Research and Publication Ethics

Established on March 1, 2007.
Revised on January 1, 2020.
Revised on April 16, 2021.
Fully revised on May 1, 2024.

Chapter 1: General Provisions

Article 1 (Purpose)

The purpose of the Research Ethics Regulations of the Korean Society of Dental Hygiene (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Society’) is outlined as follows:

Establish research ethics.
Provide principles and guidelines to prevent misconduct in research related to the Society, and in publishing papers in the Journal of the Korean Society of Dental Hygiene (hereinafter referred to as the ‘JKSDH’).
Establish procedures and criteria for addressing research misconduct.
Provide bylaws for research ethics committees.

Article 2 (Applicability and Scope)

These regulations apply to both member and non-member researchers involved in all research activities, including the submission (publication) of articles to the JKSDH and the presentation of research at conferences, organized or co-organized by the Society.

Chapter 2: Research

Article 3 (Definition of Research Misconduct)

The definitions of research misconduct outlined in this regulation are as follows (Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics [Ministry of Education Decree No. 449, effective July 17, 2023], Article 11, Scope of Research Misconduct):

Falsification: Falsely creating, recording, or reporting data; or the act of including findings that are fabricated or do not exist.
Modulation: Manipulating research data whether by altering, omitting, or misrepresenting findings, which distorts the true content and results of a study.
Plagiarism: The unauthorized use of another person’s ideas, research, findings, or records without proper citation or acknowledgment.
Double publication (duplicate publication): Publishing a series of findings across multiple papers, or generating papers presenting identical results with varying sample sizes which can lead to redundancy in the scientific literature.
Unfair paper attribution: Failing to grant authorship of a paper to an individual who has made a significant scientific or technical contribution to the research without proper justification, or assigning authorship to someone who has not made any such contributions which undermines the integrity of the academic publishing process.

Article 4 (Research Assistants)

In the course of conducting research, members must not infringe upon the rights or dignity of researchers, graduate students, or other research assistants involved in the study. They shall treat all participants fairly, in accordance with the extent of their contributions.

Article 5 (Research Subjects)

① Researchers conducting studies involving human subjects have specific responsibilities toward these individuals, as follows:

Ensure the voluntary participation of human subjects in research studies.
Provide a detailed explanation of the research’s purpose and methodology, including the expected benefits and potential risks or discomfort that might arise. Additionally, outline the advantages and disadvantages of participating in the research, and ensure that informed consent is obtained from all participants.
Ensure the safety and wellbeing of human subjects. Precautions should be taken to prevent even minor harm to the participants and immediately halt the study if any unforeseen risks arise.
If the research subjects are patients, it is essential to provide a control group with the same relevant information as that provided to the experimental group. This practice ensures that participants in the control group do not experience harm from the research, such as through the concealment of information or deprivation of opportunities.
Assure participants that they can withdraw from the study at any time without facing any negative consequences.
Respect the audience’s privacy and uphold the confidentiality of personal information.

② When conducting research involving human subjects, ensure that it is reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). The following exceptions apply:

Research involving animals must receive approval from an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).
Studies of administration and organization.
Certain studies, such as literature reviews, meta-analyses, and secondary analyses.
Research that does not require review by an IRB.

③ To protect individuals who depend on researchers, such as patients and students, please follow the guidelines outlined below:

It is important to clarify that patients and students will not face any penalties for refusing to participate in the research. Furthermore, appropriate measures should be implemented to ensure their protection.
If participation in the research is a requirement for a course or an opportunity for extra credit, provide students with alternative activities to allow them to make independent choices.

Article 6 (Gender Consciousness)

Recognize that both biological sex and sociocultural gender can influence the outcomes of cellular, animal, and clinical research. Additionally, provide a description of the following in the paper:

① Please follow these guidelines for cellular or animal research.

In the case of cellular or animal models, provide details regarding the source, certification, and biological characteristics of the cell lines or animal models.
Include both sexes equally in the cells or animals studied, and describe the implications of any observed sex-related differences.
Provide a justification when studying a single gender.

② In the context of clinical research, please adhere to the guidelines outlined below:

It is essential to accurately distinguish between sex and gender in gender-related descriptions.
Include both men and women in the study, and publish a paper that compares and analyzes the results.
Studies conducted on a single gender are academically valid.

Article 7 (Research Grants)

Researchers can independently enter into research contracts and conduct studies.
Researchers shall manage research funds transparently and equitably, in accordance with the regulations established by the overseeing organization.
Researchers must acknowledge the funding organization in any publication of research results that received financial support.

Chapter 3: Review and Publication

Article 8 (Publication Ethics)

① The author’s responsibilities and obligations are outlined below:

The corresponding author or senior author holds the overall responsibility for the data and authorship of the paper, and is accountable for supervising the work of any collaborators.
Authors must acknowledge their contributions, agree on the order of authorship, and understand their responsibilities when submitting a manuscript.
Authors must disclose all financial and personal interests related to the research at the time of submission.
When submitting a paper, authors should accurately disclose their affiliations and professional positions to enhance the credibility of their research.
Research participants have the right to privacy, and their personal information should not be disclosed unless necessary. Do not include any identifiable information in the publication, such as the subject’s name, initials, case number, photographs, or ancestry. However, if it is essential to disclose the subject’s personal information for scientific purposes, the subject or their legal representative must be informed prior to publication and written consent must be obtained. Additionally, you should inform them that their personal information may be disclosed in publications and on the internet.

② Authorship is determined using the following criteria:

Authors must adhere to the authorship criteria established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE 2024, https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf). Authorship is defined as having made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; providing final approval of the version to be published; and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions regarding the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are properly investigated and resolved.
The order of authorship should be determined equitably, and should accurately reflect the contributions of all authors.
Do not remove an eligible researcher from the author list without their consent.
Do not list individuals as authors solely out of gratitude or honor if they did not make a scientific or technical contribution to the content or results of the research. Other contributions such as data collection, input, and translation into other languages may be acknowledged in a disclaimer.
Do not include AI as an author.

Article 9 (Roles and Responsibilities of Editorial Board Members)

① The editorial board members shall impartially evaluate the scientific and ethical validity of the submitted articles without consideration of the authors’ gender, race, age, regional or educational background, or personal relationships.

② The editors should not disclose information from submitted papers, nor should they use it in their own research.

③ If a member of the editorial board has a financial or personal interest in the content of a submitted article, they must decline to review it and appoint another member of the editorial board to oversee the review process.

④ Editorial boards must include provisions in the journal’s publication policy to protect the privacy of human subjects, including obtaining informed consent. A published article must also indicate that voluntary written informed consent was obtained from the human subjects (or their legal representatives). Editorial boards are encouraged to retain written informed consents obtained in accordance with applicable regulations. Additionally, they should encourage authors to retain their written informed consents if there are concerns regarding the identification of patients’ personal information during data storage. The authors must also indicate in the manuscript that consent has been obtained and retained in compliance with the applicable regulations. In protecting the anonymity of the participants, the editorial board must ensure that the scientific meaning of the original data is not distorted. Therefore, journals must include provisions for obtaining consent from human subjects (patients) in their publication policies when reporting research involving human subjects, including case reports. If consent is obtained, it must be disclosed in the article.

Article 10 (Roles and Responsibilities of Reviewers)

① Reviewers shall evaluate submitted papers impartially and objectively, applying consistent criteria without consideration of the authors’ gender, race, age, geographic or educational background, or personal relationships.

② Reviewers must not disclose or share any information or results obtained during the review process with unauthorized individuals.

③ Reviewers should respect the individuality and intellectual independence of the authors of the paper. They should avoid personal attacks and derogatory language, ensuring that their comments remain polite and constructive.

④ Reviewers should request corrections for any material that is not properly cited in the manuscript, and encourage accurate citation of references. They should also thoroughly examine the manuscript for similarities to works published in other journals.

⑤ If a reviewer has a financial or personal interest in the content of the submitted paper, they should decline to review it and promptly inform the editorial board for an alternative reviewer to be appointed.

Article 11 (Academic Presentations)

Oral presentations or posters demonstrated at conferences organized by the Society must not have been presented at other conferences on a national or larger scale.

Chapter 4: Addressing Violations of Research Ethics

Article 12 (Review of Research Misconduct)

If an article submitted, reviewed, or published in the JKSDH falls under Article 3, any deliberation and follow-up regarding potential misconduct related to research and publication shall be conducted in accordance with established procedures.
The Editorial Board of the JKSDH will review and evaluate any violations of research and publication ethics. If a violation is identified, the board will request the author to withdraw the paper if it is still under review. If the paper has already been published, the board will take appropriate measures to retract it and prohibit its citation ex officio.
If a conflict of interest arises involving the editorial board, the issue will be referred to the Research Ethics Committee. The committee will review the situation and determine whether there has been a violation of research and publication ethics.
The Research Ethics Committee deliberates on recommendations for follow-up regarding members and papers identified as violating research and publication ethics.

Article 13 (Research Misconduct Verification Procedures)

① The research misconduct verification process includes both preliminary and main investigations. Depending on the specifics of the case, either one or both types of investigations might not be conducted.

② The preliminary investigation will be conducted within 30 days of receiving the report to determine whether an in-person investigation is necessary and whether the respondent admits any wrongdoing.

③ If the preliminary investigation indicates that the respondent admits to the misconduct, a decision can be made immediately without proceeding to the main investigation process.

④ Both the whistleblower and respondent are notified in writing of the results of the preliminary investigation within ten days of the decision. However, this does not apply to anonymous reports.

Article 14 (Investigative Committee)

① The chairperson of the research ethics committee shall establish an Investigative Committee comprising five or more members, including editorial board members and relevant experts, with at least one expert from a field other than dental hygiene. The chairperson of the Investigative Committee will be selected from among its members.

② To ensure the impartiality of the investigation, members of the Investigative Committee shall exclude the subject, whistleblower, or any individual with a conflict of interest related to the matter being investigated.

③ The Investigative Committee may request that the whistleblower, respondent, witnesses, and references appear before it to submit documents or provide statements during the investigation. In such cases, all parties are required to comply, and the whistleblower, along with the witnesses and references, must act in good faith. If the respondent fails to comply with the Investigative Committee’s request, they will be held accountable.

④ The Investigative Committee must provide both the whistleblower and the respondent with the opportunity to appeal and present their defense before finalizing its findings.

Article 15 (Reporting of Findings)

The preliminary investigation body shall submit its findings to the Research Ethics Committee within 30 days following the conclusion of the preliminary investigation. Similarly, the Investigative Committee must report its findings to the Research Ethics Committee within 30 days following the conclusion of the main investigation. The report must include at least the following:

① Specific Details of the Report.

② Allegations of research misconduct and associated papers that are being investigated.

③ The subject’s role in the study and the accuracy of the claims, which are critical components of the analysis.

④ Relevant Evidence.

⑤ Complaints or defenses submitted by the whistleblower and the respondent regarding the findings of the investigation, as well as the methods used to address these concerns.

⑥ List of investigators in the Investigative Committee (for the corresponding investigation only).

⑦ The decision to conduct a comprehensive investigation and the criteria for making that determination apply solely within the context of the preliminary investigation.

Article 16 (Determination of Research Misconduct Following Investigation)

① Judgment refers to the process of concluding the results of an investigation and notifying both the whistleblower and the subject in writing. The Research Ethics Committee deliberates on the findings of the investigation and issues a judgment.

② All investigations, from the initiation of the preliminary inquiry to the final adjudication, must be completed within six months.

Article 17 (Appeal and Re-investigation)

If the informant or subject is dissatisfied with the decision of the Research Ethics Committee, they may appeal to the Society within 30 days from the date of notification. The Research Ethics Committee shall conduct a re-investigation if it determines that the appeal is reasonable and valid.

Article 18 (Protection of Whistleblower, and Respondent Rights and Confidentiality)

① The preliminary investigation body and the Investigative Committee shall actively work to protect the identity of the whistleblower, and ensure that the dignity and rights of the respondent are not infringed upon until the verification of research ethics violations is complete.

② All matters related to the investigation shall remain confidential. Individuals, whether directly or indirectly involved in the investigation, must not disclose any information obtained during the investigation or while performing their duties.

Chapter 5: Research Ethics Committee

Article 19 (Establishment)

The Society shall establish and operate a Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Committee’) to fulfill the objectives of these regulations, and to determine measures related to research misconduct.

Article 20 (Committee Composition)

① The Committee shall consist of a chairperson and no more than seven members.

② The members shall be appointed by the President of the Society based on recommendations from within the Society. The appointed members will also include external experts with expertise in research ethics. However, individuals who have committed previous violations of research ethics will be excluded from consideration.

③ The chairperson shall be appointed by the president from among the members.

④ The term of office for a member shall be three years, but could be renewed.

Article 21 (Committee Operations)

① The Committee shall be convened by the chairperson or upon the request of at least one-fourth of its members.

② The Committee shall consist of the majority of its members, excluding the chairperson, and decisions shall be made by a two-thirds vote of those present. The chairperson does not have voting rights.

③ The editor-in-chief of the JKSDH may attend Committee meetings as a resource.

④ Meetings of the Committee addressing research misconduct shall be conducted in private, and the minutes of these meetings shall not be made public. However, if deemed necessary, the Committee may decide to disclose the minutes to the public.

⑤ The chairperson shall convene the Committee when the Investigative Committee is required to present its findings.

⑥ The chairperson shall exclude any Committee member with a vested interest in a case of research ethics violation from both the investigation and deliberation of that case.

⑦ If the chairperson has a conflict of interest in a case involving a violation of research ethics, they shall be excluded from the deliberations. The president of the Society may appoint a temporary chairperson from among the members.

⑧ The chairperson may choose to conduct written deliberations if they determine that the agenda for discussion is minor.

Article 22 (Committee Functions)

The Committee shall undertake the following tasks to achieve the objectives outlined in Article 1 of the Regulations.

Raise researchers’ awareness of research ethics.
Deliberate and manage research misconduct related to academic activities, including research and publication by scholars.
Propose amendments to the research ethics regulations.
Address other matters related to research ethics as determined by the chairperson.

Article 23 (Follow-up on Research Misconduct)

① Follow up procedures for research and publication misconduct are outlined below:

The publication and preservation of the retraction should clearly articulate the facts and reasons supporting the decision to retract.
A ban will be imposed on the author(s), prohibiting them from publishing any future works for a minimum of three years.
Announcement on the governing body’s website and in journals.
Notifying the National Research Foundation of Korea regarding the details of the matter, including the outcomes of any relevant meetings, such as those with the institution’s internal ethics committee.
Notifying the funding agency of the details if the paper was funded by a grant.
Providing a written warning to the author of the paper.
Suspending the author’s membership.
Notifying the author’s institution regarding the details of the paper.

② Members and papers involved in research and publication ethics misconduct will be addressed based on the outcomes of future discussions.

Article 24 (Disposition of Deliberation Results)

① Records and follow-up procedures related to the investigation of research misconduct concerning the subject of the review must be documented and retained for five years after the conclusion of the review.

② Notify both the whistleblower and the respondent in writing regarding the outcomes of the review. However, exceptions will be made for anonymous reports.

③ Notify the appropriate institution of the findings from the review of the research ethics violation and recommending appropriate sanctions.

Article 25 (Follow-up Measures for Reputation Restoration)

If the investigation confirms that no violations of research ethics have occurred, the Committee shall make every effort to restore the investigator’s reputation, and implement appropriate follow-up measures.

Article 26 (Prevention of Research Misconduct)

① The committee provides education on research ethics to promote appropriate ethical practices among its members and to prevent research misconduct.

② The committee informs members of the research ethics policy and publicizes any revisions made to it.

Chapter 6: Supplementary Provisions

Article 27

Any aspects of research ethics not explicitly addressed in these regulations shall conform to the International Standards of Medical Ethics and the Ministry of Education’s Guidelines for Ensuring Research Ethics.

Article 28 (Detailed Guidelines)

Detailed guidelines for implementing these regulations may be established separately after deliberation by the Research Ethics Committee.

Transitional Provisions

① These regulations shall take effect on March 1, 2007.
② These regulations shall take effect on January 1, 2020.
③ These regulations shall take effect on April 16, 2021.
④ These regulations shall take effect on May 1, 2024.

For Authors

For Editors & Reviewers

Indexed in

Publisher

Journal of Korean Society of Dental Hygiene (J Korean Soc Dent Hyg)

4

2