Siriraj Medical Journal accepts the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects (Seoul, 2008). Thus, for any new research project involving human research subjects, starting from 1 March 2009, the authors need to submit a photocopy of a document of approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC).
For any research project involving human research subjects starting before 1 March 2009 that does not have a document of approval from IRB or IEC, the authors need to convince the editorial board that the research does not violate any ethical concern on human research subjects. In addition, for any new clinical trial starting from 1 March 2009, the authors need to register at the public clinical trial registry prior to the research conduct. The registration number should be placed at the end of the abstract in parentheses.
The ethics for publication is required for a high quality of publication in Siriraj Medical Journal (SMJ). It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the peer reviewer, and the journal editors. The publication ethics guidelines are followed by the Committee on Publication Ethics- (COPE).
Ethics of Authors
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Authors should acknowledge ideas and previously published results by citing these works in the paper and listing them in the references. The Journal reserves the right to use plagiarism detecting software to screen submitted papers at all times.
Accuracy: Authors of papers that report on original research should present an accurate account of the study performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper which presented the results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. Conclusions should be based on the evidence presented in the paper and not on personal opinions.
Disclosure of financial support and conflicts of interest: All financial support for the research and the paper writing process should be disclosed in the acknowledgments and any conflicts of interest should be stated. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honorarium, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed when the article is submitted.
Ethics of Reviewers
Confidentiality: Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of the review process. They should not discuss aspects of the work under review with other researchers until such time as the article is published. Unpublished materials disclosed in a manuscript under review must not be quoted or referenced by a reviewer without the express written consent of the author, requested through the editor. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Conflicts of interest: If the reviewer realizes, after receiving a manuscript for review, that he or she has been involved in the research described, knows the researchers involved in the research, or for any reason cannot give an objective review of the manuscript, the reviewer should inform the editors and decline the review. Conflicts of interest can include competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper under review.
Objectivity: Manuscripts should be reviewed objectively in the context of the reviewer's expertise in the field. The importance of the article's contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in reviewing the quality of a manuscript. Personal opinions without backing evidence should not be used as criteria for review decisions.
Acknowledgment of sources: Reviewers should identify important relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Ethics of Editors
Confidentiality: The editors of Siriraj Medical Journal (SMJ) use a "double-blind" peer review process where neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identity. The editors make all best efforts to protect the identity of author(s) and reviewers throughout the review process. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be quoted or referenced by an editor without the express written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Conflicts of interest: Editors recuse themselves from the review process when they have a conflict of interest or personal stake in the publication of research work.
Objectivity: Decisions on publication are made objectively after reviewing the submitted manuscript and the peer reviews. The importance of the article's contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in the decision to publish.
The journal will not accept articles which have been published (except in the form of an abstract) or are being considered for publication by another journal. Papers being considered here should not be submitted to other journals.
The editor of Siriraj Medical Journal (SMJ) is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Intellectual property is seriously concerned by the Journal. On submission, all articles are screened using the software ‘Turnitin’ which is supported by Mahidol University. Plagiarism is suspected when the percentage of similarity is higher than 20%. The Editor-in-Chief will be informed. Clear plagiarism (use of large portions of copied text and/or data) results in rejection while minor copying of short phrases leads to a polite notification to the authors for re-writing. If plagiarism is detected during the reviewing process by any means, all the process will be immediately withheld. The Editor-in-Chief will contact the corresponding author and/or all the authors for an explanation. Rejection of submission will occur once the explanation is unsatisfactory or the authors admit guilt. After publication, the article will be retracted if plagiarism is proven. All the authors’ institutions will be contacted to explain the retraction and inform the expected future behaviors. The event of retraction will be officially announced as early as possible in the Journal.