Ethical guidelines in scientific journal policies: analysis and recommendations

LIMA, Catarina Pereira Monteiro; PONTES, Larissa Braz; CALDEIRA, François Isnaldo Dias; FARIA, Luan Viana; OLIVEIRA, Fernando Afonso de; SILVA, Luana Raphael da; MARTELLI, Maurício Gandini Gianni; FERNANDES, Clemente Maia da Silva; SERRA, Mônica da Costa

doi:10.1590/1807-2577.20250011

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

Original Article • Rev. Odontol. UNESP 54 • 2025 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-2577.20250011 linkcopy

Ethical guidelines in scientific journal policies: analysis and recommendations

Diretrizes éticas nas políticas de periódicos científicos: análise e recomendações

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Introduction The growth of online scientific publications has expanded the dissemination of knowledge but has also fostered the emergence of predatory journals that disregard ethical principles of publishing.

Objective This study examined ethical requirements in health science journals using “Submission Guidelines” from journal websites.

Material and method A sample of 270 journals was randomly selected from 2,523 identified via the Qualis portal, distributed across Dentistry (15.9%), Health Sciences (53.7%), and multidisciplinary areas (30.4%).

Result Findings revealed a decline in ethical submission standards with decreasing impact factor and Qualis classification.

Conclusion Higher-impact journals emphasized robust methodologies, ethical adherence, and reliable results, contrasting with lower-impact journals, which showed less stringent policies. These trends also applied to multidisciplinary journals.

Descriptors:
Ethics in scientific publication; journals; guidelines

Variable	Analysis criteria
*Grouping Variables*
a) Qualis	The 2017-2020 CAPES Classification¹¹.
b) Impact Factor	The Incites Journal Citation Reports (JCR) by Clarivate Analytics¹² was used.
c) Journal Specialty	The journals were grouped into three categories based on their scope: Dentistry Specialty Journals - Journals publishing articles exclusively related to Dentistry; Health Journals - Journals publishing articles from medical and related fields, including Dentistry; Multidisciplinary Journals - Journals publishing articles from various fields of knowledge.
*Outcome Variables*	Analysis criteria
I. Approval from ethical committee designed to protect humans	This item was considered fulfilled if the guidelines required approval from Research Ethics Committees for studies involving humans, directly or indirectly, including the presentation of the approval protocol number or justification for exemption.
II. Study must be conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration	This item was considered fulfilled if the journal guidelines mentioned that reports of studies involving humans must be conducted ethically, based on the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki¹³ and its subsequent amendments or comparable ethical standards.
III. Ethical approval for animal studies	This item was considered fulfilled if the guidelines required approval from Research Ethics Committees for studies involving animals, including the presentation of the approval protocol number or justification for exemption.
IV. Declaration of potential conflicts of interest	This item was considered fulfilled if the guidelines recommended the need to declare potential conflicts of interest by authors that could have a direct or potential influence on the work.
V. Funding source declaration	This item was considered fulfilled if the guidelines recommended including information about sources of funding and any financial interests involved.
VI. Registries for conducting clinical trials	This item was considered fulfilled if the guidelines required clinical trials to be registered on publicly accessible platforms such as clinical registers¹⁴, clinical trials¹⁵, the UK’s clinical study registry¹⁶ or similar platforms.
VII. Standards of reporting for conducting original research (Exemple: EQUATOR, STROBE, STARD, ARRIVE)	This item was considered fulfilled if the guidelines recommended that authors follow the minimum reporting guidelines hosted by the EQUATOR Network¹⁷ when preparing their manuscripts. If at least one of these guidelines was cited, this requirement was considered fulfilled.
VIII. Standards of reporting for conducting review studies (Exemple: PRISMA, COCHRANE)	This item was considered fulfilled if the guidelines recommended that authors follow specific guidelines for preparing literature review studies, provided the journal accepted this type of study. For journals that do not publish literature reviews, this item was automatically considered “fulfilled.”
IX. Use of peer review (blind)	This item was considered fulfilled if the submission guidelines clearly stated that the peer-review system was blinded (single-blind or double-blind review system).
X. Plagiarism guidelines	This item was considered fulfilled if the submission guidelines included recommendations regarding plagiarism practices and/or writing misconduct.
XI. Use of originality or duplicate checking software	This item was considered fulfilled if the submission guidelines clearly stated that the journal uses or may use plagiarism detection software
XII. Remenadtions to authorship	This item was considered fulfilled if the submission guidelines included recommendations regarding principles of authorship and good authorship practices. Guidelines for changes in authorship, recommendations for addressing authorship disputes or issues, or procedures for deceased or incapacitated authors were not included in the evaluation of this variable
XIII. Detailed contribution recommendations following criteria established by the International Committee of Journal Editors	This item was considered fulfilled if the submission guidelines required authors to declare the specific contributions of each author (regardless of whether this information would later be published in the final version of the work).
XIV. Recommendations about use of generative AI in scientific writing	This item was considered fulfilled if the submission guidelines included recommendations on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process.
XV. Copyright transfer agreement for Open Access research	The journals were classified into three groups: Hybrid journals - Journals requiring readers to subscribe for content access, with no mandatory article processing charges, although authors may opt for open-access publication by paying fees; Paid journals - Journals where authors are required to pay article processing charges; Free journals - Journals that do not charge authors for article processing, regardless of whether they publish content in an open-access format or not.
XVI. Journal on Beall's list of predatory open-access publishers	For the evaluation of this item, journal names were cross-referenced with Beall's List. A January 2017 version of the list was used, as the blog maintained by the original researcher was discontinued, and updates on potential predatory journals ceased. The latest version of the list is currently preserved by an anonymous individual website¹⁸.

Variable		Qualis classification					P value	Journal's Impact Factor				P value	The journal's specialty			Total	P value
Variable		A1- A2	A3-A4	B1-B2	B3-B4	C	P value	0	0.1-2	2.1-4	< 4	P value	Dental Specialty	Health Sciences	Multidisciplinary	Total	P value
I. Approval from ethical designed to protect humans	Yes	76.7 %	78.3 %	75.0 %	73.3 %	53.3 %	0.148	72.8 %	68.8 %	82.7 %	72.7 %	0.339	79.1 %	82.1 %	54.9 %	73.3 %	< 0.001
I. Approval from ethical designed to protect humans	No	23.3 %	21.7 %	25.0 %	26.7 %	46.7 %	0.148	27.2 %	31.2 %	17.3 %	27.3 %	0.339	20.9 %	17.9 %	45.1 %	26.7 %	< 0.001
II. Study must be conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration	Yes	60.0 %	61.7 %	56.7 %	36.7 %	10.0 %	< 0.001	30.9 %	45.2 %	73.1 %	61.4 %	< 0.001	53.5 %	52.4 %	40.2 %	48.9 %	0.174
	No	40.0 %	38.3 %	43.3 %	63.3 %	90.0 %	< 0.001	69.1 %	54.8 %	26.9 %	38.6 %	< 0.001	46.5 %	47.6 %	59.8 %	51.1 %	0.174
III. Ethical approval for animal studies	Yes	66.7 %	75.0 %	65.0 %	61.7 %	30.0 %	0.001	54.3 %	58.1 %	78.8 %	0.5 %	0.015	62.8 %	71.0 %	48.8 %	63.0 %	0.004
III. Ethical approval for animal studies	No	33.3 %	25.0 %	35.0 %	38.3 %	70.0 %	0.001	45.7 %	41.9 %	21.2 %	29.5 %	0.015	37.2 %	29.0 %	51.2 %	37.0 %	0.004
IV. Declaration of potential conflicts of interest	Yes	93.3 %	91.7 %	76.7 %	70.0 %	76.7 %	0.001	64.2 %	86.0 %	90.4 %	97.7 %	< 0.001	83.7 %	84.1 %	78.0 %	82.2 %	0.513
IV. Declaration of potential conflicts of interest	No	6.7 %	8.3 %	23.3 %	30.0 %	23.3 %	0.001	35.8 %	14.0 %	9.6 %	2.3 %	< 0.001	16.3 %	15.9 %	22.0 %	17.8 %	0.513
V. Funding source declaration	Yes	95.0 %	85.0 %	73.3 %	55.0 %	73.3 %	< 0.001	59.3 %	79.6 %	84.6 %	93.2 %	< 0.001	72.1 %	78.6 %	7075.6 %	76.7 %	0.615
V. Funding source declaration	No	5.0 %	15.0 %	26.7 %	45.0 %	26.7 %	< 0.001	40.7 %	20.4 %	15.4 %	6.8 %	< 0.001	27.9 %	21.4 %	24.4 %	23.3 %	0.615
VI. Registries for conducting clinical trials	Yes	40.0 %	60.0 %	48.3 %	26.7 %	16.7 %	< 0.001	24.7 %	43.0 %	59.6 %	43.2 %	< 0.001	44.2 %	47.6 %	26.8 %	40.7 %	0.008
VI. Registries for conducting clinical trials	No	60.0 %	40.0 %	51.7 %	73.3 %	83.3 %	< 0.001	75.3 %	57.0 %	40.4 %	56.8 %	< 0.001	55.8 %	52.4 %	73.2 %	59.3 %	0.008
VII. Standards of reporting for conducting original research (EQUATOR, STROBE, STARD, ARRIVE)	Yes	20.0 %	40.0 %	30.0 %	18.3 %	6.7 %	0.003	12.3 %	32.3 %	32.7 %	22.7 %	0.007	23.3 %	31.7 %	13.4 %	24.8 %	0.009
	No	80.0 %	60.0 %	70.0 %	81.7 %	93.3 %	0.003	87.7 %	67.7 %	67.3 %	77.3 %	0.007	76.7 %	68.3 %	86.6 %	75.2 %	0.009
VIII.Standards of reporting for conducting review studies (PRISMA, COCHRANE)	Yes	23.3 %	51.7 %	36.7 %	23.3 %	10.0 %	< 0.001	17.3 %	38.7 %	44.2 %	25.0 %	0.002	27.9 %	40.0 %	17.1 %	31.1 %	0.001
	No	76.7 %	48.3 %	63.3 %	76.7 %	90.0 %	< 0.001	82.7 %	61.3 %	55.8 %	75.0 %	0.002	72.1 %	60.0 %	82.9 %	68.9 %	0.001
IX. Use of peer review (blind)	Yes	93.3 %	96.7 %	95.0 %	90.0 %	93.3 %	0.646	93.8 %	93.5 %	90.4 %	97.7 %	0.568	88.4 %	95.9 %	92.7 %	93.7 %	0.175
IX. Use of peer review (blind)	No	6.7 %	3.3 %	5.0 %	10.0 %	6.7 %	0.646	6.2 %	6.5 %	9.6 %	2.3 %	0.568	11.6 %	4.1 %	7.3 %	6.3 %	0.175
X. Plagiarism guidelines	Yes	45.0 %	66.7 %	48.3 %	50.0 %	60.0 %	0.116	46.9 %	58.1 %	55.8 %	52.3 %	0.512	48.8 %	55.9 %	51.2 %	53.3 %	0.655
X. Plagiarism guidelines	No	55.0 %	33.3 %	51.7 %	50.0 %	40.0 %	0.116	53.1 %	41.9 %	44.2 %	47.7 %	0.512	51.2 %	44.1 %	48.8 %	46.7 %	0.655
XI. Use of originality or duplicate checking software	Yes	41.7 %	48.3 %	36.7 %	38.3 %	46.7 %	0.683	30.9 %	48.4 %	46.2 %	43.2 %	0.104	32.6 %	49.0 %	34.1 %	41.9 %	0.039
XI. Use of originality or duplicate checking software	No	58.3 %	51.7 %	63.3 %	61.7 %	53.3 %	0.683	69.1 %	51.6 %	53.8 %	56.8 %	0.104	67.4 %	51.0 %	65.9 %	58.1 %	0.039
XII. Remenadtions to authorship	Yes	90.0 %	75.0 %	71.7 %	46.7 %	20.0 %	< 0.001	38.3 %	65.6 %	84.6 %	90.9 %	< 0.001	55.8 %	67.6 %	65.9 %	65.2 %	0.366
XII. Remenadtions to authorship	No	10.0 %	25.0 %	28.3 %	53.3 %	80.0 %	< 0.001	61.7 %	34.4 %	15.4 %	9.1 %	< 0.001	44.2 %	32.4 %	34.1 %	34.8 %	0.366
XIII. Detailed contribution recommendations following criteria established by the International Committee of Journal Editors	Yes	81.7 %	41.7 %	40.0 %	36.7 %	6.7 %	< 0.001*	18.5 %	44.1 %	65.4 %	72.7 %	< 0.001	37.2 %	50.3 %	40.2 %	45.2 %	0.188
	No	18.3 %	58.3 %	60.0 %	63.3 %	93.3 %	< 0.001*	81.5 %	55.9 %	34.6 %	27.3 %	< 0.001	62.8 %	49.7 %	59.8 %	54.8 %	0.188
XIV. Recommendations about use of generative AI in scientific writing	Yes	51.7 %	15.0 %	3.3 %	5.0 %	3.3 %	< 0.001	1.2 %	11.8 %	25.0 %	47.7 %	< 0.001	2.3 %	15.9 %	26.8 %	17.0 %	0.001
	No	48.3 %	85.0 %	96.7 %	95.0 %	96.7 %	< 0.001	98.8 %	88.2 %	75.0 %	52.3 %	< 0.001	97.7 %	84.1 %	73.2 %	83.0 %	0.001
XV. Copyright transfer agreement for Open Access research	Hibrid journals	68.3 %	46.7 %	38.3 %	21.7 %	43.3 %	< 0.001	45.2 %	59.6 %	68.2 %	18.5 %	< 0.001 *	25.6 %	42.1 %	56.1 %	43.7 %	0.027*
	Paid journals	20.0 %	31.7 %	11.7 %	25.0 %	6.7 %		22.6 %	25.0 %	25.0 %	12.3 %		27.9 %	21.4 %	14.6 %	20.4 %
	Free journals	11.7 %	21.7 %	50.0 %	53.3 %	50.0 %		32.3 %	15.4 %	6.8 %	69.1 %		46.5 %	36.6 %	29.3 %	35.9 %
XVI. Journal on Beall's list of predatory open-access publishers	Yes	0.0 %	0.0 %	1.7 %	5.0 %	43.3 %	< 0.001	9.9 %	7.5 %	0.0 %	4.5 %	0.088	4.7 %	4.8 %	9.8 %	6.3 %	0.327
	No	100.0 %	100.0 %	98.3 %	95.0 %	56.7 %	< 0.001	90.1 %	92.5 %	100.0 %	95.5 %	0.088	95.3 %	95.2 %	90.2 %	93.7 %
XVII. The journal's specialty	Dental Specialty	6.7 %	15.0 %	18.3 %	15.0 %	33.3 %	0.021	21.0 %	19.4 %	11.5 %	4.5 %	0.026*	-	-	-	-	-
	Health Sciences	46.7 %	61.7 %	55.0 %	60.0 %	36.7 %		49.4 %	53.8 %	65.4 %	47.7 %		-	-	-	-	-
	Multidisciplinary	46.7 %	23.3 %	26.7 %	25.0 %	30.0 %		29.6 %	26.9 %	23.1 %	47.7 %		-	-	-	-	-

vertical_align_top show_chart

more_horiz close
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho Rua Humaitá, 1680 - Caixa Postal 331, 14801-903 Araraquara,São Paulo,SP, Tel.: (55 16) 3301-6376, Fax: (55 16) 3301-6433 - Araraquara - SP - Brazil
E-mail: adriana@foar.unesp.br

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[TFN1] ^*
Fisher’s Monte Carlo P-Value.