Xia & He Publishing

Publications > Journals > Neurosurgical Subspecialties > Ethics and Policies

Supported by

Department of Neurosurgery at Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology

Ethics and Policies

Content List

Confidentiality	Statement of Timeliness for Editors
Authorship	Editorial Freedom
Policy on the Application of AI tools	Corrections, Retractions and Expressions of Concern
Ethics in Scientific Process	Reprints and Permissions
Ethics in Publication	Complaints Procedure
Data Sharing Policy	Disclaimer
Self-archiving Policy	Crossmark
Conflict of Interest	Advertising Policy

Confidentiality: Authors' manuscripts are the private property of the authors and must be handled in a confidential manner. The editors and editorial staff of the journal are under an obligation not to disclose any information related to the manuscript to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. This includes whether the manuscript has been received, its status in the review process, its contents, reviewers' comments, or editorial decisions regarding its publication or revision.

In addition, the editors and editorial staff must caution reviewers about the confidential nature of the manuscript and any related documents. Reviewers cannot appropriate ideas from the manuscript before it is published, nor retain the manuscript for personal use; they must destroy or delete all copies after submitting their review. Editors must obtain written permission from the reviewer and authors prior to publishing or publicizing reviewer’s comments.

Editors must obtain written permission from the reviewer before revealing the identity of the reviewer to the author.

If a manuscript is rejected for publication, all copies of the manuscript should be destroyed or deleted by the editor or editorial staff. If the paper is published, all related documents should be kept in the editorial office for at least three years.

Authorship: Authorship Criteria

Authorship should be given upon meeting all four of the following criteria proposed (verbatim) by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE; http://www.icmje.org/):

(1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;

(2) Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content;

(3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND

(4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Neurosurgical Subspecialties implements the following additional standards for authorship and related responsibilities:

(1) All authors are responsible for identifying which co-authors take greater responsibility for specific parts of the work, such as statistical analyses, specific methods/tools for which they hold unique expertise, etc.

(2) All authors should have confidence in the integrity of their co-authors' work, as they are accepting collective responsibility of such.

(3) All authors listed in the first submission of the manuscript should remain as authors throughout the peer-review and publication processes. If revisions of the manuscript, during the course of these processes, are modified to the extent that an original author no longer fits all four ICMJE criteria, the authors must provide XHP with a detailed, written explanation in a formal statement. This formal Authorship Change Agreement statement must be signed by all original and new authors, including the author(s) removed and/or added.

4) The specified Corresponding Author takes responsibility for monitoring and responding to all correspondence with the journal in a timely manner throughout the entire peer-review and publication process, from submission through post-publication (e.g., addressing related Letters to the Editor, etc.). These activities include ensuring that all of the journal's administrative processes are addressed to completion, such as providing documentation related to ethics committee review/approval, patient/participant consent, clinical trial registration, etc. The Corresponding Author should carry out all of these activities while keeping in mind that their replies, such as to editorial/reviewer queries/critiques, can be made publicly available at the discretion of the journal after final publication.

Non-Author Contributors
All persons/agencies who contributed to the study or manuscript but did not fulfill all four ICMJE authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgments" section of the manuscript. These persons/agencies should provide written permission for their inclusion in the Acknowledgments section. Examples of such contributors include anyone/group who contributed through general supervision of a research group or general administrative support, writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, proofreading, advising, supplying materials, critical review, and so forth.

Policy on the Application of AI Tools: XHP journals do not accept the listing of any artificial intelligence (AI) tools, including large language models (LLM) such as ChatGPT, as authors, because such tools cannot take responsibility for the contents (text and/or figures) they have produced. Therefore, they do not fulfill the ICMJE criteria for authorship.

According to the principles of transparency, authors who use any AI tools must provide detailed information regarding such application in the Methods section and/or make a clear declaration in the Acknowledgments section of the manuscript. An author's intentional concealment of the use of AI tools will be treated as academic misconduct and consequently result in the retraction of the article.

Ethics in Scientific Process: NSSS demands that all research described in its publications be conducted and reported in accordance with the guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and practices according to the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authors are expected to carry out their research-related activities in accordance with the tenets of honesty, transparency, objectivity, and accountability. Editors-in-chief, Associates Editors, editorial members, reviewers and editorial staff are requested to pay attention to prevent and eliminate author misconduct. NSSS reserves the right to reject any manuscript that editors believe does not uphold high ethical standards, even if authors have obtained ethical approval or if ethical approval is not required.

Ethics in Reporting Study Procedures and Findings
All methods used in a study should be adequately described so that readers may replicate the experiments as they were performed by the authors. The practice of withholding a key step (including but not limited to a reagent, procedure, tool, or technique) or any other piece of information related to the study for proprietary or personal reasons is absolutely unacceptable.
Reporting of results is expected to be complete and accurate. All statistical results of an experiment and/or study project should be presented, including data that do not meet the threshold for statistical significance. The authors must not engage in data picking, which is the practice of presenting incomplete evidence from a series of experiments. The practice of selecting data to exclude negative findings is also prohibited and constitutes scientific misconduct.
All experimental controls should be reported. In addition, the weaknesses of the study design, which may have biased the results, should be reported.
Authors must ensure that all research records, including handwritten/typewritten documentation, films, and electronic files, are made available upon request at any time during the review process and in perpetuity after the publication of the article describing the study. Patient-related research records should meet the standard regulations of patient privacy and confidentiality. Refusal, disregard, or inability to provide requested research records is considered evidence of scientific misconduct and should prompt an investigation into the need for an article's dismissal from review or retraction from the journal. The decision to pursue additional actions to address the misconduct should be made at the discretion of the Editors-in-Chief.

Image Manipulation
All images accompanying a publication should be generated in accordance with general ethical standards to ensure the integrity of the data presented. Image manipulation or any other form of adjustment that modifies the data is prohibited.

Animal Subjects
Ethical conduct is expected for all procedures related to animal handling, including husbandry, care, and experimentation. For animal studies, it should be clearly stated that approval was obtained from an institutional animal care committee and that all animals received humane care in accordance with relevant institutional and national guidelines and regulations. For example, US authors should declare compliance with the "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals" prepared by the National Academy of Sciences and published by the National Institutes of Health.
Example: Ethical statement for experiments involving animals

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. The protocol was approved by the Committee on the Ethics of Animal Experiments of the University of **** (Protocol Number: **-****). All surgeries were performed under sodium pentobarbital anesthesia, and all efforts were made to minimize suffering.

Human Subjects and Informed Consent
For a research study using human subjects, the type of study should be indicated from the following list: randomized controlled trial, cross-sectional study, cohort study, case series, or survey. In addition, the following should be stated: participating institutions; number of subjects; methods of subject selection, recruitment, enrollment, and randomization; and subject withdrawal and completion. Concerning interventions, the criteria for assignment, methods of administration, and duration should be described.
The authors should ensure that the planning, performance, and reporting of human research are in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013. All authors should seek approval to conduct research from an independent local, regional, or national review body (e.g., ethics committee or institutional review board). If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the local, regional, or national review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.
The authors should provide declarative statements that: (a) written informed consent was obtained from each patient prior to enrollment; (b) the study protocol was approved by the appropriate institutional review committee (IRB), with the name of the committee and institution clearly stated; and (c) the study conformed to the ethical guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration (as revised in 2013). Information that may identify the human subject should be omitted or anonymized unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. GE reserves the right to ask the author to provide signed informed consent if necessary.
Examples: Ethical statement for experiments involving human subjects

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of [name of guidelines], [name of committee]. The protocol was approved by the [name of committee]. All subjects gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. This study is registered at [URL]. The registration identification number is [identification number]. (Prospective study)

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of [name of guidelines], [name of committee]. The protocol was approved by the [name of committee]. The individual consent for this retrospective analysis was waived. (Retrospective study)

Clinical Trial Registry
NSSS adopts the ICMJE's trial registration policy. Briefly, we require registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry (such as ClinicalTrials.gov or other Primary Registries listed here) at or before the time of the first patient enrollment as a condition of consideration for publication. The ICMJE does not define the timing of the first participant enrollment, but best practice dictates registration by the time of the first participant consent. For all randomized controlled trials submitted for publication, the Clinical Trials Registry identifier number and platform should be provided. Observational studies (those in which the assignment of the medical intervention is not at the discretion of the investigator) do not require registration..

Consent for Publication
All case reports and research articles including individual person's data must have obtained consent for publication. Since human patients are typically involved, case reports should first state that the study was carried out in accordance with the ethical standards of an ethics committee or institutional review board and with the Helsinki Declaration (as revised in 2013) ("Human Subjects and Informed Consent").
The authors should always protect the confidentiality of individual information obtained in the course of research or professional interactions (e.g., between doctors and patients). Any submitted materials (photographs/videos, etc.) including personal details that may identify the participant should be omitted or anonymized, unless the information is essential for scientific purposes. Photographs need to be cropped sufficiently to prevent participants from being recognized, and the eyes must be masked to make the individual unrecognizable. It is therefore almost always necessary to obtain written informed consent for publication from people (or from their parent/guardian) who might recognize themselves or be identified by others (e.g., from case reports or photographs). It may be possible to publish individual information without explicit consent only if public interest considerations outweigh possible harms, it is impossible to obtain consent, and a reasonable individual would be unlikely to object to publication.
Example: Ethical statement for case reports

The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutions to which we are affiliated and with the Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in 2013). Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this case report.

This study received ethical approval from the institutional review board of xxx Hospital and was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in 2013). Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for the publication of this case report and the accompanying images. A copy of the written consent is available for review by the editorial office of this journal.

This single case report of [number of cases] clinical cases was a retrospective analysis of three or fewer clinical cases and is not considered human research according to the U.S. federal policy [and institutional review board (IRB) regulations of xxx hospital]. An IRB approval was thus deemed unnecessary. This study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in 2013). Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for the publication of this case report and the accompanying images.
Please note that consent to participate in research or undergo treatment is not the same as consent for the publication of personal information. To obtain consent for publication, authors can use the NSSS consent form (download here) or use an institutional consent form. The consent form must specify that the consent materials will be freely available on the internet and that all readers worldwide will be able to view them. Authors do not need to provide a copy of the consent form to the editorial office; however, the editor may ask the authors to provide a copy for verification at any time.

Proper Credit for All Individuals or Organizations
Authors are expected to give proper credit to all individuals and organizations involved in the performance of the research described in an article published by NSSS. Individuals who do not meet the Authorship Criteria but who aided in the research, such as patients and hospital staff, should be appropriately acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section of the manuscript. Organizations that were contracted to perform work related to the research or that acted in a non-paid collaborative manner should be appropriately acknowledged in the manuscript. All funding agencies that provided support for the research or for any of the individuals involved in the research must be appropriately acknowledged in the manuscript.

Ethics in Publication: NSSS has a zero-tolerance policy for misconduct such as plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification. Cases of misconduct will be investigated and dealt with on a case-by-case basis, with the Editors-in-Chief being responsible for the final decision in all cases.

Types of Plagiarism
Plagiarism is defined by the NSSS as the use of information, including textual descriptions, figures/tables and data, from a previously published document without proper citation or reference to the original source. All submitted manuscripts will be checked using plagiarism detection software (Crossref Similarity Check).

Textual Plagiarism
Textual plagiarism is the verbatim copy of a textual description of information that has been published, regardless of citation or reference. This includes text published in an article written by the authors themselves (known as self-plagiarism). To avoid this type of plagiarism, authors are strongly recommended to not use the copy-and-paste method for constructing the text of their manuscript or directly quoting text from other sources.

Duplicate/Redundant Publication
Duplicate/redundant publication plagiarism involves the submission or publication of a study and/or its results and findings more than once. This type of plagiarism includes publishing a study and/or its results and findings in another language or with the information only slightly modified from another publication written by others or by the authors themselves (known as self-plagiarism). Duplicate/redundant publication can result from simultaneous submission of an article; therefore, the journal requires that all authors of manuscripts submitted for consideration of publication provide written assurance that the submitted manuscript is not under consideration nor published elsewhere.

Fabrication
Fabrication is defined as faking raw data, figures, or any supporting files.

Falsification
Falsification, including image manipulation, is manipulating research materials or equipment, or processing/changing/omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.

Policy on Misconduct
All instances of misconduct are considered intentional.
All authors who contributed to a manuscript with misconduct are considered responsible for the offensive action. Therefore, it is the responsibility of all the authors (contributing as well as corresponding) to ensure prior to submission that no instances of misconduct, textual or data-related, are present in their manuscript.
If an author has strong suspicion or evidence of misconduct after the review process has been initiated, and before the publication process has begun or been completed, we strongly recommend that the author contact the editorial office immediately to withdraw the manuscript.
If the journal discovers misconduct during the review process, through a concern raised by a reviewer, editor, or the editorial staff, the editorial office will suspend the peer-review process and start an initial investigation, which usually will consist of obtaining a second opinion from another reviewer/editor. If the second opinion finds no supporting evidence for scientific misconduct, a statement and supporting evidence will be recorded, and the peer-review process will continue. If the second opinion finds supporting evidence for misconduct, a special Committee on Ethical Publication consisting of all editors-in-chief and three associate editors will review the data and request that the corresponding author be contacted in writing and asked to address the concerns within a short but reasonable time. If the corresponding author responds on behalf of all the authors with explanations satisfactory to the Committee, the evidence will be summarized, the decision recorded, and the authors notified that the peer-review process will continue without prejudice. If the corresponding author(s) does(do) not respond in a manner judged by the Committee to be unsatisfactory, the corresponding author's institution, and in some situations, the appropriate regulatory body will be contacted, presented with the concerns, and asked to conduct an independent investigation. If the authors are found not guilty of scientific misconduct, the peer-review process will continue without prejudice. If the author(s) are found guilty of scientific misconduct, the manuscript will be rejected immediately, and the author(s) may be banned from all journals published by Xia & He Publishing, Inc. for a determined period of time.
If scientific misconduct is detected after a manuscript has been published, for example, by a reader, the editorial office will refer the case to the Committee on Ethical Publication to investigate and contact the author(s) to request an explanation regarding the concerns. If the author(s) respond(s) with a satisfactory explanation, there will be no change to the published manuscript. A correction will be published in the case that an honest error has been detected that does not invalidate the conclusions. If the author(s)’ explanation is unsatisfactory, or the author(s) does(do) not respond, the editorial office will contact the corresponding author's institution, and in some situations, an appropriate regulatory body, to review the concerns. If the independent review confirms the Committee's conclusion, a retraction or correction (if minor error and the majority of the results and conclusions of the manuscript remain valid) will be required to be published if there is sufficient evidence of misconduct, or if the authors admit misconduct. An expression of concern will be considered for publication if neither the authors nor the institutions provide a response or conclusive reply. The authors involved in confirmed scientific misconduct may be banned from all journals published by Xia & He Publishing, Inc. for a determined period of time.

Corrections
NSSS is very aware of our responsibility to correct errors in previously published articles. If there is sufficient evidence to prove an error in any published article, corrections must be made as soon as possible, in accordance with the requirements of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Errors include but are not limited to a research claim, the label of a figure or a table that does not alter conclusions, authorship, and so forth.
a) Corrections should be made immediately in the electronic version or printed page of the journal. The places that need to be corrected should be clearly indicated, with the correction date. The corrections should be included in the Table of Contents of either an electronic version or a print version of the journal.
b) The corrected version, and the version with errors, should be available for future access upon request from the authors.
c) The prior electronic version should contain a note that clearly indicates the existence of an updated version.
d) If the error is major enough to jeopardize the fundamental results or conclusions of the research, retraction instead of correction will be demanded.
The title of the submission should have the following format: "Corrigendum: Title of original article". It is advised to use the corrigendum Word templates.

Retractions and Expressions of Concern
NSSS acts in accordance with the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in cases of potential retraction. We also abide by two other key principles, as recommended by COPE:
a) Retractions are not about punishing authors.
b) Retraction statements should be public and linked to the original, retracted article.
Although all retractions are dealt with on a case-by-case basis, NSSS considers the following examples as sufficient cause for concern and potential retraction:
c) Sufficient evidence that findings are faulty or unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or academic error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error);
d) Findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper permission or justification (i.e., dual publication);
e) Legal or political issues pertaining to the content of the article are identified;
f) Major authorship issues have led to difficulty in determining the legitimate owners of the published work, i.e., proven or strongly suspected cases of ghostwriting or sold (‘gift’) authorship;

When scientific misconduct is alleged, or any concerns are raised about the conduct or integrity of published studies, appropriate procedures will be initiated as detailed by committees such as COPE. An expression of concern may be published pending the outcomes of these procedures. If any major flaw or academic misconduct is confirmed, the publisher reserves the right to retract the paper immediately. Examples of misconduct include but are not limited to data falsification, fabrication, duplication, or plagiarism.
An expression of concern and retraction will be posted, in an electronic or printed version of the Table of Contents, to ensure proper indexing. The title of the original article will be included in the heading. The retracted paper will also be clearly labeled and linked with the retraction letter from both directions.
Readers who would like to draw the editors' attention to published work that might require retraction should contact the authors of the article and write to the journal, making sure to include copies of all correspondence with the authors.
If an article requires retraction, the corresponding author(s) will be required to pay a fee of USD1,000 to cover the costs of retracting the publication.

Data Sharing Policy: It is the policy of NSSS that authors of papers published in our journals make all data and related metadata underlying findings reported in their manuscripts available, either in a publicly available data repository, as supplementary information alongside the publication itself, or direct provision upon request from readers.

To support this data sharing recommendation, a Data Sharing Statement is required for all research articles published by NSSS. This Statement will specify the method(s) by which any reader may access the shared data, according to the following:

(1) For provision through a data repository: While there is no required repository, the authors should carefully select one according to field-specific standards, for example GenBank for gene sequences; ArrayExpress for microarray data, etc. The Statement will include a functional hyperlink (full, and not a shortened version, such as Bitly) that takes the reader directly to the dataset for the manuscript, along with the repository(ies) name(s) and digital object identifiers (DOIs), accession numbers or codes, or other persistent identifiers for all relevant data.
Sample wording:
The [DATA TYPE, such as the technical appendix, statistical code, or dataset] used in support of the findings of this study have been deposited in the [NAME] repository ([DOI or other persistent identifier]).

(2) For provision through Supplementary Information files: The authors will state that the complete data files were submitted along with the paper and are published as corresponding Supplementary Information accessible through the electronic publication.
Sample wording:
The [DATA TYPE, such as the technical appendix, statistical code, or dataset] used in support of the findings of this study are included within the supplementary information file(s) accompanying this publication in the [Journal Title].

(3) For provision upon direct request: The authors will state that the complete dataset is available upon direct request to a specified contact, which can be an individual (author or otherwise, as clearly expressed in the Statement) or professional group/agency. The precise contact information of that person or group/agency, usually an email address or URL, will be provided in the Statement.
Sample wording:
The [DATA TYPE, such as the technical appendix, statistical code, or dataset] used in support of the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author at [email address or URL] upon request.

(4) For restriction of data sharing: If there is any restriction to the complete and free access to the data reported in a paper, the authors must provide a detailed and rational explanation of such.
Sample wording:
The [DATA TYPE, such as the technical appendix, statistical code, or dataset] used in support of the findings of this study have not been made available because [the reason].

(5) No additional data: If all data related to the study are presented within the paper, and no additional (including raw) data exist, this will be specified in the Data Sharing Statement.
Sample wording:
The [DATA TYPE, such as the technical appendix, statistical code, or dataset] used in support of the findings of this study are included within the article.

(6) For Data sharing of clinical trials: NSSS adopts ICMJE's data sharing statement policy, which is available at http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html#two: A. As of 1 July 2018, manuscripts submitted to ICMJE journals that report the results of clinical trials must contain a data sharing statement as described below. B. Clinical trials that begin enrolling participants on or after 1 January 2019 must include a data sharing plan in the trial's registration. If the data sharing plan changes after registration, this should be reflected in the statement submitted, published with the manuscript, and updated in the registry record.
Please note: Data sharing statements for clinical trials must indicate the following:
1. Whether individual de-identified data will be shared;
2. What data will be shared;
3. Availability of related documents (study protocol, statistical analysis plan, etc.);
4. When the data will be available and for how long;
5. Criteria for obtaining the data.
If an original article reports results from a clinical trial involving any data that are not publicly available, the authors must provide a statement to answer the above questions. Illustrative examples of data sharing statements that would meet these requirements are provided at http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html#two.

(7) For data sharing of human-involved research: For studies involving human subjects, data sharing should not compromise the privacy of the participants. It should be ensured that data are shared in accordance with local laws as well as the participants' consent.
Please note: If there is an ethical or legal restriction to complete and free access to the data, the authors should provide the reason for the restriction in detail and provide the contact information to which requests for the data can be sent.

Self-archiving Policy: Authors of articles published in NSSS are permitted to self-archive the preprint version of the article at any time, and may self-archive the postprint and published version without embargo.
Articles may be placed on:
1. The author's personal website;
2. The author's company/institutional repository or archive;
3. Non-for-profit subject-based preprint servers or repositories (preprints);
4. Non-for-profit subject-based repositories such as PubMed Central (postprints) and Research Gate;
5. Other suitable non-for-profit sites.

Preprint Version

A preprint is the version of an article before peer review. Authors are not required to remove a preprint from a non-for-profit preprint server before submission. Upon acceptance, we recommend including an acknowledgment of acceptance on the first page, as follows:
“This is the pre-peer-reviewed version of the article which has been subsequently peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in [JOURNAL TITLE].”
After publication, the author may include the sentence:
“This is the pre-peer-reviewed version of the following article, which has been published online at [Link to final article using the DOI]: [FULL CITE].”

Postprint Version

A postprint is the version of an article that has been peer-reviewed, revised, and accepted for publication but is prior to the final publication version which often includes copyediting, typesetting, and so forth. The following notice should be included on the first page:
“This is the peer-reviewed and pre-copyedited version of the article which has been accepted for publication in [JOURNAL TITLE].”
After publication, the author may include the sentence:
“This is the peer-reviewed and pre-copyedited version of the following article, which has been published online at [Link to final article using the DOI]: [FULL CITE]”

Published Version

A published version is the article in its formal format that is published online by the publisher. The version self-archived should include the full citation of the article on the first page.

Conflict of Interest: Authors
A conflict of interest is any influence on an investigator or author that could sway his or her judgment or decisions concerning the investigator’s or author’s research, such as the valid reporting of data or its analysis or interpretation. Potential conflicts of interest include: professional or financial gain; personal or academic relationships or competition; religious, philosophical, or political beliefs; or any factor that prevents the independent preparation or publishing of a manuscript.

The public perception of a conflict of interest is similarly as harmful as an actual conflict of interest. Authors are responsible for reporting any potential or actual conflict of interest upon first submission of a manuscript, with appropriate changes in further revisions, if necessary. A conflict of interest statement should include all sources of financial support (for example, sponsors, and grant numbers), other support for the study (such as collecting, analyzing, or interpreting data), writing or revising the manuscript, or any factor that limited (or will limit in the future) the investigators' full access to the data and its analysis.

All authors must check the ICMJE’s unified disclosure form. Each author should check the form to disclose any potential conflict of interest and is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the provided information. The ICMJE's form can be downloaded here.
Examples: Conflict of interest
1. The author is a consultant for and has received consultation fees from A**llas; however, this review is solely the author's work without any connection with A**llas.
2. One of the authors, xx, has been an editorial board member of xxx journal since May 2021. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to note.
3. The authors have no conflicts of interest related to this publication.

Editors and Reviewers
Any conflict of interest (financial, professional, personal, or otherwise) must be disclosed to the journal's editorial office as soon as it is recognized or suspected. This includes but is not limited to having a financial interest in the findings, having a competition to publish the same findings, having collaboration or publication with an author in the recent past, working at the same institution as the author, having a dispute with the author, and being a friend/family member/present or previous mentor of the author. This policy applies to all editors, reviewers, and editorial staff.

All peer reviewers are requested to disclose any conflict of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript and to decline to review any manuscript for which a conflict or appearance of conflict exists. In the event that a peer reviewer recognizes a conflict of interest that may compromise his or her ability to make an unbiased assessment of a manuscript, it is required that the reviewer decline to review the manuscript and inform the editorial office. If the staff or representatives of Xia & He Publishing, Inc. discover potential evidence of a conflict-of-interest violation, the issue will be addressed on a case-by-case basis through investigation and recusal. If a reviewer discloses a conflict of interest but still reviews the manuscript, that review will not be considered in the evaluation of that manuscript, and an alternative review will be arranged.

The academic editor to whom a manuscript has been assigned is asked to disclose to the managing editor any potential conflict of interest that may affect his/her judgment and to decline the assignment. The editorial staff must exclude themselves from participating in editorial decisions regarding manuscripts for which potential conflicts of interest exist.

Submissions from Editors, Editorial Board Members, or Employees
Submissions from editors, members of the editorial board, or employees will undergo the same rigorous peer-review process as other submissions and will be treated no differently from any other manuscripts submitted to the journal. To ensure an unbiased review, the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editor, Editorial Board Member, and Editorial Staff will not make decisions for, handle, or review his/her own manuscript. All possible measures will be undertaken to avoid any potential conflict of interest in the handling of such manuscripts at all stages, including allocation of the handling editor, reviewer selection, decision-making, and, if required, processing for publication. Moreover, the status of editorial board membership/employment should be declared in the conflict of interest statement of the published article, beginning in September 2021.

Statement of Timeliness for Editors: NSSS sets a strict timeframe for the return of papers assigned to editors. In any situation that may cause delay, the editor should report to the editorial office immediately.

Editorial Freedom: The Editors-in-Chief are responsible for all final decisions regarding each paper submitted, as well as the topics and contents of each issue. Neither the journal owners nor XIA & HE PUBLISHING INC. may interfere with the decisions of the editorial office.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern: Corrections
NSSS is very aware of our responsibility to correct errors in previously published articles. If there is sufficient evidence to prove an error in any published article, corrections must be made as soon as possible, in accordance with the requirements of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Errors include but are not limited to a research claim, the label of a figure or table that does not alter conclusions, authorship, and so forth.
a) Corrections should be made immediately in the electronic version or printed page of the journal. The places that need to be corrected should be clearly indicated, with the correction date. The corrections should be included in the Table of Contents of either an electronic version or a print version of the journal.
b) The corrected version, and the version with errors, should be available for future access upon request from the authors.
c) The prior electronic version should contain a note that clearly indicates the existence of an updated version.
d) If the error is major enough to jeopardize the fundamental results or conclusions of the research, retraction instead of correction will be demanded.
The title of the submission should have the following format: "Corrigendum: Title of original article". It is advised to use the corrigendum Word templates.

Retractions and Expressions of Concern
NSSS acts in accordance with the guidelines and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in cases of potential retraction. We also abide by two other key principles, as recommended by COPE:
a) Retractions are not about punishing authors.
b) Retraction statements should be public and linked to the original, retracted article.
Although all retractions are dealt with on a case-by-case basis, Xia & He Publishing considers the following examples as sufficient cause for concern and potential retraction:
c) Sufficient evidence that findings are faulty or unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or academic error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error);
d) Findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper permission or justification (i.e., dual publication);
e) Legal or political issues pertaining to the content of the article are identified;
f) Major authorship issues have led to difficulty in determining the legitimate owners of the published work, i.e., proven or strongly suspected cases of ghostwriting or sold (‘gift’) authorship;

When scientific misconduct is alleged, or any concerns are raised about the conduct or integrity of published studies, appropriate procedures will be initiated as detailed by such committees as COPE. An expression of concern may be published pending the outcomes of these procedures. If any major flaw or academic misconduct is confirmed, the publisher reserves the right to retract the paper immediately. Examples of misconduct include but are not limited to data falsification, fabrication, duplication, or plagiarism.
An expression of concern and retraction will be posted, in an electronic or printed version of the Table of Contents, to ensure proper indexing. The title of the original article will be included in the heading. The retracted paper will also be clearly labeled and linked with the retraction letter from both directions.
Readers who would like to draw the editors' attention to published work that might require retraction should contact the authors of the article and write to the journal, making sure to include copies of all correspondence with the authors.
If an article requires retraction, the corresponding author(s) will be required to pay a fee of USD1,000 to cover the costs of retracting the publication.

Reprints and Permissions: Articles published by NSSS are distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial and otherwise in compliance with the license.
Readers who would like to draw the editors' attention to published work that might require retraction should contact the authors of the article and write to the journal, making sure to include copies of all correspondence with the authors.

Article reprints are an exact replica of the article as it appears in the published journal, with the cover included. High-quality copies of articles are available upon request to the publisher. Permission to publish or advertise articles or portions of articles is granted on a case-by-case basis. For a request for permission, please complete the Permission Request Form and submit it to [email protected].

Complaints Procedure

We welcome complaints and will try our best to resolve the matters in a timely manner to the entire satisfaction of our authors. The complaint must relate to the content or process that is within the responsibility of the journal, our editorial staff, or editors.

How to Make a Complaint

The best way to make a complaint is by email. Complaints should ideally be made to the person the complainant is already in contact with regarding the matter being complained about. If that is not appropriate, please email [email protected].

Whenever possible, complaints will be dealt with by the relevant member of the editorial staff. If that person is not appropriate, he or she will refer it to the executive editor.

Complaints that are not under the control of the journal's editorial staff will be sent to the relevant heads of department.

All complaints will be acknowledged within two working days.

If possible a full response will be made within two weeks. If this is not possible an interim response will be given within two weeks. Further interim responses will be provided until the complaint is resolved.

If the complainant is not happy with the resolution, he or she can ask for the complaint to be escalated to the executive editor.

If the complainant remains unhappy, complaints should be escalated to the editor, whose decision is final.

If a complainant remains unhappy after what the editor considers a definitive reply the complainant may complain to an external body (see below).

External Body

If the complainant has exhausted the internal processes and is still unhappy he or she can complain to the following bodybody: The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://www.publicationethics.org) publishes a code of practice for editors of scientific, technical, and medical journals. It will consider complaints against editors but only once a journal's own complaints procedures have been exhausted.

Disclaimer: All articles published in NSSS represent the views and opinions of their authors, and not the views, opinions, or policies of the publisher, except where explicitly indicated. NSSS shall not be held responsible for the use of views and opinions expressed in the articles; the use of any information in the articles shall not be considered an endorsement by NSSS of the products advertised.

Crossmark

Crossmark is an initiative to provide a standard way for readers to locate the current version of a piece of content. By applying the Crossmark button, Xia & He Publishing is committing to maintaining the content it publishes, and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.

Clicking on the Crossmark button will tell you the current status of a document and may also give you additional publication record information about the document.

The Xia & He Publishing content that will have the CrossMark logo is restricted to current and future journal content.

Advertising Policy

1. Advertisements are prohibited from being juxtaposed with editorial content for the same product.

2. Advertisements and editorial content must be clearly distinguishable.

3. Editorial decisions are not influenced by advertising clients or sponsors.

4. Editors-in-Chief of the journals published by Xia & He Publishing Inc. have full and final authority for approving print and online advertisements and for enforcing advertising policy.

5. Financial/commercial interests and/or sponsors/advertisers will not influence any editorial content.

6. Generally, Xia & He Publishing Inc. accepts advertisements for academic, educational, or intellectual purposes. Advertisements for products or services that have proven seriously harmful to health will not be considered.

7. Xia & He Publishing Inc. reserves all rights to decline advertisements that may affect its value and reputation.

8. The advertiser(s) must be clearly identified in the advertisement(s).

9. Xia & He Publishing Inc. reserves all rights to withdraw any advertisement from the journal website, at any time, if the Editor(s)-in-Chief or the publisher requests its removal.

10. Advertisements must comply with applicable United States legislations, regulatory requirements, and guidelines.

11. Advertisements must not be misleading or deceptive, and must be in good taste.

12. Complaints related to any advertisement will be published on the advertisements page.