Smart: Journal of Public Health (SPubHealth) is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in academic publishing. We strictly adhere to the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All parties involved in the publishing process including authors, peer reviewers, editors, and the publisher are expected to agree upon and uphold these standards of ethical behavior.

Duties of Authors

• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure their submitted work is entirely original. If the work and/or words of others have been used, they must be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is strictly unacceptable.

• Authorship Criteria: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. The corresponding author must ensure all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all have seen and approved the final version before submission.

• Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide public access to such data and must retain it for a reasonable time after publication.

• Ethical Oversight: Any research involving human subjects must include a statement verifying that the study was approved by the relevant Institutional Review Board (IRB) or local ethics committee. Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants.

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors must disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

• Fundamental Errors: If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate to retract or correct the paper in the form of an erratum.

Duties of Peer Reviewers

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and serves to help the author improve their manuscript through objective feedback.

• Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

• Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

• Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Editors

• Publication Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the journal's editorial board policies and constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

• Fair Play: Editors evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

• Confidentiality: The editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

• Handling of Misconduct: Editors will take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. This may involve contacting the author, investigating the claim, and if necessary, publishing a correction, retraction, or expression of concern.

Post-Publication Processes

• Corrections: If a minor error is found that does not affect the core conclusions of the paper, SPubHealth will publish an official Erratum or Corrigendum.

• Retractions: Articles will be retracted in cases of clear evidence of unreliable findings (e.g., data fabrication or honest error), plagiarism, redundant publication, or unethical research practices. Retraction notices will clearly state the reason for the retraction and who requested it.