•  
  •  
 

Editorial Policies

Content

Journal of Applied Sciences and Nanotechnology (JASN) follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Submission of a manuscript implies that all authors have read, approved, and agreed to the submitted version and that the work conforms to these editorial policies.

Advertisements

The journal does not accept advertisements from third parties. Editorial content and decisions remain independent of commercial influence.

Affiliations

Authors must list all relevant affiliations that accurately reflect where the research was approved, supported, and/or conducted.

  • For research articles, list the institution(s) where the work was performed and any organizations that provided material or financial support.
  • For non-research articles, list your current institutional affiliation. If you moved after the work was conducted, give the affiliation where the work was done and include your current affiliation and contact details in the Acknowledgements.
  • If an author has changed institutions before publication, this change alone is not a valid reason to remove that author if they meet the authorship criteria.
  • If an author has no relevant institutional affiliation, state “Independent researcher” and provide a contact address.

Misrepresentation of affiliation is treated as misconduct. The editorial office will investigate suspected cases and may contact the relevant institutions. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring all affiliations are complete and accurate at submission.

Appeals and Complaints

Submission of an appeal or complaint is welcomed but must be supported by new evidence or clear procedural concerns. The journal follows COPE guidance for all appeals and complaints.

How to appeal or complain

  • To submit an appeal or complaint, contact the editorial office at jasn@uotechnology.edu.iq
  • Send a written appeal or complaint to the Editor-in-Chief (or editorial office) describing the basis for the appeal and enclosing any new data, analyses, or documentary evidence not previously considered.
  • State the manuscript ID, title, and the decision being appealed.

Assessment and process

  • The Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial assessment and, if warranted, requests information from all parties involved.
  • If the Editor-in-Chief has a conflict or is the subject of the complaint, the matter is handled by the Editorial Board and led by the most senior uninvolved editor.
  • The journal may pause processing, review, or publication of the manuscript while the investigation proceeds.

Standards for successful appeals

  • Appeals should present substantive new evidence, demonstrate a clear error in the review or editorial process, or reveal undisclosed conflicts of interest.
  • Appeals that rest solely on disagreement about editorial judgment (scope, novelty, priority) are unlikely to succeed.

Outcomes

Possible outcomes include: uphold original decision, request additional peer review, request a corrected resubmission, or reverse the decision. Findings of misconduct are handled per COPE flowcharts and may result in correction, retraction, notification of institutions, or sanctions.

Confidentiality and Fairness

All appeals and complaints are handled confidentially and impartially. Parties under investigation are given an opportunity to respond before a decision is reached.

Acknowledgments

List by name and affiliation of any individuals or groups who contributed materially to the work but do not meet authorship criteria (examples: technical assistance, data collection, statistical advice, funding acquisition, administrative support, or substantive discussion that informed the work). For each person or group include a brief description of their contribution (e.g., “provided statistical analysis,” “collected field data,” “served as scientific advisors”). It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to notify and obtain permission from all individuals named in the Acknowledgments, confirming their agreement to be acknowledged and their review of the final text. The permission process should include sharing the article so that those being identified can verify the context in which their contribution is acknowledged. Groups of contributors may be acknowledged under a collective, discipline-appropriate heading (for example, “participating contributors”), accompanied by a brief description of their role.

Any assistance from editorial services, professional writers, or other paid support must be declared and described. Any use of generative AI or similar tools that contributed to wording, analysis, figures, or other content must be declared in the Acknowledgments (name the tool, version, and a short statement of the tool’s role). Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of all content, including material produced or assisted by third parties or AI tools.

Authorship

Authorship credit is granted only to individuals who meet all of the following criteria:

  1. Substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
  2. Manuscript contribution, through drafting the work or critically revising it for important intellectual content.
  3. Final approval of the version to be submitted and published, including any subsequent revisions.
  4. Accountability, by agreeing to be responsible for the integrity of the work and for resolving questions related to accuracy or ethics.

Participation limited solely to funding acquisition, routine data collection, general supervision, or administrative support does not qualify for authorship.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the author list is complete and accurate at submission and must obtain written confirmation from each co-author that they meet the authorship criteria and approve the submitted version. An Author Contributions statement describing each author’s role must be included with the submission.

Changes to authorship (addition, removal, or reordering) require:

  • A written request from the corresponding author explaining the reason for the change.
  • Written agreement from all original and proposed authors.
  • Editorial approval by the Editor-in-Chief (or a delegated editor).

Post-publication authorship changes will be considered only with clear justification and written agreement from all authors and, if approved, will be implemented through a formal correction.

The journal does not permit gift, guest, or ghost authorship. Authorship disputes should be resolved by the authors’ institutions; where this is not possible, the journal will proceed in accordance with COPE guidance.

Contribution Details

Author Contributions statements are encouraged for all submissions and mandatory for manuscripts submitted from Volume 6, Issue 1 (2026). Each applicable submission must include a clear, publishable statement assigning responsibility for specific tasks to named contributors. Contributions should be described in prose using appropriate categories (e.g., concept and study design, intellectual content, literature review, experimental or analytical work, data acquisition and analysis, manuscript preparation, editing, and review). One or more authors should be identified as guarantors who accept overall responsibility for the integrity of the work. The corresponding author is responsible for obtaining written confirmation from all co-authors that the contribution statement is accurate. Changes to authorship after submission require written agreement from all affected parties and editorial approval; post-publication changes will be made only via an official notice.

Citations

Authors must cite relevant, timely, and verifiable literature to support claims and contextualize their findings, giving preference to peer-reviewed sources and including persistent identifiers (DOIs) where available. References should fairly represent the current state of the field and avoid undue bias toward particular groups, funders, or journals. Excessive self-citation, coordinated citation practices intended to influence metrics, or citation of unverifiable sources are unacceptable and may be treated as misconduct in line with COPE guidance. Review and opinion articles must provide a balanced bibliography that reflects competing views and major contributions. If authors are unsure about citation appropriateness they should consult the editorial office before submission.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors must declare any conflicts of interest that are relevant to, or could reasonably be perceived as relevant to, the submitted work. A conflict of interest may arise when an author (or the author’s employer, sponsor, family member, or close associate) has a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship that could influence, or be perceived to influence, the conduct, interpretation, or presentation of the research. Conflicts of interest may be financial or non-financial and include, but are not limited to, employment, consultancies, honoraria, equity interests, paid expert testimony, patents or patent applications, grants or other funding, in-kind support (e.g., equipment, materials, or data), leadership or advisory roles, or other personal, academic, ideological, or intellectual interests that readers may consider relevant.

At the time of submission, all authors must complete a Conflicts of Interest declaration. Declarations should clearly describe the nature of any conflict and identify the involved parties. Where no conflicts exist, authors must state: “The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.” The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have provided accurate disclosures. Declarations will be published in a Conflicts of Interest section at the end of the article.

If there is uncertainty about whether a relationship or activity constitutes a conflict, authors should disclose it or seek guidance from the editorial office. Failure to disclose a relevant conflict may result in corrective action, including correction, expression of concern, or retraction, in accordance with the journal’s ethics procedures and COPE guidance. Any conflicts identified after acceptance or publication must be reported immediately to the editorial office so that an appropriate notice can be issued.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, Retractions

If an error, omission, or ethical concern is identified after publication, the editor will assess the matter and take action in accordance with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance. Any post-publication change will be transparent, permanently recorded, and directly linked to the original article so readers can easily see the reason for the change and the authoritative record.

Minor factual or typographical errors that do not affect the scientific conclusions will normally be corrected by publishing a short Correction notice and amending the article record where appropriate. For errors introduced by authors a Corrigendum is issued; for errors introduced during production an Erratum is issued. Both types of correction are permanently associated with the article and the corrected information is clearly identified.

When concerns affect the reliability of the findings or suggest misconduct (for example, data fabrication, serious methodological errors, manipulated images, plagiarism, or lack of required ethical approval), the journal may issue a Retraction. A retraction statement will explain the reason for retraction, identify who requested it where relevant, and will be linked in both directions to the original article. The original article will remain part of the public record; the HTML and PDF versions will be clearly marked (for example, watermarked) as retracted to avoid inadvertent citation of invalid results. Retractions are intended to correct the literature and preserve the integrity of the scientific record, not to serve as punitive measures.

Where there is an unresolved, serious concern that requires investigation (for example, ongoing institutional inquiries), the journal may publish an Expression of Concern to alert readers while the matter is being investigated. If the investigation yields a conclusion, an appropriate Correction or Retraction will follow and will be linked to the Expression of Concern and to the original article.

In rare legal or ethical circumstances where content cannot remain available (for example, court orders or defamatory material), a Removal notice may be issued and the reasons for removal will be made clear in the accompanying notice insofar as legal constraints allow.

All investigations and decisions will follow COPE flowcharts and principles of fairness and confidentiality. The editorial office will normally contact the authors and, where appropriate, the authors’ institutions to request explanations and supporting documentation. Parties under investigation will be given an opportunity to respond. Depending on the outcome, actions may include publishing a Correction, issuing an Expression of Concern, retracting the article, notifying institutions and funders, and updating bibliographic databases.

Retractions will, wherever possible, include a clear statement of the reason for retraction; identify the individual(s) or parties requesting the retraction if applicable; and ensure that the retracted article and the retraction notice are cross-linked. Retractions are not normally used to resolve routine authorship disputes; where authorship changes are supported by the parties and institutions involved, a formal correction or authorship notice will be published.

To report suspected errors or concerns, contact the editorial office at jasn@uotechnology.edu.iq.

For any manuscript that includes identifying details or images of an individual, authors must obtain written informed consent for publication from the person depicted or, for minors, from a parent or legal guardian. If the person is deceased, consent must be obtained from the next of kin. Consent must explicitly permit publication of the material under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) and must state that the material will be freely available on the internet.

The manuscript must include a clear statement that written informed consent for publication was obtained and identify from whom consent was obtained (for example: “Written informed consent for publication of identifying information/images was obtained from [name or ‘the patient/the patient’s guardian’]”). The editorial office may request to see the signed consent form; any forms provided to the journal will be handled confidentially.

Confidentiality

Submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. They will be shared only with those directly involved in processing and preparing the submission (editorial staff, handling editors, invited reviewers, and production personnel). In cases of suspected misconduct or where an investigation is required, the manuscript and related materials may be disclosed to the journal’s ethics committee, the authors’ institutions, or other relevant third parties in order to resolve the matter, and the journal will follow COPE flowcharts and guidance throughout any such inquiries. Reviewers must declare competing interests before accepting assignments and must obtain editorial permission before involving colleagues in reviews. For questions about confidentiality or to report concerns, contact the editorial office at jasn@uotechnology.edu.iq.

Scope and Eligibility

JASN is a fully open-access journal dedicated to the broad dissemination of scholarly research. Manuscripts may be submitted only by authors who hold the copyright to the work or who have obtained explicit authorization from the copyright holder(s). Submission confirms that the work is original, has not been previously published, and does not infringe upon the rights of third parties.

Copyright Policy

Authors retain full copyright of their published work. By publishing in JASN, authors grant the journal a non-exclusive license to publish, reproduce, distribute, and display the article in all formats and media, including digital platforms, for the purposes of scholarly communication and archiving.

Open Access Policy

JASN provides immediate, free, and permanent open access to all published content. Readers may access, read, and use articles without subscription fees or access barriers.

To support the journal’s open-access model, an Article Processing Charge (APC) applies to Iraqi authors only; no APC is charged to international authors. Current APC details are specified in the Author Guidelines.

Licensing

All articles published in JASN are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, adaptation, and reproduction of the work, including for commercial purposes, provided that proper attribution is given to the original author(s) and the source.

Data Sharing Policy

JASN encourages timely, responsible sharing of research data to promote transparency, reproducibility, and reuse, while respecting ethical, legal, and confidentiality constraints. Authors should make the data underlying their findings available whenever possible and in accordance with funder, institutional, and regulatory requirements.

Starting from Volume 6, Issue 1 (2026), authors are required to include a Data Availability Statement in all manuscripts. This statement must describe where and how the supporting data can be accessed, including persistent identifiers (such as DOIs) or repository links when applicable, or clearly explain why data cannot be shared. Acceptable statements include, for example:

  • “The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [persistent link].”
  • “The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.”
  • “No datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.”

When appropriate, authors are expected to deposit data in recognized public repositories and to follow best practices for documentation and metadata to ensure that datasets are discoverable and reusable. The journal recommends suitable repositories, such as Mendeley Data, and supports bidirectional linking between articles and datasets through permanent identifiers to ensure reliable citation and credit.

Authors who cannot share data due to legal, ethical, privacy, or commercial restrictions must clearly state these limitations in the Data Availability Statement and, where feasible, indicate how qualified researchers may request access. The journal promotes standardized data citation and encourages authors to cite datasets in the reference list when applicable.

Editors and reviewers may request access to underlying data during peer review or post-publication investigations. Authors are expected to retain original data and provide it upon reasonable request.

Desk Rejection Policy

A manuscript may be desk rejected by the Editor without external peer review when one or more of the following conditions apply:

  • The manuscript falls outside the scope of the journal or does not align with its aims and focus.
  • There are serious concerns related to publication ethics, including plagiarism, redundant publication, data fabrication or falsification, or the absence of required ethical approvals.
  • The submission fails to comply with the journal’s submission requirements to a degree that prevents proper peer review.
  • The manuscript is incomplete, clearly unsuitable for scholarly review, or contains fundamental deficiencies that cannot reasonably be resolved through revision.

Manuscripts that pass these initial editorial checks proceed to external peer review, where scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and contribution to the field are evaluated.

Images and Figures

Images and figures should be used only when they add clear scientific value to the manuscript; purely decorative or illustrative material that does not contribute to the scholarly content should be avoided. Authors must obtain written permission to reproduce any third-party copyrighted material (text, tables, illustrations, photographs, audio, video, screenshots, etc.) and must include a brief permission statement in the figure legend identifying the copyright holder and confirming reuse rights.

Photographs, video, or audio that could identify a patient or study participant may be included only with written informed consent for publication (or consent from a parent/guardian or next of kin, as appropriate); the manuscript must state that consent was obtained and the editorial office may request sight of the signed form.

Any image processing or enhancement must be disclosed. Authors must describe image-gathering methods and report any modifications (software name and version, and a concise description of processing) in the Methods section and the figure legend. Only minor, globally applied adjustments (brightness/contrast, color balance) that do not alter the scientific meaning are acceptable; selective changes, addition/removal of features, or any manipulation that could mislead interpretation are prohibited and constitute misconduct.

For experimental photographic images (microscopy, gels, blots, etc.), authors should retain and be prepared to supply original, uncropped, unannotated, and unprocessed image files on request.

Resolution and file quality should meet journal production requirements (high resolution suitable for print and online presentation; minimum 300 dpi for photographic/illustrative figures) and vector formats are preferred for line art. Any reuse of previously published figures requires citation of the original source and confirmation of permission from the copyright holder, and this must be stated in the legend. Use of generative AI to create or substantially edit images is not permitted except where AI is an explicit part of the research methodology; such use must be disclosed (tool name, version, purpose) and is subject to editorial approval.

Failure to comply with these requirements (missing permissions, undisclosed or misleading image manipulation, or inability to provide original files) may result in rejection, correction, or retraction in line with the journal’s ethics procedures.

Misconduct

The journal treats all forms of research and publication misconduct seriously and will act to protect the integrity of the scholarly record in accordance with COPE guidance. Misconduct includes, but is not limited to, affiliation misrepresentation, breaches of copyright or third-party permissions, citation manipulation, duplicate submission or publication, “ethics dumping,” image or data fabrication or falsification, peer-review manipulation, plagiarism and text-recycling (self-plagiarism), undisclosed competing interests, and any unethical conduct in the design, conduct, or reporting of research.

Allegations will be assessed promptly and confidentially. Initial screening is followed, when warranted, by a formal investigation that may involve external experts and the authors’ institutions. Where misconduct is substantiated the journal may publish corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions; notify the authors’ institutions, funders or other relevant bodies; impose submission bans; and take other appropriate remedial or corrective actions. All investigations and outcomes will follow COPE guidance and principles of fairness, transparency, and record-keeping.

To report suspected misconduct or for questions about this policy, contact the editorial office at jasn@uotechnology.edu.iq

Forms of Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct may take many forms. The examples listed below are illustrative and not exhaustive; other behaviors that undermine the integrity of the scholarly record may also be investigated and addressed in accordance with COPE guidance.

  • Duplicate Submission: Authors must confirm at submission that the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere and has not been published previously. Duplicate submission or publication—including prior publication in another language without full disclosure and permission—constitutes a serious breach of publication ethics. Authors must disclose any related or prior publications, clearly cite earlier work, and explain the novel contribution of the new submission. Acceptable secondary publication (e.g., a translated version) requires prior permission from the original publisher and copyright holder, full disclosure to the Editor, and clear citation of the original article, in accordance with COPE guidance. If duplicate submission or undisclosed prior publication is identified, the manuscript will normally be rejected (or a published article retracted), and the journal may notify the authors’ institutions and take further action in line with COPE procedures.
  • Citation Manipulation: Deliberate inclusion of citations intended primarily to inflate citation counts for particular authors or journals is unacceptable and will be treated as misconduct, potentially triggering rejection and corrective action.
  • Data Fabrication and Falsification: Inventing, altering, or selectively reporting data, including manipulation of numerical results or images, is a serious breach of ethics and will lead to rejection, retraction if published, and other sanctions consistent with COPE guidance.
  • Improper Author Contribution or Attribution: All named authors must have made a substantial scientific contribution, approved the final manuscript, and accepted responsibility for the work; guest, gift, or ghost authorship is prohibited and will be investigated and corrected.
  • Redundant Publications: Splitting a single study into multiple overlapping papers (redundant or salami publication) without disclosure is not permitted; authors must cite related submissions or publications and justify how each report makes an independent scholarly contribution.
  • Image manipulation: Deliberate manipulation or fabrication of images is a serious form of misconduct that misleads readers and undermines the scholarly record. All images must accurately represent the original data; specific features must not be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced without clear disclosure. Minor, uniform adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable only if they do not misrepresent information, and any grouping of images (e.g., gel lanes, microscope fields) must be clearly indicated in the figure or legend. Authors must retain original, unedited image files and provide them on request; inability to produce originals may result in rejection or retraction.

Publication Ethics

The journal and its editorial board fully adhere to the policies and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We are committed to integrity, transparency and fairness in all stages of publication; submission implies that authors agree to the journal’s ethical standards and that work complies with applicable ethical approvals. The editorial office will investigate allegations of misconduct, correct the literature where necessary, and publish transparent notices (corrections, expressions of concern, retractions) in line with COPE guidance.

Duties of Editors

Publication decisions

The editorial board is responsible for deciding which submitted articles should be published. Board members confer and consider reviewer recommendations in making these decisions, while observing legal obligations related to libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editorial decisions are made solely on the basis of scholarly merit and are not influenced by the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, or other personal characteristics of the authors.

Confidentiality, disclosure, and conflicts of interest

During the review process editors must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers involved in processing the submission. Unpublished material in a submission must not be used by editors, reviewers, or other readers in their own research without the author’s explicit written consent. Editors should ensure that readers are informed of funding sources and of any role that funders had in the research or its publication.

Author relations

Editors must ensure that peer review is fair, unbiased, and timely. The journal maintains procedures to manage submissions from editorial board members or other persons with potential conflicts, ensuring independent assessment. Author instructions should make clear authorship criteria and other expectations.

Reviewer relations

Reviewers are encouraged to raise ethical concerns and to be alert to possible misconduct such as unethical study design, data manipulation, redundant publication, or plagiarism. Reviewers’ reports should normally be provided to authors in full unless they contain offensive or potentially libelous statements. The journal recognizes and acknowledges reviewer contributions and discontinues the use of reviewers who provide discourteous, low-quality, or persistently late reviews.

Quality assurance

Editors must take reasonable steps to assure the quality of published material, recognizing that different article types may have different standards. Where applicable, editors should seek confirmation that studies received appropriate ethical approval (for example, from an institutional review board). Editors should be alert to intellectual property issues and work with the publisher to address potential breaches. Material that is erroneous, misleading, or inaccurate must be corrected promptly and prominently.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Reviewers assist the editorial board by providing objective, timely, and constructive evaluations that inform editorial decisions. Reports should clearly explain strengths and weaknesses with evidence-based arguments so authors can improve their manuscripts; personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

Qualification of reviewers

If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess a manuscript or cannot meet the requested deadline, they should notify the editor and decline the invitation. Reviewers must decline assignments when a conflict of interest exists, including competitive, collaborative, financial, or personal relationships with the authors, their institutions, or sponsors.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts and associated materials received for review are confidential and must not be shared or used for personal advantage. Privileged information or ideas obtained during peer review must not be exploited or disclosed.

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant literature the authors have omitted and alert the editor to substantial overlap or similarity with other work of which they are aware. Suggestions for additional references must be supported and relevant to the manuscript under review.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors must present an accurate, complete, and objective account of their research, including honest reporting of methods, data, and interpretation. Underlying data should be represented faithfully and retained so it can be provided on reasonable request.

Originality, plagiarism, and concurrent publication

Submissions must be original and must appropriately cite prior work. Plagiarism, redundant publication, and simultaneous submission to multiple journals are unacceptable and will be treated as misconduct.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could be perceived to influence the work. Funding sources and the role of funders in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and publication decisions must be stated.

Authorship of the paper

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate contributors are listed as authors, that no inappropriate authors are included, and that every co-author has approved the final manuscript and agreed to its submission. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be named in the Acknowledgments with their contributions described.

Fundamental errors in published works

If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work they must promptly notify the editor and cooperate to publish a correction, retraction, or other notice as appropriate.

Peer Review Process

JASN operates a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scholarly value of published research. The journal follows COPE principles throughout editorial handling and peer review.

Workflow and Stages

  1. Initial Editorial Screening
    • All submissions undergo an initial screening by the editorial office and/or a designated editor to assess:
      • alignment with the journal’s aims and scope;
      • compliance with submission requirements;
      • originality and the absence of apparent ethical concerns (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate submission);
      • basic suitability for external peer review.
    • Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk rejected without external review (see the Desk Rejection Policy).
  2. Assignment to Handling Editor
    • Manuscripts that pass screening are assigned to a handling editor with relevant subject expertise (typically a member of the Editorial Board). The handling editor manages the review process and ensures it is conducted fairly, independently, and without conflicts of interest.
  3. External Peer Review
    • JASN uses double-blind peer review, where the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. Each manuscript is normally reviewed by at least two independent reviewers.
    • Reviewers evaluate:
      • scientific soundness and methodological rigor;
      • clarity and coherence of presentation;
      • relevance to the journal’s scope;
      • ethical standards and integrity of the work.
    • Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations to support editorial decision-making and, where appropriate, manuscript improvement.
  4. Editorial Decision
    • Based on reviewer reports and the handling editor’s assessment, the final decision is one of:
      • Accept
      • Minor Revision
      • Major Revision
      • Reject
    • The decision and anonymized reviewer comments are communicated to the authors. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief and/or the delegated editorial decision-maker(s),consistent with the journal’s editorial workflow.
  5. Revisions
    • When revisions are requested, authors must submit:
      • a revised manuscript;
      • a point-by-point response to reviewer comments.
    • Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed by the handling editor, depending on the extent and nature of the revisions.
  6. Final Decision and Publication
    • Once accepted, the manuscript enters production. Authors receive proofs for final checking prior to publication.

Submissions from Editors and Editorial Board Members

To avoid conflicts of interest and ensure independence:

  • such submissions are assigned to an independent editor with no relevant personal, supervisory, or collaborative relationship with the authors;
  • the submitting editor takes no part in editorial handling or decision-making;
  • peer review standards are identical to those applied to all other submissions.

Conflicts of Interest in Peer Review:

  • Editors: Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists (personal, professional, financial, or institutional). The manuscript will be reassigned to another qualified editor.
  • Reviewers: Reviewers must declare potential conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation. Reviewers with conflicts must decline. All manuscripts and associated materials are confidential and must not be shared or used for personal advantage.

Plagiarism

The journal has a strict policy against plagiarism in all forms, including copying text, data, images, or ideas from any source without proper citation and attribution. This applies to published and unpublished materials in any format. All submitted manuscripts are screened using professional plagiarism-detection software, and similarity reports are assessed by editors on a case-by-case basis. Submissions showing significant unattributed overlap or other evidence of plagiarism may be rejected or returned to the authors for clarification or correction, depending on the nature and extent of the overlap, in line with COPE guidance. Self-plagiarism, redundant publication, and reuse of substantial parts of one’s own previously published work without clear citation and justification are also prohibited. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the manuscript is entirely original, that all sources are properly acknowledged, and that all co-authors are aware of and comply with this policy.

Preprints, Archiving, and Repository Policy

JASN supports responsible dissemination and long-term accessibility of scholarly work through the use of preprint servers and repositories. This policy explains which versions of a manuscript may be shared, where they may be deposited, and the conditions that apply.

Preprints

Authors may post and share manuscripts as preprints on recognized preprint servers at any time before or during submission to JASN. Posting a preprint is not considered prior publication and does not prejudice editorial consideration.

If a preprinted manuscript is accepted for publication, authors are encouraged to:

  • update the preprint record to indicate that the manuscript has been published in JASN; and
  • add a link to the final published version using the article DOI.
  • Preprints should clearly indicate their pre-peer-review status, where applicable. Preprints must not use journal or publisher formatting, logos, or layouts that could misrepresent them as the version of record.

Author Self-Archiving

JASN permits authors to deposit their work in institutional, disciplinary, or general-purpose repositories. There is no embargo period. The following versions may be shared:

  • Submitted manuscript (preprint): may be deposited at any time.
  • Accepted manuscript (postprint): may be deposited immediately after acceptance.
  • Published version (version of record): may be deposited and shared in accordance with the article’s open license.

Deposited versions should include clear citation information and, once available, a link to the published version of record via DOI.

Repositories

Authors may deposit manuscripts and associated materials in:

  • institutional repositories;
  • subject-specific repositories; and
  • general research repositories.

Repositories should provide stable access, clear versioning, and appropriate citation metadata. Where possible, authors should use persistent identifiers (e.g., DOIs) and link deposits to the published article.

Licensing and Attribution

All articles published in JASN are made available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Any deposited version must:

  • appropriately credit the author(s) and the journal as the source;
  • state the version being shared (submitted, accepted, or published); and
  • include a citation and DOI link to the version of record once available.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that repository deposits do not misrepresent the version or publication status of the work.

Data and Supplementary Materials

Where applicable, datasets, code, and supplementary materials may be deposited in suitable repositories in line with the journal’s Data Sharing Policy. Authors should link these materials to the associated article and cite them appropriately.

Compliance with Funder and Institutional Requirements

Authors are responsible for complying with funder and institutional open-access and repository mandates. JASN’s policies are intended to be compatible with common open-access requirements.

Protection of Human Subjects’ Privacy

This policy applies only to manuscripts that involve human participants or contain identifiable personal information. Identifying information must not be published in text, images, tables, or supplementary materials unless it is scientifically essential and written informed consent for publication has been obtained from the individual concerned or, where applicable, from a parent, legal guardian, or legally authorized representative.

Authors must remove or anonymize direct identifiers wherever possible. If anonymity cannot be guaranteed (e.g., in photographs, videos, imaging data, distinctive case details, or datasets that could enable re-identification), the manuscript must include a statement confirming that informed consent for publication was obtained.

Authors are responsible for obtaining, securely retaining, and providing consent documentation upon request. Consent forms should not be submitted with the manuscript unless specifically requested by the editorial office.

JASN follows internationally accepted ethical standards and COPE guidance in protecting the privacy and dignity of human participants.

Research Ethics and Consent

This policy applies only to manuscripts that involve human participants, identifiable personal data, or animal subjects. JASN expects authors to follow internationally accepted ethical principles and all applicable institutional and national regulations.

Studies Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must be conducted ethically and in compliance with applicable requirements. Where ethics approval is required, authors must state in the manuscript that the study was reviewed and approved by an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board (including the approval body and reference number where available). Authors must also confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants or their legal guardians, as applicable.

Where relevant, authors should report key participant characteristics (e.g., sex, age, or other demographic variables) and describe how these factors were considered in the study design, analysis, and interpretation.

Studies Involving Animals

Research involving animals must comply with internationally accepted standards for animal welfare and with applicable institutional and national regulations. Authors must state that the work received approval from an appropriate ethics committee (including the approval body and reference number where available) and was conducted in accordance with relevant guidelines. Authors must report the species, strain, sex, and number of animals used, and describe steps taken to minimize harm and distress.

Informed Consent and Privacy

Authors must protect the rights, dignity, and privacy of human participants. Identifiable personal information (including images) may be included only when scientifically necessary and when written informed consent for publication has been obtained from the participant or, where applicable, a parent/guardian or next of kin. The manuscript must include a statement confirming that consent for publication was obtained. Nonessential identifying details must be omitted, and any anonymization measures must not compromise scientific accuracy.

Special Issues

Special Issue topics are determined by the editorial team of JASN and are announced on an occasional basis when a focused theme is identified as timely and significant. Special Issue submissions follow the same process and author guidelines as regular submissions, and authors should carefully review and follow the submission instructions. Calls for Special Issues and related submission deadlines are published in the journal’s announcements and on the journal website for each specific Special Issue.

Appointment of Guest Editors

Guest Editors for special issues are appointed by the editorial board and approved by the Editor-in-Chief based on their subject expertise, scholarly reputation, and, where applicable, editorial experience. They are responsible for defining the scope of the special issue, drafting the call for papers, managing submissions within that scope, overseeing the peer review process, and recommending final editorial decisions in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief.

Setup of Special Issues

A special issue is initiated when the Editorial Board approves a focused theme proposed by the Editor-in-Chief, board members, or prospective Guest Editors. Once approved, the journal finalizes a brief concept note (theme, objectives, and timeline) and publishes a call for papers through the journal website and other channels. Each special issue must have a clearly defined submission window, review period, and planned publication date, and is normally accommodated within the journal’s regular quarterly publication schedule.

Editorial Handling of Special Issue Submissions

Manuscripts submitted to a special issue are handled through the journal’s submission system and are subject to the same double-blind peer review and editorial standards as regular submissions. Guest Editors may support the process by conducting an initial scope check, proposing reviewers, and providing a recommendation based on reviewer reports and revisions. The final editorial decision (accept, revise, or reject) remains with the Editor-in-Chief (or a delegated handling editor), in line with the journal’s standard ethics and governance procedures. Accepted articles are edited, typeset, and published under the journal’s standard production and ethical policies.

Publication Schedule

The journal is published quarterly. Special issues are organized on an occasional basis and are normally accommodated within the journal’s regular publication schedule, for example by dedicating one of the scheduled quarterly issues to a focused theme, rather than publishing additional issues beyond the annual schedule. Articles are assigned to an upcoming regular or special issue once they are accepted and ready for publication, based on editorial planning and production readiness.

Standards of Reporting

Research should be reported with sufficient detail to allow others to understand, evaluate, and, where appropriate, reproduce the work. Authors are encouraged to provide clear descriptions of the study rationale, design, materials, methods, data collection, and analysis, and to follow recognized reporting guidelines appropriate to their study type. Assumptions, limitations, and any deviations from the planned protocol should be transparently stated so that readers can accurately interpret the findings.

Use of Third-Party Material

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reuse any third-party material in their manuscripts, including (but not limited to) text, figures, photographs, tables, datasets, audio, video, film stills, and screenshots for which they do not hold copyright. Limited use of short textual extracts or similar material for purposes of criticism or review may be permissible without formal permission, depending on applicable copyright law, but in all other cases written permission from the rights holder must be secured before submission. Any reproduced material must be fully credited in the manuscript and figure/table legends, in accordance with the conditions set by the copyright owner.

Use of Generative AI and AI-assisted Technologies in Writing

Generative AI and AI-assisted tools may be used only to support language editing and improve readability (for example, grammar, spelling, and style) and must not be used to generate, interpret, or manipulate scientific content, draw conclusions, or provide clinical or technical recommendations. Their use must always remain under human oversight, and all text produced or edited with such tools must be carefully checked and approved by the authors.

Authors must clearly disclose any use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the writing process within the manuscript (for example, in the Acknowledgments or a dedicated statement), specifying the tool and how it was used. AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. All named authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and ethical compliance of the manuscript and for ensuring that it does not infringe third-party rights.

Use of AI in Peer Review

To protect author confidentiality and the integrity of the peer-review process, reviewers must not use generative AI or AI-assisted tools (such as ChatGPT or similar services) to assess manuscripts or to draft, edit, or upload any part of the manuscript or review report. Submitted manuscripts and reviews are confidential and may not be shared with external AI systems or third-party platforms. Peer review requires independent human critical judgement, and reviewers remain fully responsible and accountable for the content and conclusions of their reports.