Confidentiality and Ethics

The Journal of Community Medicine and Health Sciences (JCMHS) upholds strict confidentiality and ethical standards to protect the integrity of its editorial process. This policy provides clear guidance to editors and editorial board members on maintaining confidentiality, impartiality, and professional conduct throughout manuscript handling. These principles are rooted in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices, ICMJE Recommendations, and the DOAJ Best Practice Guidelines.

1. Purpose of the Confidentiality Policy

The goal of this policy is to ensure that all materials handled during the editorial and peer-review process remain confidential, protecting authors’ intellectual property and the integrity of the publication system. Confidentiality is essential to maintain trust among authors, reviewers, and editors.

2. Scope of Confidentiality

This policy applies to all editorial board members, editors, reviewers, and staff who have access to manuscripts or related information during the editorial process. It includes confidentiality over:

• Manuscripts submitted for review, including preliminary versions and supplementary files.
• Reviewer and author identities in double-blind review.
• Peer review reports and editorial correspondence.
• Post-publication communications relating to ethical issues or appeals.

3. Editorial Responsibility for Confidential Handling

Editors are responsible for ensuring that no details about a submitted manuscript are disclosed to anyone other than those directly involved in its evaluation. Unauthorized sharing, discussion, or storage of manuscripts outside the secure editorial management system is strictly prohibited.

4. Access Control and Data Security

Access to manuscripts is limited to authorized personnel. Editors must ensure secure use of online submission systems, employ strong passwords, and prevent sharing of login credentials. Manuscripts and correspondence must be stored in secure, encrypted systems in accordance with GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) standards.

5. Reviewer Anonymity and Integrity

In double-blind peer review, editors must protect the identity of both authors and reviewers. Reviewers’ identities must never be revealed without consent, and correspondence should remain within the editorial system. Editors should remove identifying metadata from manuscripts before sending them for review.

6. Handling of Sensitive and Unpublished Information

Editors must never use unpublished data, results, or concepts from submitted manuscripts for personal advantage or to benefit another person or organization. Such actions constitute a serious ethical breach.

7. Conflict of Interest Management

Editors must recuse themselves from decisions involving manuscripts where personal, professional, or financial conflicts may arise. Conflicts include prior collaborations with the author, institutional affiliations, or personal relationships that may bias judgment.

8. Professional Conduct and Neutrality

Editors must maintain a professional, respectful, and neutral tone in all communications with authors and reviewers. Personal opinions, biases, or external pressures must not influence editorial decisions.

9. Ethical Oversight and Accountability

The editorial board shares collective responsibility for maintaining ethical standards in publishing. Editors must report any suspected misconduct—such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research—to the Editor-in-Chief, who initiates actions following COPE guidelines.

10. Confidentiality during Misconduct Investigations

All investigations into ethical breaches must be handled confidentially. Editors must ensure that information is shared only with those involved in the investigation and that communications remain factual, respectful, and non-defamatory.

11. Editorial Decision Transparency

While confidentiality is essential, transparency in decision-making must be maintained. Editors should provide authors with detailed, constructive feedback explaining decisions without disclosing reviewer identities or private deliberations.

12. Confidential Archiving of Records

All editorial communications, peer review reports, and ethical correspondence should be securely archived for a minimum of five years. Access to these records is restricted to senior editorial staff or authorized personnel within the publisher.

13. Handling Data Requests

Editors may receive legitimate requests for data verification or investigation of published work. Such requests must be handled responsibly, balancing transparency with confidentiality obligations. Information can only be shared with institutional ethics committees or oversight bodies when justified.

14. Privacy of Personal and Institutional Data

Editors must handle personal data—including author affiliations, contact information, and reviewer credentials—in strict compliance with the journal’s Privacy Statement. Editors may not use personal information for purposes unrelated to editorial operations.

15. Confidentiality after Editorial Tenure

Even after leaving the editorial board, editors remain bound by confidentiality obligations. Manuscripts or reviewer information obtained during their tenure may never be disclosed or discussed outside the editorial framework.

16. Managing Ethical Dilemmas

If editors face ethical uncertainty—such as potential bias, inappropriate reviewer behavior, or sensitive conflicts—they should consult the Editor-in-Chief or refer to COPE’s Core Practices and flowcharts for guidance.

17. Communicating with Authors

Editors must communicate decisions with clarity and respect, maintaining professionalism even in cases of rejection. All communications must occur through official channels and remain part of the confidential record.

18. Managing External Influences

Editors must resist any attempt to influence editorial decisions from funding agencies, advertisers, institutions, or political groups. Decisions must be based solely on academic merit and ethical integrity.

19. Handling Appeals with Discretion

Appeals or author complaints must be reviewed discreetly and objectively. Editors must avoid revealing reviewer comments or identities during appeals and involve an independent editor when conflicts arise.

20. Ethical Communication with Reviewers

Editors must brief reviewers about confidentiality expectations and ensure reviewers agree to non-disclosure before accessing manuscripts. Editors should discourage reviewers from discussing the work with colleagues or using it for their research until it is published.

21. Data Sharing and Open Science Balance

While JCMHS supports transparency and open science, editors must ensure that data sharing aligns with ethical boundaries. Sensitive or identifiable data should only be shared when appropriate permissions and anonymization are in place.

22. Cultural Sensitivity and Ethical Awareness

Editors must respect cultural differences in research contexts and ensure that manuscripts do not perpetuate stereotypes or disrespect populations studied. Ethical awareness must guide all editorial evaluations.

23. Confidentiality Breaches and Reporting

If a breach occurs, it must be reported immediately to the Editor-in-Chief. The incident will be investigated confidentially, and appropriate corrective action will be taken, which may include retraining, reprimand, or reassignment of duties.

24. Continuous Ethical Training

The journal encourages editors to undergo periodic training on confidentiality, privacy, and research ethics through COPE or publisher-organized programs. Training strengthens ethical awareness and decision-making consistency.

25. Editorial Integrity and Public Trust

By maintaining confidentiality and ethical conduct, editors reinforce public trust in scientific publishing. Their actions protect authors’ intellectual property and preserve the credibility of the research record.

“Editorial ethics begin with silence—confidentiality is the foundation upon which trust and credibility are built.”