Publication Ethics Policy for the Journal of New Medicine
The Journal of New Medicine strictly adheres to the "Three Review and Three Proofreading" system, upholding vocational publishing ethics and firmly resisting academic misconduct. To strengthen academic integrity and further standardize the manuscript writing, editing, reviewing, and publishing process, the journal follows relevant domestic and international documents or regulations such as the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing), the Ethical Review Measures for Life Sciences and Medical Research Involving Humans, the Measures for the Ethical Review of Science and Technology (Trial), the Several Opinions on Further Strengthening the Construction of Scientific Research Integrity, the Academic Publishing Specification—Definition of Academic Misconduct for Journals (CY/T174—2019), the Measures for the Prevention and Punishment of Academic Misconducts in Institutions of Higher Education, the 2.0 Guidelines for the Boundaries of AIGC Usage in Academic Publishing, the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China (2020 Revision), and the 2024 Chinese version of the Declaration of Helsinki. In combination with its actual circumstances, the Journal of New Medicine has developed its own publishing ethics policies for authors, peer reviewers, and editors.
1. Authors must ensure that all submitted content is original. Submissions should be scientifically sound, academically rigorous, and innovative, with authentic research materials, clear arguments, reliable data and proper writing standards. Plagiarism of others' research findings is strictly prohibited, as is altering or falsifying data, providing false funding information, or submitting papers that have been ghostwritten or modified by a "third party". If necessary, authors are obligated to provide supporting materials, such as original images, raw data, funding project approval documents, and project names, if requested by the editorial department. If authors wish to submit their manuscript to another journal, they must contact the editorial department to request withdrawal and avoid duplicate submission.
2. Journal Policy on Authorship and Contributor Roles: When submitting a manuscript, authors must ensure that the manuscript does not involve confidential content, that there are no disputes over authorship, no conflicts of interest, no infringement of rights, no duplicate publication, or multiple submissions. The order of authors should be determined through discussion and agreement by all authors prior to submission and should not be changed during the editing process. If changes are necessary, official documentation from the authors' institution must be provided. Authors should meet the following criteria: (i) Participation in the topic selection, study design, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2. Drafting or revising key theoretical aspects or other major content of the paper; (iii) Ability to verify and revise the manuscript based on the editorial department's suggestions, defend the work in academic settings, and approve the final version for publication. Both the first author and the corresponding author must meet all three of the above criteria. Individuals who only contributed to securing funding or collecting data should not be listed as authors, nor should those who only provided general management of the research group. At least one author must be responsible for each major conclusion in the manuscript. For manuscripts with collective authorship, the name of the corresponding author or the individual responsible for the manuscript (listed at the end of the manuscript) must be clearly indicated. Other contributors should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section. If the manuscript includes foreign authors, a signed letter of consent from the foreign author(s) agreeing to publication in the journal must be provided. If the corresponding author is not the first author, this should be explicitly stated. Only one corresponding author should generally be designated, as determined by the submitter. If collaborative group members need to be listed, they should be included before the references. Author contributions must be detailed in the "Author Contribution Statement Form" and submitted with the manuscript. Changes to authorship after submission are generally not permitted. In the event of unavoidable objective factors necessitating a change in authorship, the lead authors (the first author and the corresponding author) must submit a written request to the editorial department, explaining the reasons and providing signed approval from all listed authors, along with an official seal from the authors' institution.
4. In accordance with the Ethical Review Measures for Life Sciences and Medical Research Involving Humans, the Measures for the Ethical Review of Science and Technology (Trial), authors must submit an ethical approval document from their institution (i.e., the institution engaged in life sciences, medicine, artificial intelligence, or other scientific activities) when submitting manuscripts involving human life sciences and medical research or scientific activities involving experimental animals. An ethical statement must also be included in the manuscript. When the study involves human subjects, authors must provide informed consent from participants or their relatives. Clinical trial papers must adhere to the fundamental principles of bioethics and include a registration number from the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Reports on animal experiments must indicate compliance with relevant regulations on the management and use of experimental animals.
5. Journal Policy on Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests: All authors must disclose any commercial relationships, familial relationships, or close collaborative relationships that could be perceived as potential conflicts of interest related to the submitted manuscript. If the manuscript involves commercial products, the manufacturer's name must be clearly stated in the "Materials and Methods" section or another appropriate part of the text.
6. In the event of academic disputes during the peer review process, authors should maintain an objective and rational attitude toward reviewer comments. If authors have legitimate objections, they may appeal to the editorial department by providing strong supporting materials and detailed explanations addressing each review comment.
7. AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as authors or co-authors, nor should AI be cited as an author. Authors must ensure that the manuscript contains no plagiarism, including text or images generated by AI.
8. The Journal of New Medicine has been indexed by multiple domestic and international databases. If authors do not agree to their articles being indexed, they should declare this to the editorial department at the time of submission.
9. If authors identify errors in a published manuscript, they are obligated to promptly notify the editorial department to make corrections and cooperate with the editorial department to retract the manuscript or issue a correction statement. If the editorial department becomes aware of issues related to research or publication ethics in a published manuscript through a third party, authors are obligated to cooperate with the editorial department to retract the article or issue a correction statement.
10. No review fees will be charged for any submissions. Publication fees are collected based on relevant national and industry documents and regulations. Authors will be notified of the fees upon acceptance of the manuscript, with the standard rate set at 500 RMB per page. After receiving the payment notice, authors should transfer the fee as soon as possible. Once the payment is received by the Journal of New Medicine, the article will be scheduled for publication promptly.
11. Authors can access the full text of articles via the official website at https://www.xinyixue.cn/. They are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full text of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose.
II. Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
1. Peer reviewers should adhere to the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality, and timeliness in contributing to the decision-making process. They should objectively and promptly assist in improving the quality of published papers. If, for any reason, reviewers are unable to return their comments on time or are unqualified to review a particular manuscript, they must immediately inform the editorial department and must not delegate the review to others without authorization.
2. Peer reviewers should respect the independence of authors' ideas and the innovation of scientific research. Their evaluation should focus primarily on the academic quality of the manuscript, avoiding any bias or discrimination against authors based on factors, such as personal background, academic institution, region, qualifications, ethnicity.
3. The journal employs a double-blind peer review process. All manuscripts received by peer reviewers must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or discuss the manuscript with others or misuse its content.
4. Journal Policy on Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests: If a peer reviewer has a conflict of interest with the authors (e.g., familial relationships, mentor-student relationships, alumni relationships, colleague relationships, or competitive relationships), they must promptly declare the conflict of interest to the editorial department and recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript to ensure the fairness of the review process.
5. Reviewers must strictly uphold academic ethics during the review process. If a peer reviewer finds that the research in the manuscript is closely related to their own work, they must not use their review comments to explicitly or implicitly pressure the authors to cite their own work or publications. They must not abuse their reviewing authority to deliberately suppress or undermine the quality of the manuscript.
6. If peer reviewers identify issues such as data fabrication or falsification, duplicate publication, plagiarism, ghostwriting, unauthorized submission, or other violations of research or publication ethics, they must highlight these concerns in their review comments so that the editorial department can carry out further verification, or request necessary explanations from the authors.
7. Peer review comments should be written by the reviewers themselves based on an objective and fair assessment of the manuscript's quality. They must not be generated by AI.
III. Ethical Guidelines for Editors
1. Journal’s Ethical Oversight Policy: Editors must comply with national policies, regulations, and the journal’s institutional guidelines regarding journal management. They must strictly adhere to the review process and are not permitted to alter the manuscript handling procedures without authorization.
2. Editors are responsible for conducting plagiarism checks on all submitted manuscripts and rejecting those with a similarity rate exceeding 20%. For manuscripts meeting the similarity requirements, editors must avoid bias based on the authors’ race, nationality, seniority, or position. They should primarily evaluate the academic quality of the manuscript during the initial review, provide feedback, and promptly forward qualified manuscripts for external and final review. Editors must respect the reviewers’ opinions and make fair decisions regarding revisions, acceptance, or rejection, providing detailed revision suggestions or reasons for rejection.
3. Journal Policy on Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests: If an editor identifies a potential conflict of interest during the initial review (e.g., familial relationships, mentor-student relationships, alumni relationships, colleague relationships, or competitive relationships), they must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript. The editorial department should reassign the manuscript to another editor. Editors must not use their position to gain inappropriate benefits.
4. Editors must uphold the principle of confidentiality. They must not disclose the personal information of authors or peer reviewers, nor the content of the manuscript. They must not interfere with or influence the independent review process of peer reviewers.
5. Editors must rigorously review the credentials of peer reviewers recommended by authors, taking into account their research filed and expertise and potential conflicts of interest with the authors, to determine whether to invite them. Editors should also give due consideration to authors’ requests to exclude specific reviewers and avoid them whenever possible.
6. Editors have a duty to inform authors of potential copyright and intellectual property issues that may arise from changes in authorship, affiliations, or the order of authors.
7. Editors should publish comprehensive guidelines (e.g., submission guidelines) that the public may require, and update them regularly.
The Journal of New Medicine is an open-access journal. All online articles can be read and downloaded free of charge at https://www.xinyixue.cn/.
The journal publishes public service advertisements as required but does not engage in any commercial advertising activities.
Author Submission Guidelines:
https://www.xinyixue.cn/CN/column/item11.shtml](https://www.xinyixue.cn/CN/column/item11.shtml.
来稿 | Submission
证明材料检查 | Document Verification
是否齐备、真实 | Completeness and Authenticity Check
否 | No
仅缺少部分材料予驳回重投 | Rejection for Resubmission Due to Partial Missing Materials
材料真实性存疑予退稿 | Rejection Due to Doubts About Material Authenticity
是 | Yes
重复率检测（如网、万方） | Plagiarism Check (e.g., CNKI, Wanfang)
无明显重复，具新颖性 | No Significant Duplication, Novelty Present
收稿 | Acceptance
仅为术语、材料、特有方法重复，予审查新颖性 | Only Terminology, Materials, or Unique Methods Duplicated, Novelty Review Required
相似度8%以上，分析相似内容并进行判断 | Similarity Above 8%, Analyze Similar Content and Make Judgment
20%以上不可接受，退稿 | Above 20% Unacceptable, Reject
具新颖性，修改后可接受，建议作者重新组织语言 | Novelty Present, Acceptable After Revision, Suggest Author Reorganize Language
修改后低于8% | After Revision, Similarity Below 8%
是 | Yes
收稿 | Acceptance
不具新颖性或文章内容太段重复少不可接受 | Lack of Novelty or Excessive Repetition Unacceptable
否 | No
退稿 | Rejection
Manuscript Acceptance Flowchart
Expert Review Guidelines: https://www.xinyixue.cn/CN/column/item34.shtml
稿件入库 | Manuscript Submission
编辑初审/统计学初筛 | Editorial Initial Review/ Initial Statistical Screening
原则性问题 | Issues of Principle
退稿 | Rejection
有 | Yes
无 | None
需完善内容较少送同行评议，需完善内容较多送作者退修 | Minor revisions sent for peer review, major revisions sent back to author for revision
不通过 | Not Approved
同行评议 | Peer Review
符合要求 | Meeting Requirements
作者退修 | Author Revision
不符合要求 | Not meeting requirements
退稿 | Rejection
通过 | Approved
编辑加工 | Editorial Processing
存在细节问题 | Existing issues of detail
原则性问题 | Issues of Principle
不通过 | Not Approved
统计学二审 | Second Statistical Review
需作者核实的问题 | Issues Requiring Author Verification
存在细节问题 | Existing issues of detail
编辑部主任/编委会复审 | Review by Editorial Director/Editorial Board
通过 | Approved
主编终审 | Final Review by Editor-in-Chief
通过 | Approved
通过 | Approved
作者修改 | Author Revision
是否符合要求 | Meeting Requirements
细节问题 | Issues of Detail
编辑加工 | Editorial Processing
原则性问题 | Issues of Principle
统计学复审 | Second Statistical Review
原则性问题 | Issues of Principle
原则性问题 | Issues of Principle
Note: Non-original research manuscripts do not require a statistical review process.
Manuscript Processing Flowchart
Intellectual Property Policy and Open Access Statement: https://www.xinyixue.cn/CN/column/item60.shtml
Editorial Board Members: https://www.xinyixue.cn/CN/column/column2.shtml
Peer Review Policy: https://www.xinyixue.cn/CN/column/item34.shtml
Author Guidelines: https://www.xinyixue.cn/CN/column/item11.shtml
8. Process for Handling Allegations of Academic Misconduct: For manuscripts that have been accepted but not yet published, if violations of research or publication ethics are identified, the editor has the authority to reject the manuscript and notify the author. For published articles found to violate research or publication ethics, the journal will retract the article after verification, notify relevant databases, and issue a public statement explaining the reasons for retraction. The journal welcomes readers to supervise academic misconduct and provide relevant feedback to the journal to jointly maintain a positive academic environment. Readers may send comments to our email address. The editorial department will address such reports promptly and provide feedback as appropriate.
IV. Consequences of Violating Publication Ethics
The Journal of New Medicine maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward violations of publication ethics to uphold the integrity of scientific research and provide readers with accurate and authoritative information. Editors or peer reviewers found to violate publication ethics will be dismissed; authors found to violate publication ethics will face manuscript rejection or retraction. Legal action will be pursued against individuals who violate the law.
Editorial Department of the Journal of New Medicine
