Peer Review, Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Submission is considered on the conditions that papers are previously unpublished and are not offered simultaneously elsewhere; that authors have read and approved the content, and all authors have also declared all competing interests; and that the work complies with the ethical approval requirements and has been conducted under internationally accepted ethical standards. If ethical misconduct is suspected, the Editorial Board will act in accordance with the relevant international rules of publication ethics (i.e., COPE guidelines).
Editorial policies of the journal are conducted as stated in the rules recommended by the Council of Science Editors and reflected in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. Accordingly, authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to adhere to the best practice guidelines on ethical behavior contained in this statement.
Submitted manuscripts are subjected to double-blinded peer-review. The scientific board guiding the selection of the papers to be published in the journal consists of elected specialists of the journal and, if necessary, selected from national and international experts in the relevant field of research. All manuscripts are reviewed by the editor, section associate editors, and at least two internal and external expert reviewers.
Human and Animal Rights
For the experimental, clinical, and drug human studies, approval by the ethical committee and a statement on the adherence of the study protocol to the international agreements (World Medical Association of Helsinki "Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects," amended October 2013) are required. In experimental animal studies, the authors should indicate that the procedures followed were by animal rights (Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals), and they should obtain animal ethics committee approval. The Ethics Committee approval document should be submitted to the Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy together with the manuscript.
The approval of the ethics committee; a statement on the adherence to international guidelines mentioned above; and proof that the patient's informed consent is obtained should be indicated in the `Material and Method` section. These items are required for case reports whenever data/media could reveal the identity of the patient.
For people under 18 years of age, please provide a consent form that includes both parents' signatures or of the person's legal guardian or supervisor.
Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct
This journal uses "iThenticate" to screen all submissions for plagiarism before publication. It is essential that authors avoid all forms of plagiarism and ethical misconduct, as represented below.
Plagiarism: To republish whole or part of a content in another author's publication without attribution.
Fabrication: To publish data and findings/results that do not exist.
Duplication: Using data from another publication; this includes republishing an article in different languages.
Salamisation: Creating multiple publications by abnormally splitting the results of a study.
Data Manipulation/Falsification: Manipulating or deliberately distorting research data to give a false impression.
We disapprove of such unethical practices and of efforts to influence the review process with such practices as gifting authorship, inappropriate acknowledgements, and references in line with the COPE flowcharts.
Submitted manuscripts are subjected to automatic software evaluation for plagiarism and duplicate publication. Authors are obliged to acknowledge if they published study results in whole or in part in the form of abstracts.
Use of Large Language Models and Generative AI Tools
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 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.” COPE Position Statement on Authorship and AI tools. Detailed information about the statement can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author
After reviewing the COPE statement, the editors of Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy have decided that papers should include a statement in a section called “Declaration Regarding the Use of AI and AI-Assisted Technologies” to let readers know if AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the writing process. It's important to remember that all authors are responsible for the content of their work. This declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, or references (such as Mendeley, EndNote, Zotero, and others). If there is nothing to declare, there is no need to add a statement.
It is suggested that authors follow this format when preparing their statement:
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) utilized [NAME OF TOOL(S) USED] to [DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE TOOL(S) WERE UTILIZED AND HOW THE VALIDITY OF THE OUTPUTS WAS EVALUATED]. After carefully reviewing and editing the content as necessary, full responsibility for the publication's content is taken by the author(s). This incorporation of AI tool usage primarily impacted [SPECIFY WHICH ASPECTS OF THE STUDY, ARTICLE CONTENTS, DATA, OR SUPPORTING FILES WERE AFFECTED/GENERATED].
Example:
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) utilized OpenAI's ChatGPT to generate summaries of research articles related to the topic. These summaries were evaluated by comparing them to manually written summaries by experts in the field. Upon confirming the accuracy and relevance of the generated summaries, they were integrated into the literature review section of the manuscript. After carefully reviewing and editing the content as necessary, full responsibility for the publication's content is taken by the author(s). This incorporation of AI tool usage primarily impacted the efficiency of literature review process and the comprehensiveness of the gathered research insights.
A. DUTIES OF PUBLISHER:
Handling of unethical publishing behaviour
The publisher will take all appropriate measures to modify the article in question, in close cooperation with the editors, in cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, disclosure, or retraction of the affected work in the most severe case. Together with the editors, the publisher will take reasonable steps to detect and prevent the publication of articles in which research misconduct occurs and will under no circumstances promote or knowingly allow such abuse to occur.
Editorial Autonomy
Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy is committed to ensuring the autonomy of editorial decisions without influence from commercial partners.
Intellectual Property and Copyright
The Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy protects the property and copyright of the articles published in the journal and maintains each article's published version of the record. The journal provides the integrity and transparency of each published article.
Scientific Misconduct
The Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy’s publisher takes all appropriate measures regarding fraudulent publication or plagiarism.
B. DUTIES OF EDITORS:
Decision on Publication and Responsibility
The editor of the journal strives to meet the needs of readers and authors, and to provide a fair and appropriate peer-review process. The editor is also responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published and guided by the policies subjected to legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor might discuss such policies, procedures, and responsibilities with reviewers while making publication decisions. The editor is responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
Objectivity
Articles that are submitted to the journal are always evaluated without any prejudice.
Confidentiality
The editor must not disclose any information about a submitted article to anyone other than editorial staff, reviewers, and publisher.
Conflicts of Interest and Disclosure
The Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy does not allow any conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers, and editors. Unpublished materials in a submitted article must not be used by anyone without the express written assent of the author.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
Authors are obliged to notify the journal's editors or publisher immediately and to cooperate with them to correct or retract the article if significant errors or inaccuracies are detected in the published work. If the editors or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, the authors must promptly correct or retract the article or provide the journal editors with evidence of the accuracy of the article.
C. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS:
Evaluation
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts without regard for the origin, gender, sexual orientation, or political philosophy of the authors. Reviewers also ensure a fair, blind peer review of the submitted manuscripts for evaluation.
Confidentiality
All the information relative to submitted articles is kept confidential. The reviewers must not be discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
The reviewers have no conflicts of interest among authors, funders, editors, etc.
Contribution to editor
Reviewers help the editor make publishing decisions and may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
Objectivity
Reviewers offer objective judgments and evaluations. The reviewers express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers ought to identify a relevant published study that the authors have not cited. Reviewers also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
