Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements

 

1. Preamble

The Hip Knee Journal (HKJ) is a peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal dedicated to advancing knowledge in the fields of hip and knee orthopaedic surgery, arthroplasty, sports medicine related to the lower extremity, and musculoskeletal rehabilitation. Published by Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, the journal serves as a platform for clinicians, researchers, and academics to disseminate high-quality original research, case reports, reviews, and technical notes in orthopaedic science.

The editorial board and publisher of The Hip Knee Journal are committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and maintaining trust in the scientific record. This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement has been developed in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Declaration of Helsinki, and internationally recognized best practices in scholarly publishing.

All parties involved in the publication process — editors, authors, reviewers, and the publisher — are expected to meet these ethical standards. Failure to comply may result in rejection of manuscripts, retraction of published articles, and reporting to relevant institutions.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

2.1 Fair and Impartial Handling of Manuscripts

The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board of The Hip Knee Journal are responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts should be published, based solely on the academic merit, scientific validity, originality, and relevance of the work to the scope of the journal.

• All submissions are evaluated on their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs of the authors.
• Editors shall not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the explicit written consent of the author(s).

2.2 Confidentiality

The editorial team shall maintain the confidentiality of the peer review process. All manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents and must not be shared with or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

2.3 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors who have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers they are reviewing must recuse themselves and assign the review to another editor.

• Editors must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without prior written consent from the authors.
• Any financial or personal interest that could inappropriately influence decisions must be disclosed.

2.4 Publication Decisions

The editor is responsible for ensuring the integrity of the academic record. When ethical concerns arise about submitted or published manuscripts, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, or manipulation,  editors are obligated to take appropriate action in accordance with COPE guidelines, which may include contacting the authors' institutions or retraction of the published article.

2.5 Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

Editors are obligated to take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints are raised concerning a submitted or published manuscript. Such measures generally include contacting the author of the manuscript and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies. COPE flowcharts will be followed in handling such cases.

3. Duties and Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

3.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. The Hip Knee Journal operates a double-blind peer review process, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the review.

3.2 Promptness and Commitment

• Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript, or knows that its prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
• Reviewers should provide reviews within the agreed timeframe. If an extension is needed, the editor must be notified immediately.
• Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in a constructive and professional manner.

3.3 Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Reviewers must not retain or copy any portion of a manuscript without explicit permission.

3.4 Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and should not make statements that cannot be supported. Reviews must focus solely on the scientific merit, methodology, originality, and clinical relevance of the work.

3.5 Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submitted work. Any potential conflict of interest must be declared to the editor before agreeing to review.

3.6 Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

4. Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

4.1 Reporting Standards and Original Research

Authors of reports of original research submitted to The Hip Knee Journal should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

• Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
• Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and opinion works clearly identified as such.
• All manuscripts should follow the CARE guidelines (for case reports), CONSORT (for RCTs), PRISMA (for systematic reviews and meta-analyses), STROBE (for observational studies), or other applicable reporting guidelines.

4.2 Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication and to provide access to such data to other competent professionals who seek it. All data must have been obtained ethically, especially data involving human participants.

4.3 Originality and Plagiarism

The Hip Knee Journal requires that all submitted manuscripts are original works and have not been previously published, nor are under consideration for publication elsewhere in any language. Authors are strictly prohibited from:

• Submitting plagiarised content, using someone else's words, data, ideas, or images without proper attribution.
• Self-plagiarism, reproducing substantial portions of their own previously published work without proper citation or acknowledgment.
• Paraphrasing, disguising plagiarism by changing words while maintaining the same structure and content.

All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software (Turnitin or iThenticate). A similarity index of more than 20% (excluding references) will result in immediate rejection.

4.4 Multiple, Duplicate, or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Authors submitting a manuscript must declare that the manuscript has not been published previously, is not under consideration by another journal, and will not be submitted elsewhere until the final editorial decision is made.

4.5 Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. All references must be formatted according to the Vancouver style, as per the journal's instructions to authors. Data, ideas, or results obtained in private correspondence or conversation must not be used without explicit, written permission from the source.

4.6 Authorship Criteria

Authorship of a manuscript should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission.

Authorship criteria based on ICMJE recommendations require all of the following:

• Substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
• Final approval of the version to be published.
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Guest authorship (listing an individual who does not meet authorship criteria as a co-author), ghost authorship (failing to list an individual who does meet authorship criteria), and gift authorship are considered unethical and will not be tolerated.

4.7 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all sources of financial support for the project in the acknowledgment section of the manuscript. Additionally, all authors must disclose any personal, financial, or institutional relationships that might be perceived as influencing the objectivity of the research at the time of submission. This includes relationships with companies, foundations, or individuals providing financial or in-kind support. Conflict of interest disclosures must be provided on the manuscript submission form and within the manuscript itself.

4.8 Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

4.9 Informed Consent and Patient Rights

All research involving human participants submitted to The Hip Knee Journal must have been conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Authors must confirm that:

• Ethical approval has been obtained from the relevant Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee (Komite Etik Penelitian Kesehatan, KEPK) prior to commencement of the study.
• Written informed consent was obtained from all participants or their legal guardians prior to their participation in the study.
• Patient anonymity and privacy are protected. Identifiable patient data (including photographs, clinical records, and imaging) must not be published without explicit written consent.
• Studies involving animals must comply with the Guidelines for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and must include the approval of the institutional animal ethics committee.

The ethical approval number and the name of the approving institution must be stated in the Methods section of the manuscript.

5. Responsibilities of the Publisher

Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, as publisher of The Hip Knee Journal, is committed to ensuring that commercial considerations never compromise intellectual and ethical standards. The publisher will:

• Support the editor in their work and implement clear processes for handling editorial complaints and appeals.
• Ensure the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research (through digital archiving such as PKP PLN and GARUDA).
• Protect the integrity of the academic record by never condoning plagiarism, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, or data fabrication.
• Maintain a clear separation between advertising and editorial content, ensuring that no advertiser or sponsor can influence editorial decisions.
• Comply with applicable national and international legislation regarding copyright, data protection, and privacy (including UU No. 28 Tahun 2014 tentang Hak Cipta and relevant international standards).
• Ensure open access to all published content, consistent with the journal's open-access policy under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.

6. Handling of Research Misconduct and Allegations

6.1 Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

The Hip Knee Journal considers the following as research and publication misconduct:

• Fabrication: inventing data or results and recording or reporting them.
• Falsification: manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented.
• Plagiarism: appropriating another person's ideas, processes, results, words, or data without giving appropriate credit.
• Duplicate/redundant submission or publication.
• Authorship misconduct (guest, ghost, or gift authorship).
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
• Failure to obtain ethical approval for human or animal research.
• Image manipulation that misrepresents the original data.
• Citation manipulation (excessive self-citation or coercive citation).
• Peer review manipulation (attempting to interfere with the peer review process).

6.2 Procedures for Addressing Misconduct

The editorial board will follow COPE guidelines when addressing allegations of misconduct. The standard procedure is as follows:

• Preliminary assessment: The editor-in-chief will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the allegation has substance and warrants further investigation.
• Contacting the authors: The corresponding author will be contacted and provided with an opportunity to respond to the allegations within a defined timeframe (usually 14 days).
• Escalation: If the author's response is unsatisfactory, the matter will be escalated to the author's institution and/or relevant professional bodies.
• Decision: Based on all available evidence, the editorial board will make a decision, which may include rejection of the manuscript, retraction of a published article, issuing an erratum or corrigendum, or publishing an expression of concern.
• All correspondence related to the investigation will be documented and retained.

6.3 Corrections and Retractions

Errors in published articles will be addressed through the following mechanisms:

• Corrigendum: issued when the author's error significantly affects the data but does not invalidate the conclusions of the article.
• Erratum: issued when the journal has made an error in the publication process.
• Retraction: issued when there is clear evidence of research misconduct, unreliable data, or other ethical violations that invalidate the conclusions of the article. Retracted articles will be clearly marked as 'RETRACTED' and will be retained in the online archive with the retraction notice.
• Expression of Concern: issued when there is evidence of possible misconduct but where a definitive conclusion cannot yet be drawn.

All corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern will be published as promptly as possible, clearly identified and linked to the original article, and permanently archived.