1. Research Integrity

Homeostatic Medicine adheres to the highest standards of scholarly publishing and expects all research submitted and published in the journal to align with the principles outlined by COPE for maintaining integrity in research and its dissemination.

These principles cover:

• Honesty in all aspects of research;
• Scrupulous care, thoroughness, and excellence in research practice;
• Transparency and open communication;
• Care and respect for all research participants and subjects.

In addition to these general principles, the Homeostatic Medicine editorial team provides specific policies and guidance on research integrity and ethics tailored to the relevant subject matter and academic discipline. If you believe that any research published in Homeostatic Medicine has not been carried out in line with these Research Publishing Ethics Guidelines or the principles outlined above, please contact the appropriate Editor or email us at editorialoffice@homeostmed.net. All concerns will be reviewed in accordance with COPE guidelines, and if necessary, the matter may be escalated to the OAE Ethics Committee for further investigation.

2. Editorial Process

2.1 Editorial independence

We are fully committed to upholding editorial independence and ensuring it is never compromised by conflicts of interest or external pressures - whether corporate, financial, political, or otherwise. This principle is embedded throughout our editorial workflows. We do not discriminate against authors, editors, or peer reviewers based on personal attributes or identity.

All manuscripts submitted to Homeostatic Medicine are assessed by members of the independent Editorial Board. Editorial Office staff do not participate in decisions regarding manuscript acceptance. Final decisions are made by one or two Academic Editors (such as the Editor-in-Chief, Honorary Regional Editors, Associate Editors, or Editorial Board Members) based solely on:

• Appropriateness of selected reviewers;
• Quality and relevance of reviewer comments and author responses;
• Scientific originality and excellence;
• Overall scientific merit of the paper.

We have a zero-tolerance policy for abusive behavior or correspondence directed at our staff and any individual involved in the publishing process on our behalf. In such cases, we reserve the right to take appropriate actions to protect those affected. This may include, for example, withdrawing a manuscript from consideration or responding to inappropriate reviewer comments.

2.2 Editorial Workflow

Homeostatic Medicine follows a rigorous single-blind peer-review process involving at least three independent reviewers. The Academic Editor is responsible for the overall academic integrity of the publication process. This includes making final acceptance or rejection decisions and overseeing the appointment of Guest Editors, the approval of Special Issue topics, and the selection of new Editorial Board members. A detailed overview of our editorial workflow is available in the Editorial Process section.

3. Peer-Review Policy

3.1 Acceptable manuscript types

The following types of submissions to Homeostatic Medicine are subject to peer review: Original Article, Review, Meta-analysis, Technical Note, Perspective, Opinion, Communication, Mini-review, and Commentary. Other types of submissions are generally not peer-reviewed. For questions or concerns about the peer-review process, please contact the Managing Editor. For inquiries related to a specific manuscript, authors may contact the assigned Editor directly.

3.2 Online review system

All submitted manuscripts are managed through our online manuscript system, MESAs, which complies with international publishing standards specified by COPE, ICMJE, and WAME. Peer reviewers can download manuscripts and upload their reviews within the system. For technical difficulties, reviewers may reach out to the Managing Editor for assistance.

3.3 Criteria for publication

To be accepted for publication, a manuscript must demonstrate high scientific quality. It should offer original contributions, present robust evidence to support its conclusions, and be of significant interest to researchers and readers in the related field.
The Editorial Office encourages post-publication commentary as an essential element of scientific discourse. This includes critical discussions, clarifications, and responses to published work.
All submissions are checked for plagiarism using the iThenticate software. Generally, the total similarity index should not exceed 20%, with no more than 5% similarity from any single source.

3.4 Review process

Manuscripts will proceed to formal peer review only if they meet all of the following editorial criteria:

• The topic falls within the scope of the target journal;
• The manuscript passes the Academic Editor’s initial quality assessment;
• Ethical approval and documentation, if applicable, are provided;
• Copyright permissions for any cited Tables or Figures are included, if required;
• The manuscript’s similarity index must not exceed 20% overall or 5% from any single source. No textual overlap is permitted in the Abstract, Results, or Discussion sections;
• The manuscript is written in clear, readable, and scientifically appropriate English.

Submissions that do not meet these criteria due to insufficient novelty, poor quality, or other issues will be promptly rejected by the Editors without external peer review.
Manuscripts undergoing external peer review typically require three independent review reports. Reviewers are expected to provide a clear recommendation to the Editors along with detailed, constructive comments for both the editorial team and the authors.
Based on the reviewers' feedback, the Academic Editor will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept (with/without minor editorial revisions): The manuscript is suitable for publication in its current form or with minor adjustments.
• Accept after minor revisions: If reviewers recommend only minor changes, the manuscript will be accepted following satisfactory revision. Authors are typically given one week to submit their revised manuscript.
• Reconsider after major revisions: If reviewers raise substantial concerns or suggest significant revisions, authors must respond point by point to all comments. If they disagree with any comments, they must provide a clear and reasoned rebuttal. Generally, only one round of major revision is permitted. Authors should resubmit their revised manuscript within two weeks, or within one month if additional experiments are required. If the additional work cannot be completed within one month, authors are encouraged to finalize the experiments and submit a new submission. Revised submissions will be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation.
• Reject: The Academic Editor will provide detailed reasons for rejection, such as lack of originality or critical methodological flaws.

Reviewer feedback is taken seriously. In cases of disagreement between reviewers, or if authors believe their work has been misunderstood, additional expert opinions may be sought.
We respect reviewers' preferences regarding the review of revised manuscripts. However, if the authors fail to address reviewer comments adequately, the Assistant Editor may withhold the revision from further review.

3.5 Reviewer selection

Reviewer selection is a crucial part of the editorial process. When identifying suitable reviewers, we consider expertise, professional reputation, prior recommendations, and past reviewing performance. Reviewers who are prompt, responsible, and provide insightful comments are prioritized and added to our reviewer database. Authors may request that one or two specific individuals or institutions be excluded from reviewing their manuscripts. These requests will be taken seriously and are generally honored, although the final decision rests with the Editors. Confidentiality of manuscript content is maintained throughout the review process.
General reviewer qualifications for Homeostatic Medicine include:

• Hold a Ph.D. degree and possess an institutional email address;
• Have research interests related to the manuscript topic;
• No conflicts of interest with the authors, as determined by preliminary editorial checks;
• Recent publication record in internationally recognized academic journals (within the past five years).

Homeostatic Medicine employs a single-blind peer review model: reviewers remain anonymous to authors unless they choose to disclose their identities. Reviewers are asked not to reveal their identities in their reports without the Editor's consent. Any attempts by authors to identify reviewers are strongly discouraged. Homeostatic Medicine is also open to adopting double-blind or open peer review models in the future.

3.6 Time management

Homeostatic Medicine is committed to efficient manuscript processing and timely publication. A streamlined editorial process benefits both authors and the wider scientific community. We ask reviewers to submit their review reports promptly within the agreed timeframe. If a delay becomes necessary, the Editorial Office will promptly notify the authors or assign alternative reviewers if needed.

3.7 Criteria for a qualified review report

The purpose of peer review is twofold: to aid Editors in making informed publication decisions and to help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts. A review should clearly explain the basis for acceptance or rejection and, where appropriate, offer actionable suggestions for revision.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts on the following points:
1. Provide a concise summary of the manuscript’s main contributions and strengths;
2. Identify any critical flaws that may preclude publication and explain them in detail;
3. Evaluate the manuscript from the following perspectives:

• Originality and significance: Are the conclusions novel and meaningful? Are the results useful to researchers in the relevant field?
• Abstract, introduction, conclusion, and references: Is the abstract clear? Is the introduction well-framed? Are the conclusions justified? Are the references appropriate and up to date?
• Data and methodology: Are the methods valid and clearly described? Are the data reproducible and transparent?
• Scope of expertise: Indicate any sections that fall outside your area of expertise and cannot be professionally evaluated.
• Statistical analysis and uncertainty: Are the statistical methods appropriate, and are uncertainties handled correctly?

Reviewers should provide detailed, point-by-point recommendations where improvements are needed. If in doubt, they are encouraged to contact the Editor for guidance.

3.8 Reviewing review reports

Editors carefully examine each review report to ensure its validity before sending it to the authors. We place great importance on reviewers' confidential comments to the Editor when making editorial decisions. In line with our policy, all reviewer comments are generally transmitted to the authors. However, editorial staff may edit review reports to remove offensive language or to protect confidential information when necessary. We strongly encourage reviewers to express their evaluations professionally, without offensive or inappropriate remarks, and to treat authors’ work with the same respect they would expect for their own. Reviewers must refrain from suggesting citations to their own work unless such references clearly enhance the quality and relevance of the manuscript. Requests for unnecessary citations may compromise reviewer anonymity. Authors are expected to respond to reviewers' comments objectively and constructively.

3.9 Ethics and security

Editorial Board members (including Editors-in-Chief) are not involved in the processing of their own manuscripts. Submissions from Editorial Board members undergo rigorous single-blind peer-review and are evaluated by at least three independent reviewers. Final decisions are made under a double-blind process by Editorial Board members with no conflicts of interest with the authors. Starting in 2024, Editorial Board members must disclose their editorial role at Homeostatic Medicine in the Conflicts of Interest section of any submitted manuscript.

Homeostatic Medicine Editors may seek advice not only from expert reviewers but also from appropriate specialists when submissions raise concerns such as ethical issues or security risks. This additional input is typically obtained concurrently with the peer review process. The Academic Editor responsible for the manuscript makes the final publication decision.

Further details are available in our Peer Review Guidelines.

4. Access to Full Text and Article Processing Charges (APCs)

Homeostatic Medicine supports Gold Open Access and encourages authors to seek funding support for publication. All articles published under Gold Open Access undergo rigorous peer review and benefit from professional editing and production services. All website content, including full-text articles, is freely accessible without registration. To sustain open access and cover the costs associated with manuscript processing, peer review, editorial services, typesetting, language polishing, long-term archiving, journal operations, platform maintenance, and system development, an Article Processing Charge (APC) is applied to accepted manuscripts.

5. Publication Ethics and Misconduct Policy

Homeostatic Medicine strictly complies with the COPE guidelines concerning publication ethics and misconduct. According to COPE’s best practices, the roles, responsibilities, and rights of all participants in the publishing process – including authors, reviewers, Honorary Editors-in-Chief, Editors-in-Chief, Associate Editors, Editorial Board members, and in-house Editors - are clearly defined and upheld.

5.1 Author responsibilities and rights

Homeostatic Medicine is a peer-reviewed journal. Authors are obliged to participate in the journal’s single-blind peer review process.

1.Originality and data integrity: Authors must ensure the originality, authenticity, accuracy, and repeatability of the data presented in their submissions. Where applicable, the sources of data should be clearly documented to facilitate replication of experiments or further research by other scholars.
2. Exclusive submission: Manuscripts submitted to Homeostatic Medicine must not be under consideration by another journal or previously published elsewhere during the review period. Ethical violations such as duplicate submission or duplicate publication are strictly prohibited.
3. Ethical compliance: For studies involving human participants, animals, or plants, authors must obtain prior approval from appropriate institutional bodies (e.g., Ethics Committee, Institutional Review Board).

• If personal information is involved, informed consent must be obtained, and participant privacy must be respected.
• Clinical trials must be registered with a public clinical trial registry (see Research Ethics and Consent for details).
• For any content involving copyrighted materials, explicit permission must be secured from the relevant copyright holders (see Copyright and License to Publish for details).
  Relevant documentation must be submitted alongside the manuscript.

4. Reporting standards: Authors must adhere to recognized reporting guidelines, including but not limited to:

• CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)
• STARD (Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies)
• STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology)
• For systematic reviews and meta-analyses: QUOROM (Quality of Reporting Meta-analyses) and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)
• For case reports: CARE (CAse REports) guidelines

5. Conflicts of interest disclosure: Authors are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest – financial or non-financial - within the manuscript (see Conflicts of Interest Policy for details).
6. Post-publication corrections: If a published article is found to contain serious errors, the authors must promptly notify the Journal Office. They are expected to cooperate in issuing a formal correction or retraction if necessary.
7. Manuscript tracking and appeals: All authors have the right to monitor the status of their manuscripts throughout the editorial process. If they have concerns or objections regarding editorial decisions or procedures, they may file a formal complaint with the Journal Office or the Editor-in-Chief.
8. Authorship and misconduct: All listed authors must have made substantial contributions to the research. In cases involving disputes over authorship, plagiarism, or falsified authorship claims, the originally listed authors may report the issue to the Journal Office with supporting evidence. The journal will investigate and, if misconduct is confirmed, will reject or retract the manuscript and make the outcome public. In severe cases, the author’s affiliated institutions will be notified, and future submissions from the individuals involved will be permanently barred.

5.2 Reviewer's responsibilities and rights

1. Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and in a timely manner. They should not discriminate against authors based on nationality, race, or other personal attributes. Personal attacks or defamatory comments must be strictly avoided. Reviewers are expected to respect the authors' contributions and offer constructive feedback to help improve the quality of manuscripts.
2. Prior to the official publication of a manuscript, reviewers must not use, retain, or reproduce any part of the manuscript for personal purposes, including data, research methods, or ideas. Confidentiality must be maintained throughout the review process.
3. Reviewers should remain vigilant about potential conflicts of interest and promptly notify the authors if any are identified.
4. Reviewers must avoid evaluating manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists. In such cases, they should notify the Journal Office to prevent a biased or unfair review process.
5. If reviewers identify any form of academic misconduct, they are obligated to report it to the Journal Office promptly. Reviewers have the right to be informed of the investigation's progress and outcome.

5.3 Editor-in-Chief's responsibilities and rights

The Editor-in-Chief serves as a key leader of Homeostatic Medicine, with primary responsibility for the journal’s academic and scientific quality. Manuscript evaluations should be based solely on originality, significance, and academic value. The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that decisions are not influenced by commercial interests or other inappropriate considerations.

Key responsibilities include:

• Defining the journal's aims and scope;
• Formulating and revising publication plans and long-term goals;
• Inviting distinguished researchers to join the Editorial Board;
• Proposing topics for Special Issues;
• Soliciting high-quality submissions;
• Participating actively in the editorial process, including conducting initial reviews and making final decisions on manuscripts;
• Promoting the journal within the academic community and at scholarly events;
• Advising on journal policies and contributing to the development of new regulations.

To recognize the Editor-in-Chief’s contributions, OAE provides an annual fund to support their academic activities. The initial term of appointment is five years and may be renewed.

5.4 Honorary Editor-in-Chief's responsibilities and rights

This is primarily an honorary position. The responsibilities of an Honorary Editor-in-Chief include:

• Providing academic suggestions for the development of the journal;
• Reviewing one or two manuscripts per year;
• Promoting the journal within academic circles and at conferences;

Honorary Editors-in-Chief may step down at any time should they find the responsibilities burdensome.

5.5 Associate Editor's responsibilities and rights

Associate Editors at Homeostatic Medicine primarily handle initial evaluations of submitted manuscripts. Their responsibilities include:

• Making initial or first decisions on submissions;
• Promoting the journal within their academic networks and at professional conferences;
• Assisting in the editing of Special Issues aligned with their research interests;
• Providing input or feedback on proposed journal policies and regulations.

The initial term of appointment is two years and may be renewed. Associate Editors may resign at any time if they find the responsibilities burdensome.

5.6 Editorial Board Members’ responsibilities and rights

Homeostatic Medicine is supported by an international Editorial Board composed of distinguished researchers from leading institutions around the world. The list of Editorial Board members can be found on the journal’s Editorial Board page. The initial term of appointment to the Editorial Board is two years and may be renewed. The publisher conducts an annual evaluation of Editorial Board members based on their contributions and regularly updates the editorial team accordingly. Editorial Board members may resign from their positions at any time if they feel unable to meet the demands of the role. The responsibilities of Editorial Board members include:

• Recommending or reviewing manuscripts submitted to the journal;
• Conducting initial or final reviews of submissions related to their area of expertise;
• Promoting the journal within their academic networks and at professional conferences;
• Providing input or feedback on new journal policies and regulations.

5.7 Youth Editorial Board Members’ responsibilities and rights

Homeostatic Medicine  is also supported by a Youth Editorial Board comprising early-career researchers from institutions worldwide. The list of Youth Editorial Board members can be found on the Youth Editorial Board page. The initial term for Youth Editorial Board members is two years, with the possibility of renewal. The publisher evaluates each member’s contributions annually and updates the Youth Editorial Board accordingly. Members may step back from their positions at any time if they find the responsibilities too demanding.

The responsibilities of Youth Editorial Board members include:

• Contributing scholarly articles to the journal during the tenure;
• Participating in the peer review of manuscripts within their area of expertise;
• Promoting the journal among peers and at academic conferences;
• Offering input or feedback on proposed journal policies and regulations;
• Participating in academic webinars and events organized by Homeostatic Medicine.

5.8 Guest Editor responsibilities and rights

Homeostatic Medicine welcomes researchers to serve as Guest Editors and launch Special Issues on certain topics of interest. Special Issues foster international collaboration and academic exchange worldwide. The following guidelines outline the responsibilities and rights of Guest Editors in the publication of a Special Issue.

5.8.1 Proposal preparation

Guest Editors are required to submit a proposal for the Special Issue, which should contain the following information:

• Title of the Special Issue;
• A brief introduction outlining the scope and significance of the Special Issue;
• A tentative timeline for manuscript submission;
• A list of potential contributing authors.

The Editorial Office will assess the proposal. Upon approval by the Journal office and the Academic Editor, the Special Issue will be formally launched and announced on the journal’s website.

5.8.2 Soliciting submissions

Guest Editors are responsible for promoting their Special Issues and soliciting high-quality papers. This includes disseminating the Call for Papers via appropriate academic channels, such as conferences and scholarly networks.

5.8.3 Peer review process

All submissions to Special Issues are processed through OAE's MESAs submission system and must undergo rigorous peer review.
Guest Editors may recommend decisions on manuscripts submitted to their Special Issue; however, they must have no conflicts of interest with the authors of those manuscripts.
The Academic Editor retains the final authority to accept or reject all manuscripts, including those submitted to Special Issues.
Accepted papers are published online immediately and collected together on the Special Issue’s dedicated webpage.
APCs for Special Issue submissions follow the journal's standard APC policy.
Once all articles in the Special Issue have been published, Guest Editors are invited to prepare a concluding Editorial summarizing the theme, highlights, and contributions of the Issue.
In recognition of their contributions, Guest Editors will receive a digital copy (softcopy/e-book) of the complete Special Issue, following confirmation of all content.

5.9 In-house Editor responsibilities

The in-house editorial team comprises the Managing Editor, Assistant Editors, Language Editors, and Production Editors. Their responsibilities are outlined below:

5.9.1 Managing Editor

• Conducts an initial assessment of submissions based on originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, structural and formatting compliance, conflicts of interest disclosures, and authors’ credentials. Manuscripts that fail to meet basic standards may be rejected at this stage without being forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief;
• Assigns submissions that pass the pre-check to the appropriate Assistant Editor;
• Oversees the editorial workflow to ensure adherence to the best practice guidelines of COPE;
• Supports the Editor-in-Chief in journal management tasks, including supervising and coordinating with the Editorial Board to maintain consistent operations according to the journal’s development plan;
• Promotes the journal through activities such as organizing conference partnerships and attending academic workshops.

5.9.2 Assistant Editor

The Assistant Editors of Homeostatic Medicine are mainly responsible for managing the peer-review process for assigned manuscripts. They ensure the process complies with COPE’s best practices and assist authors in improving their manuscripts based on reviewers’ feedback. Specific duties include:

• Assigning submissions that have passed the Managing Editor’s initial check to an Academic Editor for preliminary evaluation;
• Inviting suitable reviewers for manuscripts approved by the Academic Editor and collecting high-quality peer review reports;
• Communicating with authors to guide manuscript revisions based on reviewer comments;
• Forwarding revised manuscripts to the Academic Editor for a final decision;
• Notifying authors of editorial decisions;
• Assisting the Managing Editor with additional editorial tasks as needed.

5.9.3 Language Editors

Homeostatic Medicine provides English language editing services for all accepted manuscripts. Language Editors are responsible for polishing the language of submissions to ensure clarity and fluency. An additional fee may apply if extensive language corrections are required during the revision process.  Click here to learn more about OAE's Language Editing Services.

5.9.4 Production Editors

Production Editors are responsible for the final preparation and publication of accepted manuscripts. Their duties include copyediting, formatting, proofreading, and overseeing the online release of articles.

5.10 Research ethics and consent

5.10.1 Research involving human subjects

All studies involving human subjects must comply with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and obtain approval from an independent ethics oversight body, such as a local, regional, or national ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB). The name of the approving body must be clearly stated in the Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate section of the manuscript. If the study has been deemed exempt from ethics approval, the manuscript must include a statement specifying the name of the committee that granted the exemption, along with the justification for the exemption. Authors should be prepared to provide additional documentation upon request, as Editors may require further details. Any suspected breaches of research ethics will be investigated according to COPE Guidelines.

5.10.1.1 Consent to participate

For all research involving human subjects, informed consent must be obtained from the participants themselves. For minors under the age of 16, consent must be obtained from a parent or legal guardian. A clear statement confirming that informed consent was obtained must be included in the Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate section of the manuscript.
If an ethical concern arises at any stage of the publication process, it will be thoroughly investigated based on COPE Guidelines.

5.10.1.2 Consent for publication

All articles published in Homeostatic Medicine are openly accessible online. If a manuscript includes identifiable information about individual participants, such as personal details, images, or videos, - Consent for Publication must be obtained from the individual concerned. For minors, consent must be obtained from a parent or legal guardian. In the event the participant is deceased, consent must be obtained from the next of kin. Authors must include a Consent for Publication statement in the manuscript, confirming that written informed consent for publication was obtained.

5.10.1.3 Ethical approval and informed consent for retrospective/database studies

Researchers using retrospective data or databases must confirm that they have obtained approval from an ethics review board and, where applicable, permission from the dataset custodian to use the information for their research. If data are publicly available and no formal permission is required - such as under an open license - this must be clearly stated in the manuscript. For studies where ethics approval was waived, the manuscript must include a statement detailing the waiver and the policies under which it was granted.

Data should be anonymized whenever possible. If anonymization is not feasible and participant details are disclosed, written informed consent, including consent for publication, must be obtained from each participant. A corresponding consent statement must be included in the manuscript.

5.10.1.4 Ethical approval and informed consent for survey studies

Researchers conducting survey-based studies must ensure participant confidentiality and clearly inform participants of the study’s purpose, any potential risks, and how their data will be stored and used. Voluntary informed consent must be obtained from all participants, and all applicable data protection regulations must be followed. As with other human research studies, ethics approval must be obtained from an IRB/local ethics committee prior to conducting the survey. If ethics approval is not required for a particular survey, a clear explanatory statement must be provided in the manuscript.

5.10.1.5 Clinical trials

Trial registration

Homeostatic Medicine requires authors to register all relevant clinical trials reported in submitted manuscripts. The journal adheres to the World Health Organization (WHO)'s definition of a clinical trial:

A clinical trial is any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes. Interventions include but are not restricted to drugs, cells and other biological products, surgical procedures, radiologic procedures, devices, behavioural treatments, process-of-care changes, preventive care, etc.

In line with the recommendations of ICMJE, Homeostatic Medicine requires that clinical trials be registered in a publicly accessible registry at or before the enrollment of the first participant. Acceptable registries include any primary register of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) or ClinicalTrials.gov. The trial registration number must be listed at the end of the Abstract.

Secondary analyses of data from previously registered primary (or parent) clinical trials do not require new registration; however, authors must reference the registration number of the original trial.

Editors will carefully assess submissions involving unregistered or incompletely registered trials. Given the importance of prospective trial registration, exceptions to this policy are expected to be rare. In such cases, the trial must still be registered, and the authors must clearly indicate when registration occurred and explain the reason for the delay. If an exception is granted, editors will publish a statement detailing the rationale for the decision. Authors who fail to register their trial prospectively may risk the manuscript being deemed ineligible for publication in Homeostatic Medicine.

Authors unsure about whether trial registration is required should consult the ICMJE FAQs.

Data sharing

Homeostatic Medicine adheres to the ICMJE requirements regarding data sharing statements. Authors must clearly specify the following information:

• Whether individual de-identified participant data (including data dictionaries) will be shared;
• What specific data will be shared;
• Whether related documents will be made available (e.g., study protocol, statistical analysis plan, data dictionary, etc.);
• When the data will become available and the duration of availability;
• The criteria for accessing the data, including who may access it, for what types of analyses, and through what mechanisms.

Examples of data sharing statements that meet ICMJE requirements are provided below *
*These examples are meant to illustrate a range of, but not all, data sharing options.

5.10.2 Research involving animals

Experimental research involving animals must receive approval from appropriate ethics committees and comply with applicable institutional, national, and international guidelines. Homeostatic Medicine strongly encourages authors to adhere to the AALAS Guidelines, ARRIVE Guidelines, and ICLAS Guidelines, and to obtain prior approval from a relevant ethics committee before initiating the study. Manuscripts must include a declaration of Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate, clearly stating that the study was approved by the relevant ethics committee and conducted in accordance with ethical standards. If ethics approval was deemed unnecessary, the manuscript must include the name of the committee that granted the exemption along with a justification for the exemption. Editors will consider animal welfare issues when reviewing submissions and reserve the right to reject manuscripts that involve research procedures inconsistent with commonly accepted norms of animal research.

5.10.3 Research involving cell lines

Authors must clearly describe the cell lines used in their study and provide details about their origin to ensure reproducibility. For established cell lines, the source should be explicitly stated and supported with references to either a published article or a commercial supplier. For newly derived (de novo) human cell lines, approval must be obtained from an institutional review board or equivalent ethics committee. Additionally, informed consent must be secured from the donor or next of kin. These approvals and consents must be declared in the Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate sections of the manuscript.
Further guidance is available from the International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC). Homeostatic Medicine also recommends that the authors check the NCBI database to check for potential misidentification or contamination of human cell lines.

5.10.4 Research involving plants

Experimental research involving plants (whether cultivated or wild) must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international guidelines. This includes the collection of plant material. Field studies must adhere to local legislation, and the manuscript must include a statement indicating that the necessary permissions and/or licenses have been obtained. Homeostatic Medicine recommends that authors follow the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

For all submitted manuscripts, the origin of the plant material and relevant genetic information must be provided. For research involving rare or non-model plants (i.e., species other than widely used models such as Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Oryza sativa, etc.), voucher specimens must be deposited in a publicly accessible herbarium or collection that ensures availability of the materials for future research.

5.10.5 Bias-free language

For studies involving or referencing human participants, authors must clearly describe the study population using appropriate, bias-free language. The seventh edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2009) provides guidance on avoiding biased terminology, particularly in reference to gender, age, racial and ethnic background, sexual orientation, disability status, and socioeconomic status.

In cases where participant quotes or interview transcripts include potentially offensive or derogatory language related to demographic descriptors, authors should avoid the use of such terms. However, if the inclusion of offensive language is essential to the integrity of the research, such as a direct quote reflecting a participant’s experience, it may be included, provided it is clearly marked as a quotation.

5.10.6 Borders and territories

Disputes over borders or territory claims may affect how research sites or author affiliations are described in a manuscript. Homeostatic Medicine respects the terminology and choices of authors in such cases. If a dispute or complaint arises regarding the naming of a location or territory, the editorial team will seek a resolution that respects all parties involved. The final decision regarding content rests with the Editors, who may consult the relevant academic society and publisher as necessary.

5.10.7 Ethnicity and race

When reporting demographic information about study populations, it is preferable to use descriptors of ethnicity (e.g., African American, South Asian) rather than race, where applicable. Authors are encouraged to refer to the British Sociological Association’s language guidelines for appropriate and respectful terminology when describing ethnicity and race.

5.10.8 Text recycling

Homeostatic Medicine adheres to the COPE Text Recycling Guidelines when addressing instances of content reuse. In certain cases, authors may wish to present findings from the same research project to different audiences. In such cases, limited text recycling – appropriately cited and clearly identified – may be acceptable, particularly when the context, discussion, or conclusions are distinct from the original publication.

5.10.9 Translations

Homeostatic Medicine may consider publishing accurate translations of materials originally published in another language. Authors who submit translated content must obtain proper permissions and clearly indicate that the submission is a translation. The original source must be fully acknowledged and cited.

5.11 Publication misconduct and handling policies

5.11.1 Misconduct

Misconduct in scholarly publishing encompasses a range of unethical behaviors that violate academic integrity and responsible research practices. These include, but are not limited to, data fabrication, plagiarism, inappropriate authorship practices, breaches of ethical or legal regulations, and misappropriation of others' ideas. To help authors understand and avoid such behaviors, WAME has outlined several common forms of misconduct.

• Data falsification – This includes data fabrication, selective and misleading reporting of findings, omission of conflicting results, or the deliberate suppression and/or distortion of data.
• Plagiarism – The use of another person’s language, ideas, or intellectual output without proper attribution, and the presentation of such material as one's own original work.
• Image manipulation – Altering images in a way that misrepresents the data or leads to false conclusions. Inappropriate image manipulation is considered a form of data fabrication or falsification.
• Improper authorship – This refers to practices such as excluding legitimate contributors, including individuals who did not make a significant contribution to the work, or submitting a multi-authored manuscript without the concurrence of all listed authors.
• Breaches of ethical and legal regulations – These involve serious, repeated, or intentional violations of local or international laws and guidelines, including those concerning the use of research funds, the care and use of animals or human subjects, or the handling of investigational drugs, recombinant products, new medical devices, or hazardous biological, chemical, or radioactive materials.
• Misappropriation of others' ideas – This occurs when individuals use ideas obtained during the peer review or grant review process without permission or proper credit. Significant use of such material constitutes misconduct.
• Violation of accepted research practices – This includes significant deviations from established research protocols, manipulation of experiments to produce biased outcomes, use of deceptive statistical methods, or misrepresentation of research results.
• Inappropriate conduct related to misconduct – This includes knowingly making false accusations, failing to report known or suspected misconduct, withholding or destroying relevant information, or retaliating against individuals involved in the reporting or investigation of misconduct.

5.11.2 Identification of misconduct

• Homeostatic Medicine checks all submitted manuscripts for duplication using iThenticate to detect potential misconduct such as plagiarism and duplicate publication.
• Homeostatic Medicine provides MESAs, an independent manuscript processing system that enables authors to conduct a self-check using a standardized checklist. If the system detects potential misconduct (e.g., plagiarism and duplicate publication), it automatically notifies the Editorial Board.
• Homeostatic Medicine utilizes forensic tools provided by the Office of Research Integrity to examine images and samples for signs of manipulation.
• Homeostatic Medicine encourages all stakeholders - including readers, authors, reviewers, and Editorial Board members - to report suspected misconduct according to the guidelines of WAME, COPE, and ICMJE, and to promptly notify the journal's Editor or the publisher.
• It is the responsibility of the informant to provide sufficient evidence and relevant information to facilitate the Editors’ or publishers’ further investigation with appropriate departments or institutions.

5.11.3 Prevention of misconduct

• Homeostatic Medicine raises awareness of research integrity by disseminating relevant information and clarifying the contributions of all listed authors.
• Homeostatic Medicine ensures that all conflicts of interest are properly disclosed and provides clear guidance on authorship and author order.
• Homeostatic Medicine offers a commenting feature on published articles to encourage reader engagement and scholarly discussion.
• Reviewers are informed of their obligation to maintain confidentiality throughout the peer review process.
• Homeostatic Medicine has established a Quality Control Committee and an Ethics Committee to oversee the integrity and ethical standards of its editorial practices.

5.11.4 How to handle it

Homeostatic Medicine treats all allegations of potential misconduct seriously and handles each case individually, guided by the principles of WAME Guidelines and COPE. If misconduct is suspected, the Editors may share relevant manuscript content with third parties such as the authors' institutions or ethics committees. For inquiries, please contact the Editorial Office at: editorialoffice@homeostmed.net

1. For cases identified by plagiarism detection tools, the Managing Editor will forward the results to the relevant parties and request a formal explanation.  Based on the outcomes of institutional investigations, the Managing Editor may implement one or more of the following measures if academic misconduct is confirmed:

Possible outcomes (from least to most severe):
A. Educate the individuals involved.
B. Issue a formal warning.
C. Publicly disclose the misconduct.
D. Notify the individuals’ affiliations or supervisors.
E. Reject or retract the manuscript and notify relevant indexing databases to remove publication records. For details, refer to the journal’s Corrections and Retractions policy.
F. Impose a temporary ban on manuscript submissions, publications, or other academic activities in this and other journals under the same publisher.
G. In severe cases, notify the appropriate authorities or institutions to record the misconduct permanently in accordance with publishing ethics regulations.

2. If a written report of misconduct is submitted to the Managing Editor, Assistant Editor, Editor-in-Chief, or Associate Editor, the following steps may be taken:
A. Request the informant to submit supporting evidence and details.
B. Seek a formal response from the accused party.
C. If the response is insufficient, contact relevant institutions or regulatory agencies for assistance.
D. If needed, and ensuring no conflicts of interest, establish an investigation team comprising the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor and at least one Editorial Board member.
E. Officially notify the accused party and initiate the investigation.
F. Depending on the outcome:

• If no misconduct is found, formally notify both parties;
• If misconduct is confirmed, provide recommendations to the Editors and formally inform both parties of the decision.

Homeostatic Medicine follows the COPE flowcharts when addressing cases of misconduct. If any parties object to the handling outcome, they may file an appeal with the publisher by contacting info@oaepublish.com.

5.12 Hazardous materials, risks, and biosecurity

Authors are responsible for identifying any inherent hazards or risks associated with the content of their manuscripts. They must include appropriate warnings and refer to relevant safety precautions. Such risks may arise from the use of specific products, chemicals, procedures, or technologies that pose threats to public health and safety, the environment, animals, plants, or equipment.

Homeostatic Medicine requires authors to inform the Editorial Office at the time of manuscript submission if their study has the potential for both beneficial and harmful applications - commonly referred to as "dual-use research."

In such cases, authors are expected to comply with guidelines such as those issued by the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB), which provides a detailed description and discussion of "dual-use research of concern."

5.13 Investigation of questionable research practices

Concerns regarding questionable research practices may arise through the use of plagiarism detection or image screening tools, or be raised by Editors, peer reviewers, or third parties. COPE provides flowcharts to guide responses to such concerns, including those raised directly or indirectly by third parties. If an investigation requires the disclosure of a third party’s identity, their informed consent must be obtained beforehand.

Whether concerns originate from automated screening tools, editorial staff, peer reviewers, or external sources, all allegations supported by specific and detailed evidence - anonymous or not - should be investigated thoroughly.

The Homeostatic Medicine Editorial Office is responsible for addressing potential cases involving, but not limited to:

• Data fabrication or falsification
• Plagiarism
• Image manipulation
• Unethical research practices
• Biased reporting
• Authorship disputes
• Redundant or duplicate publication
• Undeclared conflicts of interest

If the nature of the concern limits the publishing team’s ability to conduct a thorough investigation (e.g., in cases involving data fabrication, authorship issues, or ethical violations), Homeostatic Medicine will refer the matter to the appropriate authority, such as the authors’ institutions, employer, funder, or relevant national body. For issues that can be reasonably assessed internally (e.g., plagiarism or image manipulation), Homeostatic Medicine will undertake the investigation and take necessary actions. The Editorial Office will ensure that all relevant parties, including the authors and their institutions and/or funders, are kept informed throughout the process.

Investigations must follow established procedures, such as those outlined in COPE Flowcharts. Editors may also consult COPE Sample Letters (login required) or the Council of Science Editors’ Sample Correspondence for Editors for guidance.

Investigations should proceed with due diligence, balancing timeliness with thoroughness. Outcomes may include Retractions, Withdrawals, Expressions of Concern, or other appropriate editorial actions.

6. Authorship and Contribution

Authorship credit in Homeostatic Medicine should be based solely on substantial contributions to the published work, as defined by the following four criteria:
(1) Significant contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;
(2) Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content;
(3) Final approval of the version to be published;
(4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

All individuals who meet these four criteria should be listed as authors. Authors must specify their individual contributions in the Authors' Contributions section of the manuscript. Contributors who do not meet all four criteria (e.g., those involved solely in funding acquisition, general supervision, administrative support, writing assistance, technical editing, language polishing, or proofreading) should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section rather than listed as authors.

For multi-author collaborative groups, authorship should ideally be determined before the research starts and confirmed prior to submission. All listed authors must meet all the four criteria outlined above.

AI tools and AI-assisted technologies cannot be credited as authors or co-authors.

6.1 Corresponding author(s)

Homeostatic Medicine does not require written submission letters from all authors, nor does it impose a specific order of authorship. Submission implies that all listed authors have agreed to the manuscript’s content, including the author list and the statement of contributions.

The corresponding author(s) is responsible for all communication with the journal during the submission, peer review, and publication processes. This includes:

• Ensuring all authors have approved the submitted version of the manuscript;
• Confirming authorship details and compliance with ethical guidelines, including ethics committee approval and clinical trial registration where applicable;
• Collecting conflict of interest declarations from all authors.

Any changes to the authorship list after submission, such as reordering, adding, or removing authors, must be approved by all co-authors. Homeostatic Medicine editors are not responsible for investigating authorship disputes. Unresolved disputes should be referred to the relevant institutional authority. No changes to authorship are allowed after a manuscript has been officially accepted.

Each author’s primary affiliation should be the institution where the majority of the work was conducted. If an author has changed institutions, their current address may also be stated. Homeostatic Medicine remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in institutional affiliations and published maps.

The corresponding author is also responsible for the following regarding data, code, and materials:

• Ensuring compliance with transparency and reproducibility standards;
• Preserving original data/materials/code in accordance with best practices to enable reanalysis;
• Ensuring accurate representation of data/materials/code;
• Minimizing obstacles to sharing the data/materials/code used in the work.

At the time of submission, the corresponding author must identify any reused content (e.g., figures or tables) that has been previously published, and confirm that written permission has been obtained from the original authors and/or publishers. After acceptance, the corresponding author is responsible for the accuracy of all proof content, including co-author names, affiliations, and addresses. After publication, the corresponding author serves as the main point of contact for inquiries about the paper and must inform co-authors of any issues that arise and facilitate prompt resolution.

Corresponding authors are advised to provide their ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) at the time of submission. This identifier will be displayed once the manuscript is published online.

6.2 Co-first authorship

When two or more authors contribute equally to a manuscript, co-first authorship may be indicated on the title page using a hash symbol (#), along with a note stating: "#These authors contributed equally to this work."

6.3 Group authorship

Homeostatic Medicine permits group authorship in cases where large collaborative groups attribute authorship to a group name, with or without individual contributors. When submitting a manuscript on behalf of a group, the corresponding author must specify the group name, if applicable, and clearly identify the individuals who qualify as authors and take credit and responsibility for the work.

6.4 Statement of authors' contributions

Homeostatic Medicine requires authors to include a statement detailing each author’s specific contributions at the end of the manuscript. The nature of contributions may vary across disciplines—some manuscripts result from distinct individual efforts, while others reflect collective work at all stages. Authors are also encouraged to acknowledge individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship (e.g., those who provided research or writing assistance) in the Acknowledgments section. We encourage editors and authors to consult the COPE resources on authorship and authorship disputes. Homeostatic Medicine supports Editors in managing authorship and authorship disputes, including seeking guidance from COPE when necessary. We align with recognized industry standards to promote transparency in authorship, such as the use of ORCID identifiers. Additionally, we support initiatives like CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to clearly define authorship and contributorship roles.

6.5 Deceased authors

If a manuscript includes a deceased author, either at the time of submission or during the review process, a footnote should be added to the final published article using the "†" symbol to explain the circumstances. A co-author must verify the deceased author’s contribution and disclose any potential conflicts of interest. If the deceased author was the corresponding author, another co-author must be designated to assume that role. Please note that under applicable laws, copyright is considered personal property. If the deceased author has not signed a copyright agreement or provided written authorization to a co-author, permission to publish must be obtained from the author’s legal successor.

6.6 Author name changes after publication

If an author requests a name change after publication, the Editorial Office will evaluate the request under reasonable circumstances. Approved changes will be reflected in the article through a formal correction. All co-authors must be notified of any such change and, where appropriate, consulted on the wording of the correction notice. The Editorial Office will follow COPE guidelines (How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers)and strive to respect the author's preferences while maintaining transparency and integrity in the published record.

6.7 Authorship disputes

In the event of an authorship dispute, the Editorial Office will refer to the COPE Flowcharts and the guidance document How to spot authorship problems. If the parties involved cannot resolve the matter independently, the issue may need to be escalated to the appropriate institutional or regulatory authorities.

6.8 Editors and journal staff as authors

Editorial Office staff and Editorial Board members (including Editors-in-Chief) are not involved in the peer review or editorial decision-making process for their own submissions. Such manuscripts are reviewed by at least three independent reviewers and handled by other Editorial Board members who have no conflict of interest with the authors.

7. Policy of the Use of AI and AI-assisted Technologies

7.1 AI Authorship

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies (e.g., large language models) in scholarly publishing is evolving. However, their application in manuscript preparation is subject to the following restrictions:

• Prohibited uses: AI tools must not be used to perform core research tasks, including generating scientific insights, analyzing/interpreting data, or formulating scientific conclusions.
• Permitted uses: These tools may be employed solely to enhance language quality and enhance the readability of the manuscript.

All AI-generated content must be created under strict human oversight, as such tools can introduce inaccuracies or biases. AI technologies cannot be credited as authors or co-authors and may not be cited as such. Authors retain full responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of all content, including that generated with AI assistance.

Exception for methodological use:
When AI tools are integral to the research design/methodology, authors must:
1. Clearly describe their use in the Materials and Methods section, specifying:

• Tool/model name
• Version/extension number
• Developer or provider

2. Include a separate declaration titled "Declaration of Generative AI Use" before the reference section, stating:
""During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [TOOL NAME] for [specific purpose]. The author(s) reviewed and edited all AI-generated content and take full responsibility for the final published version.""
Note: A declaration is not required for routine grammar/spelling-checking tools or reference management software.

7.2 Use of Generative AI in Visual Content

The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or manipulate visual content is strictly prohibited, including for:

• Graphical abstracts
• Cover images
• Figures or illustrations within the manuscript

The only permitted image adjustments are:

• Brightness/contrast correction
• Color balance optimization

Such modifications must not obscure, alter, delete, or misrepresent original data in any way.

7.3 Use of AI in Peer Review

Confidentiality requirements:

• Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading any manuscript content to AI platforms. Doing so:

1. Breaches OAE’s confidentiality policies
2. Risks infringement of intellectual property rights
3. May expose personally identifiable information

Maintaining review integrity:

• Peer review must remain a human-driven process; AI tools must not be used to replace scholarly evaluation and judgment.
• The use of AI to assist in manuscript assessment is prohibited due to the risks of:

1. Inaccurate/incomplete assessments
2. Algorithmic bias

Disclosure requirement: If any aspect of the manuscript review involved the use of AI tools, reviewers must disclose this clearly in their report. Reviewers are fully accountable for the content of their evaluations.

OAE will review and update this policy periodically to ensure alignment with technological advancements and evolving academic standards.

8. Conflicts of Interest

8.1 Conflicts of Interest Policy

All academics have a responsibility to uphold the transparency and integrity of the research publishing process. Enhancing openness and legitimacy within scholarly publishing facilitates the effective dissemination of critical information, thereby advancing the collective understanding of academic knowledge. Homeostatic Medicine requires authors to disclose any actual or potential financial and/or non-financial conflicts of interest in their submitted manuscripts.

8.2 Definition of conflicts of interest

A conflict of interest arises when an author’s objectivity may be compromised due to various personal, professional, or financial relationships.
Conflicts of interest at Homeostatic Medicine include both financial and non-financial factors that may influence, or appear to influence, the objectivity, integrity, or perceived value of a publication.

8.2.1 Financial conflicts of interest

Financial conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Funding Support: Authors must disclose any sources of funding that may benefit or suffer financially from the publication, along with the funder's involvement in the conception, design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, and manuscript preparation.
• Employment: Authors should declare any recent (during the research project), current, or anticipated employment with organizations that may be financially impacted by the publication.
• Personal Financial Interests: This includes ownership of stocks or shares, consultancy fees, honoraria, and other financial compensation, as well as any patents or patent applications that could be influenced by the publication’s outcomes.

When it is difficult to establish a strict threshold for what constitutes a financial interest, Homeostatic Medicine strongly encourages authors to disclose any potential competing financial interests to avoid post-publication disputes or reputational concerns.

8.2.2 Non-financial conflicts of interest

Non-financial conflicts of interest typically involve personal or professional relationships that may affect judgment or decision-making. Examples include, but are not limited to:

• Unpaid roles in governmental or non-governmental organizations
• Uncompensated advisory positions in commercial enterprises
• Participation as an expert witness
  Authors are encouraged to declare any unpaid affiliations or roles that may reasonably be perceived as influencing the research or publication process.

8.3 Conflicts of interest policy for authors

Authors must disclose any actual or potential financial and/or non-financial conflicts of interest both at the end of their manuscript and in the cover letter. They must also confirm this disclosure during the submission process.
If no conflicts of interest exist, authors should state:"The authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest."
If confidentiality agreements prevent disclosure, the following statement should be used: "The authors declared that they are bound by confidentiality agreements which prevent the disclosure of competing interests related to this work."
All conflicts of interest statements will be made available to peer reviewers and will be published alongside the article upon acceptance.

8.4 Conflicts of interest policy for reviewers

Reviewers are advised to decline assignments where a significant conflict of interest exists. However, if the Editor is fully informed of any relevant interests, and these do not compromise the reviewer’s impartiality, the reviewer may proceed with the evaluation. Editors will consider any declared interests when interpreting reviewer recommendations.

8.5 Conflicts of interest policy for Editors

Editors must disclose any interests that could influence their editorial decisions. In cases where a significant conflict exists, Editors are required to recuse themselves from handling the manuscript to ensure the integrity and fairness of the editorial process.

9. Duplicate Publication

Manuscripts submitted to Homeostatic Medicine must be original and must not be published or under consideration by any other journal. Authors are required to clearly declare in the cover letter any potential overlap or duplication with other publications. In cases of overlap, relevant publications must be appropriately cited. Homeostatic Medicine uses iThenticate to screen all submissions for potential plagiarism. Suspected cases of duplicate submission will be handled in accordance with the COPE Guidelines. Where misconduct is suspected, the Editor reserves the right to contact the authors' institution.
Certain types of prior dissemination are generally not considered duplicate publications. These include:

• Preliminary reports, such as letters to the editor or preprints;
• Abstracts or posters presented at academic conferences;
• Papers presented at conferences that have not been published in full or are under consideration for proceedings.

Press reports from scheduled meetings typically do not constitute a breach of this policy unless they contain substantial additional data (e.g., tables or figures) not previously disclosed.
In specific cases, secondary publication may be permissible and ethically acceptable. For further details, please refer to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines on overlapping publications, which Homeostatic Medicine fully endorses.

10. Citation

Authors must ensure that any material taken from other sources (including their own previously published work), is clearly cited and, where necessary, that permission has been obtained.
Authors should avoid excessive self-citation.
References should not be copied from other publications unless the author has personally read the cited work.
Authors should not cite their own, or that of friends, colleagues, or their institution, in a preferential or promotional manner.
Citations to advertisements or advertorial material are not permitted.
In accordance with COPE guidelines, any "original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations". This requirement also applies to an author's own previously published work. COPE has published a discussion document on citation manipulation, which includes recommendations for best practices.

11. Embargo Policy

Submitted and accepted articles are considered privileged documents and must not be released to the press or the public in any form, including print, television, the internet, or other media, until they are published online as either an “ahead of print” article or a final version. Homeostatic Medicine permits authors to post their manuscripts on not-for-profit preprint servers or to present them at scientific conferences; however, these works should not be discussed with the media.

12. Preprints & Conference Proceedings

12.1 Preprints policies

A preprint is defined as an author's version of a research manuscript prior to formal peer review, which is deposited on a public server. At Homeostatic Medicine, before acceptance for publication, authors retain the right to make a preprint version of their article available on preprint servers, personal or institutional websites, and through open communication platforms among researchers, such as community preprint servers or preprint commenting systems.
When submitting a manuscript to Homeostatic Medicine, authors should disclose detailed information about any existing preprints in the cover letter, including the DOI and licensing terms used on the preprint platform.
Once the article has been accepted, it is the author's responsibility to update the preprint with the final version and to clearly indicate that the article has been accepted for publication in Homeostatic Medicine, using the following statement:
"This article has been accepted for publication in Homeostatic Medicine, published by OAE Publishing Inc. (DOI: xxxxx; URL link: xxxxx)."
Authors may cite preprints in the reference list of their manuscript submitted to Homeostatic Medicine. The citation format should be as follows:
Adams DM, Reay WR, Geaghan MP, Cairns MJ. Investigating the effect of glycaemic traits on the risk of psychiatric illness using Mendelian randomization. Preprint at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.984690v1 (2020).

12.2 Conference proceedings policies

Homeostatic Medicine welcomes submissions based on material previously presented in conference proceedings. However, such submissions must provide a substantial extension of the original work, including significant additional methodology, results, analysis, and conclusions. Authors must clearly disclose this information in the cover letter to inform the Editors. Additionally, authors are responsible for obtaining copyright permissions for any reused material from previously published conference papers.

13. Confidentiality

Homeostatic Medicine adheres to the COPE guidelines and treats all manuscripts as confidential during editorial processing. Editors do not share manuscripts with third parties except in cases of suspected misconduct (please refer to the Misconduct Policy for details). Once a manuscript is rejected, all copies will be deleted from the editorial system. If an Editor needs to retain a copy of a rejected manuscript, they must obtain prior permission from the authors.
Homeostatic Medicine uses a single-blind peer review process, meaning that reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors or to anyone else unless the reviewers given explicit permission. Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality and must not share or use any information from the manuscript during or after the review process. If reviewers wish to involve another person in the review, they must first obtain permission from the Editors, provide the name of the individual assisting, and ensure confidentiality is upheld.

14. Copyright and License to Publish

Homeostatic Medicine adopts the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) for publication. Authors retain the copyright of their articles. Authors are required to sign a License to Publish (available in the Author Instructions section), granting Homeostatic Medicine, as the original publisher, the exclusive right to publish their articles, and allowing third parties to use the work freely as long as the integrity is maintained and proper credit is given to the original authors, citation details and publisher.

15. Availability of Data and Materials

To uphold the integrity, transparency, and reproducibility of research, authors are encouraged to make their experimental materials and research data freely available to readers. This can be achieved by publishing supporting information as supplementary material within the journal or by depositing datasets in publicly accessible data repositories. Authors must include a declaration of Availability of Data and Materials within their manuscript, indicating where the data and materials related to their work can be found. If authors are unable to share their data, they must clearly state that data will not be shared and provide a specific reason.

Below are the recommended Data Availability Statements:

Data availability status	Recommended Data Availability Statement
Data available in a publicly accessible repository	The original data presented in this study are openly available in [repository name, e.g., FigShare] at [DOI/URL] or under [reference/accession number].
Data available upon reasonable request due to restrictions (e.g., privacy, legal, or ethical reasons)	The data presented in this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author(s) due to [specify the reason for the restriction].
Third-party data	Restrictions apply to the availability of these data. Data were obtained from [third party] and are available [from the authors/at URL] with permission from [third party].
Embargo on data due to commercial restrictions	The data supporting the findings of this study will be available in [repository name] at [DOI/URL] following an embargo period after publication to allow for the commercialization of the research findings.
Restrictions apply to the datasets	The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because [reason, e.g., they are part of an ongoing study or due to technical/time constraints]. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to [contact information].
Data derived from public domain resources	The data presented in this study are available in [repository name] at [DOI/URL], reference number [reference number]. These data were derived from the following publicly available resources: [list resources and URLs].
Data sharing not applicable (only if no new data were generated or if the study is entirely theoretical)	No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
Data contained within the article or its supplementary materials	The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article and/or its supplementary materials. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author(s).
Dataset available upon reasonable request from the authors	The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors upon reasonable request.

16. Publication Permanency

To ensure permanent access to published articles, Homeostatic Medicine archives all its publications with Portico, one of the world’s leading digital preservation service providers.

17. Repository policy

Homeostatic Medicine permits authors to deposit versions of their work in an institutional or other repository of their choice. Detailed policies can be found on Sherpa Romeo.

18. Describing New Taxa

18.1 Fungal and botanical names

Manuscripts that describe new taxon names or contain other nomenclatural acts must follow the guidelines of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants.
Authors introducing new fungal taxa should register these names with a recognized repository, such as Mycobank, and obtain a unique digital identifier, which must be included in the published article.

18.2 Zoological names

Since January 2012, electronic publication has been recognized as a valid means of publishing zoological names if specific conditions are met. Manuscripts that describe new zoological taxa or contain other nomenclatural acts must comply with the guidelines of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Homeostatic Medicine requires that new taxon names and the corresponding articles be registered with ZooBank. The ZooBank unique identifier should be included in the published article. Authors can update ZooBank with the final citation after publication.

18.3 Bacterial names

According to the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP), new prokaryotic names may be effectively published in electronic journals.
As prescribed by the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes (ICSP), for valid publication of new names, authors must submit the final published version of the article along with certificates confirming deposition of the type strain (available for unrestricted distribution) in at least two internationally recognized and publicly accessible culture collections in different countries to the Editorial Office of the International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (IJSEM).
Following review by the List Editor, names that conform to all ICNP rules will be included in a subsequent Validation List, in the order received, and then will be considered validly published.

18.4 Virus names

Proposals for new virus names must comply with the International Code of Virus Classification and Nomenclature. Authors should submit proposals for new virus taxa to the appropriate Study Group of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) for consideration.

19. Corrections, Retractions, Withdrawals, and Expressions of Concern

19.1 Corrections

The editors of Homeostatic Medicine encourage readers and authors to notify the Editorial Office of any errors, especially those that could affect the interpretation of data or conclusions presented in an article. When an error is identified:

• The Editorial Office will collaborate with the authors and publisher to correct significant published errors.
• Retraction will be considered if errors are so fundamental that they invalidate the study’s findings.
• Corrections arising from errors should be clearly distinguished from retractions and expressions of concern relating to questionable research practices.
• Corrections should be included in indexing services and linked to the original article.
• Corrections should be freely accessible.

The format of the correction depends on the publication stage of the article. For articles published online as an Early View (or equivalent) version - the online version of record before issue assignment - corrections may be made directly to the online article. In such cases, an audit trail must clearly document the changes made and the date of each modification.

For articles already published in an issue, a separate correction notice should be published and linked to the original article. In these instances, changes are typically not made directly to the original article text.

19.2 Retractions

Homeostatic Medicine is committed to upholding the integrity of the scholarly record. Accordingly, retractions may be necessary under certain circumstances, including:

• The presence of major scientific errors that invalidate the article’s conclusions, such as findings shown to be unreliable due to misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest errors (e.g., miscalculations or experimental mistakes).
• Instances of redundant publication, where findings have been published previously without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification.
• Ethical breaches, including plagiarism (appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without proper credit, including those obtained through confidential review) or inappropriate authorship practices (e.g., "guest" authorship).
• The reporting of unethical research.

To ensure that retractions are handled appropriately and in accordance with best practices and COPE guidelines, Homeostatic Medicine follows this process:

All potential retractions are thoroughly investigated by the Editorial Office, in consultation with the Editorial Board and with final approval from the Editor-in-Chief. External experts and relevant institutions, such as university authorities, may also be consulted as necessary.

19.3 Withdrawals

Accepted Articles

An Accepted Article is the unedited, uncorrected version that has been accepted for publication and made available on the Homeostatic Medicine journal website. Although it is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), it does not represent the final Version of Record and lacks complete bibliographic details. If an Accepted Article must be withdrawn - due to errors, duplicate submission, or violations of ethical standards - it may be removed and replaced with a formal withdrawal statement.

Even in these cases, bibliographic information about the withdrawn article should be retained for the scientific record, accompanied by a brief explanation of the reason for its removal.

Published Version

Homeostatic Medicine strongly discourages withdrawal of the online Version of Record, following the guidelines of the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers regarding the preservation of the scholarly record. Deletion of the online version is rare and will only be considered in exceptional circumstances, such as:

• Where there has been a violation of the research subject’s privacy.
• When errors present a significant health risk to the public if acted upon.
• When clearly defamatory statements have been made about individuals or their work.

19.4 Expressions of Concern

The editors of Homeostatic Medicine may issue an Expression of Concern if there are serious, well-founded doubts about the integrity of an article and readers should be alerted to potentially misleading content. However, Expressions of Concern should only be issued when an investigation has been inconclusive and there is substantial reason to believe the concerns are valid (see COPE case: Data manipulation and institute's internal review).
In rare cases, an Expression of Concern may be issued while an investigation is underway but expected to take a long time to conclude. In such cases, there must be strong evidence suggesting the concerns are legitimate.
Editors should be mindful that issuing an Expression of Concern can have significant reputational consequences for authors, similar to a retraction. Therefore, it is often preferable to wait for the outcome of a thorough independent investigation before making a final decision on retraction (see COPE case: Handling self-admissions of fraud).

20. Crossmark Policy

Crossmark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref designed to provide a standardized method for readers to identify the authoritative version of a publication. By displaying the Crossmark logo, Homeostatic Medicine demonstrates its commitment to maintaining the integrity of its published content and to notifying readers of any updates or changes when they occur.
The Crossmark icon informs readers of the current status of an article and offers access to its publication history and related updates.

21. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who disagree with an editorial decision may submit a formal appeal to the Editorial Office, clearly explaining the grounds for their appeal. Such cases will be handled promptly and in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

22. How to Raise a Concern

Anyone who believes that research published in Homeostatic Medicine does not comply with the journal’s ethical standards is encouraged to raise their concerns with the relevant Editor or by emailing editorialoffice@homeostmed.net.