP (or society).

Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications with the relevant institutions and research bodies. The editor shall further make appropriate use of ICRP’s systems for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism.

An editor presented with convincing evidence of misconduct should coordinate with ICRP (and/or society) to arrange the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant10.

Reference

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions