Ethical Aspects

The Revista Hispanoamericana de Ciencias de la Salud (RHCS) is committed to the highest standards of editorial ethics, scientific integrity, and responsibility in academic publishing. This policy is based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and the editorial team.

1. Scientific integrity, plagiarism, and publication misconduct

All manuscripts submitted to RHCS are screened using plagiarism and similarity detection software as part of the initial editorial assessment.

• Only manuscripts with a maximum of 20% similarity will be considered.
• Similarity must not consist of extensive consecutive text blocks.
• Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification are considered serious breaches of scientific ethics.

When suspected scientific misconduct is identified, the Editorial Board will follow this procedure:

1. Request a formal explanation from the authors.
2. Internal assessment by the Editorial Board.
3. If concerns persist, referral of the case to the authors’ affiliated institution for an independent investigation.

If misconduct is confirmed, the manuscript will be rejected or, if already published, a correction, editorial note, or retraction will be issued, ensuring the authors’ right of reply. Relevant institutions, including funding bodies and ethics committees, will be notified.

2. Publication ethics statement

2.1 Authors’ responsibilities

• Originality and accuracy: manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under simultaneous review.
• Responsible authorship: authorship is limited to those who made substantial contributions. All authors must approve the final version.
• Conflicts of interest: all relevant financial and non-financial conflicts must be disclosed.
• Ethical approval: studies involving humans, animals, or sensitive data must report ethics committee approval and informed consent when applicable.

Ethical responsibilities in research involving humans

Studies involving direct participation of human subjects must declare prior approval by a Research Ethics Committee. Supporting documentation may be requested by the Editorial Board.

Some study designs may be exempt from ethical approval, including:

• Research using publicly available secondary data.
• Epidemiological surveillance or public health monitoring.
• Reports of public health events.
• Evaluations of health policies or programs.
• Academic evaluations posing no risk to participants.

Research involving animals

Studies involving animals must comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and applicable national or international regulations.

3. Reviewers’ responsibilities

• Provide objective, constructive, and unbiased evaluations.
• Maintain strict confidentiality.
• Declare conflicts of interest and decline review when appropriate.

4. Editorial Board responsibilities

• Ensure fair and transparent editorial decisions based on scientific merit.
• Maintain confidentiality throughout the editorial process.
• Address misconduct in accordance with COPE guidelines.

5. Corrections, retractions, and ethical complaints

• Corrections: issued for unintentional errors not affecting scientific validity.
• Retractions: issued in cases of fraud, duplication, or major error.
• Ethical complaints: handled confidentially and promptly.

6. Preservation of academic integrity and contact

RHCS encourages the scientific community to report any suspected ethical misconduct. All communications will be handled confidentially and in accordance with COPE recommendations.

Editorial Board contact:
[email protected]