Qanun Medika - Medical Journal Faculty of Medicine Muhammadiyah Surabaya is committed to maintaining research integrity, publication ethics, transparency, and accountability throughout the editorial and publication process. The journal takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and handles them fairly, confidentially, and objectively, in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices.

Research misconduct may include, but is not limited to, fabrication or falsification of research data, plagiarism, inappropriate image manipulation, duplicate or redundant publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, authorship misconduct, unethical research practices, manipulation of the peer-review process, and other actions that compromise the integrity or reliability of scholarly publications. The journal uses the relevant COPE Flowcharts and Infographics to guide the handling of suspected publication and research misconduct.

Concerns may be raised regarding manuscripts under review, accepted articles, or previously published articles. In accordance with the COPE Core Practices on Allegations of Misconduct, the journal will assess allegations and take appropriate steps to address credible concerns about research or publication integrity.

Authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, institutions, and other concerned parties may report suspected research misconduct to the journal's editorial office. Reports should include a clear description of the concern and, where available, supporting evidence such as relevant publications, documents, data, correspondence, or other verifiable information.

Reports should be submitted through the journal's official contact channels listed on the Qanun Medika official website. The journal will assess the information received and determine whether further examination is warranted, following the principles in the COPE Core Practices.

The editor-in-chief or an authorized editor will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the allegation falls within the journal's responsibility and whether sufficient information is available to proceed. The journal may request additional evidence or clarification from the person reporting the concern where necessary.

During the preliminary assessment, the journal will avoid making premature conclusions about the individuals concerned. Where an ethical concern is identified in a submitted manuscript, the journal will follow the relevant steps in the COPE Flowchart on Suspected Ethical Problems in a Submitted Manuscript.

When an allegation warrants further investigation, the editor will document the concern, review the available evidence, and contact the corresponding author or other relevant authors to request an explanation and any supporting documentation. The authors will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the concerns before the journal determines the appropriate editorial action.

Depending on the nature of the allegation, the journal may request original research data, laboratory records, ethics approval documentation, informed consent information, source images, or other relevant materials. For suspected fabricated data, the journal will use the procedures outlined in the COPE Flowcharts on Suspected Fabricated Data.

If the authors provide a satisfactory explanation and the evidence does not support the allegation, the journal may close the case and continue the editorial process where appropriate. If the explanation is inadequate, no response is received, or serious concerns remain, the journal may seek further advice or refer the matter to the authors' affiliated institution or another appropriate authority, consistent with the COPE guidance for handling suspected ethical problems.

Where the allegation requires formal investigation beyond the journal's authority, the editor may contact the authors' affiliated institution, research integrity office, research governance body, or another appropriate authority and provide relevant evidence of the concern. The journal may also request information about the outcome of the institution's investigation.

If no adequate response is received from the institution, the journal may make reasonable follow-up inquiries to seek clarification or resolution. This procedure follows the COPE Flowchart on Suspected Ethical Problems in a Submitted Manuscript, which describes contacting the institution and following up when an investigation remains unresolved.

The journal will handle allegations and supporting evidence confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and consistent with a fair investigation. Information will be shared only with individuals or institutions who need it to assess or investigate the concern, subject to applicable legal and institutional requirements.

The journal will treat complainants, authors, reviewers, and other individuals involved fairly and will not regard an allegation as proven before the available evidence has been assessed. The handling of concerns will follow the principles of responsible editorial management set out in the COPE Core Practices.

Editorial action will depend on the seriousness of the concern, the evidence available, the authors' responses, and the outcome of any relevant investigation. Possible actions include requesting clarification or revision, rejecting a submitted manuscript, suspending the editorial process while a serious concern is investigated, or referring the matter to the relevant institution.

For articles that have already been published, the journal may publish a correction, issue an expression of concern, or retract the article when justified by the findings. Decisions concerning suspected plagiarism in published articles will be guided by the relevant COPE Flowcharts and Infographics and the COPE Core Practices on Post-publication Discussions and Corrections.

Where evidence indicates systematic manipulation of the publication process, the journal may suspend the review process, examine related submissions or publications, and contact the relevant institutions or other publishers where appropriate. The journal will use the procedures described in the COPE Flowchart on Systematic Manipulation of the Publication Process.

Individuals directly affected by an editorial decision related to an allegation may submit a written request for reconsideration, providing relevant evidence or explanations. The editor-in-chief or an appropriate editor not directly involved in the initial decision will consider the request where practicable.

The journal will review appeals fairly and objectively, taking into account the available evidence and any new information provided. Requests for reconsideration will not prevent the journal from taking necessary steps to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal will maintain appropriate records of allegations, relevant correspondence, evidence reviewed, author responses, decisions, and actions taken. Records will be retained and handled in accordance with the journal's applicable record-management and confidentiality practices.

Where a case remains unresolved because an institutional investigation is pending, the journal may follow up with the relevant institution and reconsider its editorial actions when new information becomes available. This approach is consistent with the follow-up procedures in the COPE Flowchart on Suspected Ethical Problems in a Submitted Manuscript.

Qanun Medika - Medical Journal Faculty of Medicine Muhammadiyah Surabaya is committed to protecting the integrity of the scholarly record and promoting responsible research and publication practices. All allegations of research misconduct will be assessed on their merits and handled through a documented process informed by the COPE Core Practices and relevant COPE flowcharts.