Editorial Policies

AUTHORSHIP POLICIES

Authorship and CRediT Taxonomy

I. Introduction and Scope

This policy outlines the standards for defining authorship and contributor roles for all manuscripts submitted to Acta Medica Philippina. It adopts the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) to provide transparency regarding individual contributions to scholarly work. This policy applies to all authors, co-authors, and researchers submitting work for publication.

II. Policy Statement

Acta Medica Philippina requires all submitting authors to adhere to the following rules regarding authorship:

• Pre-Submission Resolution: All authorship issues, including the order of authors and the specific roles assigned, must be definitively resolved by the research team and all contributing authors PRIOR to manuscript submission.
• Adoption of CRediT: Authors must utilize the CRediT taxonomy to describe each contributor's specific role in the research and writing process. Additional role descriptors are as follows:
  • Co-primary - already incorporated
  • Co-senior https://journal.ppcr.org/index.php/ppcrjournal/authorshipguidelines -https://radiologybehindthescenes.substack.com/p/joint-first-authorship-versus-co-senior-authorship
  • Co- corresponding https://casrai.org/guides/co-corresponding-authors
• Final Conforme: Before the copy-editing phase, the journal will solicit a FINAL conforme from all listed authors to verify the accuracy of authorship and content. Withdrawal is allowed at this phase, but no reassignment or addition to the list of authors will be entertained. The authors may change their affiliation or titles at this stage.
• Certifications
  • Submission - only acknowledgement of submission after completion of uploading of manuscript (auto-generated)
  • Peer review - after submission of peer review (auto-generated)
  • Acceptance - will be incorporated in the workflow after peer review to be generated by the EIC and prior to forwarding to copyediting
  • Publication - no certificate will be issued; the author is informed of the availability of the article on the website
• Finality of Certification: Once the copy editor has conducted due diligence and obtained the final conforme, no further authorship changes will be entertained by the journal.
• Restrictions on Errata/Corrigenda: Post-publication changes to authorship via an erratum or corrigendum will only be considered upon the presentation of compelling proof of oversight or omissions by the co-authors who previously provided their conforme. The journal reserves the right to reject any corrigendum applied for by the authors and may decide to retract the publication from the website.

III. Procedures

• Submission Declaration: At the time of submission, the corresponding author must provide a statement detailing the contributions of each author based on the 14 CRediT roles.
• Conflict Resolution: Any disputes regarding authorship must be settled internally by the authors before the journal begins the peer-review process.
• Copy-Editing Verification: The copy editor will send the final proof to all authors, requesting a formal conforme to signify agreement with the final version of the manuscript and the author list.
• Post-Publication Requests: Requests for authorship amendments after publication must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief and must include documented evidence of an error that survived the conforme process.

IV. Responsibilities

• Editor-in-Chief: Responsible for final decisions regarding authorship disputes that escalate to the journal level and approving errata requests.
• Copy Editor: Responsible for conducting due diligence by soliciting the final conforme from all authors before publication.
• Corresponding Author: Responsible for ensuring all co-authors have agreed to the authorship list and roles prior to submission.
• Co-Authors: Responsible for reviewing proofs and providing a timely and accurate conforme.

V. Definitions

• CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy): A high-level taxonomy used to represent the roles typically played by contributors to scientific scholarly output.
• =Conforme: A formal acknowledgement or agreement provided by authors confirming their approval of the manuscript's final state.
• Erratum/Corrigendum: A notice issued to correct significant errors or omissions in a published article.

VI. Review and Revision History

• This policy will be reviewed every 2 years or as needed.

Individual Submissions

Single manuscripts are submitted individually through the Journal website for publication on a first-come-first-served basis. A corresponding author needs to be designated in the case of manuscripts with more than one author. The corresponding author receives all communications from the journal needed to complete the publication process. This person is responsible for conveying to the other authors as necessary any information related to the publication workflow.

Once submission requirements are completed (see Submission Requirements), the manuscript is sent for peer review to at least two (2) knowledgeable experts in the field of study of the article (see Peer Review policy).

Any comments from reviewers are sent back through the Corresponding Author for response and consideration. Appropriate revisions incorporating comments and/or responses to comments need to be sent back to the Journal Editorial Staff through the Journal platform. The Journal reserves the right to make the final decision to accept the responses and revisions, or to reject the submission. The corresponding author is notified in a timely manner about this decision.

Special Issues

The Journal also accepts collections of several manuscripts (minimum of 11 and maximum of 15) upon request by Institutions and/or professional groups. These are intended to be published together as a single issue at a date that an Institution may request. Requirements for each manuscript are the same as those that are individually submitted (See Submission Requirements).

A Guest Editor for this issue must be designated at the outset by the Institution. The roles and responsibilities of this person are detailed in a Conforme to be agreed with and signed by the Guest Editor. Among the responsibilities, the Guest Editor is tasked with identifying and sending out each manuscript to at least two (2) peer reviewers, sharing the comments and reviews with the Corresponding Author of each manuscript, and securing the responses and/or revisions of the manuscript. The Guest Editor then makes a recommendation to the Journal regarding the acceptance and eventual publication of the article.

The Journal Editorial Staff works closely with the Guest Editor, including helping with sending out communications to all relevant authors and reviewers through the portal.

The Journal also conducts training and familiarization in using the Journal platform (See OJS Platform) with the Institutional staff and Guest Editor/s.

A Declaration of Relationships is required from the Guest Editor. In case the Guest Editor is also an author in one or more of the manuscripts being considered for publication, he/she cannot make any editorial actions and decisions related to those manuscripts. In such instances, another Guest Editor must be designated by the Institution to work on manuscripts that the first Guest Editor is prevented from working on.

Similar to peer reviewers, any administrative and/or advisory position of the Guest Editor which may impact a decision on a submitted manuscript (e.g., Chair or Head of an institution, Training Committee member, Research Committee member, Technical adviser, Ethics adviser, etc.) is also a restriction on assignment of such Guest Editor.

A Memorandum of Agreement is signed by the Institution, which details the arrangements between the Institution and the Journal. The Journal reserves the right to make final editorial decisions on articles to be included in the Institutional issue. The Journal also reserves the right to change the publication date in case the Institution and its affiliated authors cannot complete the publication requirements in a timely manner.

Informed Consent

The author must state in their submitted manuscript that subjects had read, signed, and possess a copy of their Informed Consent Form (ICF). The ICF must have a statement that says that the subject understood that research results can be used for publication, but that all personal identification will remain confidential.

All interventional studies (clinical trials) require a statement that individual patient ICFs have been obtained.

Copies of individual ICFs are not required for submission.

In the case of non-interventional studies and case reports, a general consent form to use patient data as obtained by the institution upon patient admission is acceptable for this purpose. A statement that such consent has received institutional legal approval, however, needs to be included.

CONTENT AND TECHNICAL POLICIES

Open Access

All Acta Medica Philippina (AMP) materials are openly accessible and readily downloadable in PDF format without the need for a subscription. The Journal has no paywall.

Link to Current Issue: https://actamedicaphilippina.upm.edu.ph/index.php/acta/issue/current

Link to Issues: https://actamedicaphilippina.upm.edu.ph/index.php/acta/issue/archive

Copyright and Permission to Use

I. Introduction and Scope

This policy establishes the copyright, licensing, and permissions framework governing all content published in Acta Medica Philippina. It ensures legal clarity, protects authors’ rights, and supports ethical dissemination of scholarly work.

II. Policy Statement

A. Copyright Ownership

1. Author Copyright Retention

Authors retain full copyright over their manuscripts.

Upon acceptance, authors grant Acta Medica Philippina a non exclusive license to publish, archive, distribute, and index the work in print and digital formats.

2. Journal Publishing Rights

By submitting and subsequently accepting publication, authors grant the Journal the right to:

• Publish the article in print and online
• Deposit the article in indexing services and repositories
• Use the article for educational, promotional, and archival purposes
• Maintain the article in perpetuity within the Journal’s official records

B. Licensing Terms

1. Open Access License

All articles are published under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license unless otherwise specified.

Under CC BY 4.0, users may:

• Share — copy and redistribute the material
  Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
• Provided that proper attribution is given to the authors and the Journal.

2. Author Responsibilities Under CC BY

Authors must ensure that:

• All third party materials included in the manuscript have appropriate permissions
• Copyrighted images, tables, or figures from other sources are properly licensed or cleared
• Any restrictions on reuse are clearly disclosed in the manuscript

C. Third Party Content

Authors are responsible for securing permissions for any copyrighted material not covered under fair use or open licenses, including:

• Figures, tables, or images from previously published works
• Proprietary instruments, scales, or questionnaires
• Multimedia content

Proof of permission must be submitted with the manuscript.

D. Self Archiving & Repository Deposit

1. Author Self Archiving Rights

Authors may deposit any version of their manuscript (preprint, accepted manuscript, or published version) in:

• Institutional repositories
• Funding agency repositories
• Personal websites
• Preprint servers

2. Required Citation

All archived versions must include:

• Full citation of the published article
• DOI link to the final version in Acta Medica Philippina

E. Use of Published Content

1. Educational & Non Commercial Use

Readers may use published content for teaching, training, and scholarly purposes with proper attribution.

2. Commercial Use

Commercial reuse is permitted under CC BY 4.0 provided attribution is maintained.

Requests for commercial republication of entire issues or curated collections must be directed to the Editorial Office.

3. Overlapping Publications

The Acta Medical Philippina subscribes to the ICMJE guidelines for overlapping publication (https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/overlapping-publications.html)

F. Copyright Infringement & Ethical Compliance

The Journal follows COPE Core Practices for handling allegations of copyright infringement, including:

• Investigation of claims
• Communication with authors and complainants
• Issuance of corrections, retractions, or removal of infringing content when necessary

G. Policy Acceptance

Submission of a manuscript constitutes the authors’ acceptance of this Copyright & Licensing Policy.

H. Review and Revision History

This policy will be reviewed every 2 years or as needed.

Adoption of COPE Requirement for Ethical Approval

I. Introduction and Scope

The Acta Medica Philippina is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in medical and health science publishing. The Journal adopts and implements the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices as the foundation of its editorial, peer review, and post publication processes.

This policy outlines the ethical responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, and the Journal, and establishes procedures for handling misconduct, corrections, and disputes.

This policy applies to all submissions, editorial decisions, peer review activities, and post publication actions involving manuscripts submitted to Acta Medica Philippina.

II. Policy Statements

The Journal adheres to the following COPE aligned principles:

A. Integrity of the Scholarly Record

• Manuscripts must present accurate, honest, and reproducible findings.
• Fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data is strictly prohibited.
• All research involving human participants or animals must include appropriate ethical approvals.

B. Authorship and Contribution Transparency

• Authorship must follow the CRediT taxonomy.
• All authorship issues must be resolved prior to submission.
• The Journal will not mediate authorship disputes post submission unless compelling evidence of oversight or omission is provided.

C. Conflicts of Interest

• Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose all financial, institutional, or personal conflicts.
• Undisclosed conflicts may lead to rejection, correction, or retraction.

D. Peer Review Ethics

• The Journal uses a single blind review system: reviewers remain anonymous; authors are identifiable.
• Reviewers must:
  • Maintain confidentiality
  • Provide objective, evidence based evaluations
  • =Avoid personal bias
  • Decline reviews when conflicts exist

E. Editorial Independence

• Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit, relevance, and ethical compliance.
• Editors must avoid conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when necessary.

F. Data Sharing and Transparency

• Authors must provide underlying data when requested.
• Clinical trials must include registration numbers.
• Images, figures, and graphs must not be manipulated in ways that distort meaning.

G. Ethical Oversight

The Journal follows COPE flowcharts for handling:

• Plagiarism
• Duplicate publication
• Data fabrication/falsification
• Authorship disputes
• Undisclosed conflicts
• Ethical violations in human/animal research

H. Policy Acceptance

Submission of a manuscript constitutes acceptance of this Ethical Guidelines Policy and agreement to abide by COPE aligned standards.

III. Procedures

Procedure Step 1: Misconduct Handling Procedures

a. Initial Assessment

• Allegations of misconduct are reviewed by the Editor in Chief and the Ethics Committee.
• The Journal may request explanations, raw data, or institutional documentation.

b. Investigation

Investigations follow COPE guidelines and may involve:

• =Authors
• Reviewers
• Institutions
• Funding agencies

c. Outcomes

Depending on severity, actions may include:

• Rejection of manuscript
• Correction (erratum/corrigendum)
• Expression of concern
• Retraction
• Notification to institutions or regulatory bodies

All outcomes are documented for indexing compliance.

Procedure Step 2: Post Publication Corrections

Corrections follow COPE standards:

• Erratum — publisher error
• Corrigendum — author error
• Retraction — severe ethical breach
• Addendum — additional clarifications
• Expression of Concern — unresolved or ongoing investigations

IV. Responsibilities

A. Authors

• Ensure accuracy and integrity of data
• Disclose conflicts
• Obtain ethical approvals
• Follow CRediT authorship roles
• Respond to reviewer comments respectfully and completely

B. Reviewers

• Maintain confidentiality
• Provide unbiased, constructive feedback
• Declare conflicts
• Refrain from using manuscript content for personal advantage

C. Editors

• Ensure fair, timely decisions
• Maintain confidentiality
• Follow COPE flowcharts for misconduct
• Recuse themselves when conflicts exist

E. Journal

• Maintain transparent editorial processes
• Archive all decisions and communications
• Uphold COPE Core Practices
• Ensure compliance with indexing and ethical standards

VI. Review and Revision History

This policy will be reviewed every 2 years or as needed.

Adoption of ICMJE on the Use of AI

I. Introduction and Scope

1. Purpose

This policy defines the responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI) and AI assisted technologies in the editorial, peer review, and publication processes of ACTA Medica Philippina (AMP), aligned with:

• ICMJE Recommendations, including “Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing”
• AI policies of leading medical journals (e.g., NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, BMJ, Nature Medicine)
• Relevant University of the Philippines Manila (UP Manila) policies on academic integrity, research ethics, data privacy, and responsible use of digital tools.

2. Scope

This policy applies to:

• Authors (including students, trainees, and staff affiliated with UP Manila and other institutions)
• Editors and editorial office staff
• Peer reviewers
• Publishers and journal owners of AMP

It covers all AI assisted technologies (e.g., large language models, chatbots, code assistants, image generators, statistical or decision support tools) used in:

• Manuscript conception, drafting, analysis, and revision
• Peer review and editorial decision making
• Production, layout, and post publication communication.

II. Policy Statement

Acta Medica Philippina views artificial intelligence as a valuable tool in helping move scientific investigation forward, in making editorial processes efficient and in improving the human condition. It is important that this journal ensures that its utilization conforms to international norms of integrity in scientific endeavors.

Core principles

AMP adopts the following principles, consistent with ICMJE and top medical journals:

1. Human responsibility and accountability

• Humans remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and ethical conduct of all work submitted or processed, regardless of AI use.

2. AI is not an author

• AI tools cannot meet authorship criteria (e.g., accountability, ability to respond to critiques, responsibility for data).
• AI and AI assisted tools must not be listed as authors or co authors in any AMP publication.

3. Transparency and disclosure

• All substantial use of AI in manuscript preparation, analysis, or images must be openly disclosed in the manuscript and cover letter, including the tool name, version (if known), and specific purpose.

4. Confidentiality and data protection

• Confidential or sensitive content (e.g., unpublished manuscripts, peer review reports, identifiable patient data) must not be uploaded to AI tools where confidentiality, data storage, or reuse cannot be assured.
• Use of AI must comply with UP Manila, Philippine data privacy laws, and institutional ethics policies.

5. Avoidance of plagiarism and inappropriate attribution

• Authors must ensure that AI generated text, images, or code do not result in plagiarism or unacknowledged use of copyrighted material.
• AI outputs cannot be cited as primary sources; underlying original sources must be identified and cited.

6. Bias, fairness, and scientific integrity

• AI tools may embed biases; authors, reviewers, and editors must critically appraise AI assisted outputs and avoid discriminatory or misleading content.
• AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, or manipulate data, images, or results.

III. Procedures

1. Procedure Step 1: Compliance by authors:

a. Permitted uses (with disclosure)

Authors may use AI tools for:

• Language support: grammar, spelling, and stylistic editing.
• Structural assistance: suggesting headings, improving clarity, or summarizing sections.
  • Statistical analysis
• Technical support: code debugging, statistical syntax assistance, or figure formatting (without altering underlying data).
• Administrative tasks: generating cover letters or checklists, provided authors verify accuracy.

All such uses must be:

• Disclosed in the manuscript (e.g., Methods or Acknowledgments) and in the cover letter, or in the submission portal, including:
  • Tool name (e.g., “Copilot”),
  • Type of use (e.g., “language editing of the Discussion section”),
  • Statement that authors reviewed and verified all AI assisted content.

Example disclosure statement:
“We used [AI tool name] for language editing of the Introduction and Discussion. All content was reviewed and verified by the authors, who take full responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of the manuscript.”

b. Prohibited uses

Authors must not:

• Use AI to generate, alter, or fabricate data or images (e.g., clinical photographs, radiologic images, histopathology) in ways that misrepresent reality.
• Upload identifiable patient data, confidential institutional records, or proprietary datasets to public AI tools.
• Use AI to circumvent academic integrity, including ghost writing entire manuscripts or responses to reviewers.
• Rely on AI generated references without verifying their existence, accuracy, and relevance.
• Use AI to generate ethical approval statements, consent forms, or regulatory documents without institutional oversight.

c. Authorship and acknowledgments

• AI tools cannot be authors.
• Substantial AI assistance (beyond routine spelling/grammar) should be acknowledged in the manuscript, but not as an author or contributor with responsibility.

2. Procedure Step 2: Compliance by peer reviewers

• Must not upload confidential manuscripts, figures, or supplementary files to AI tools where data may be stored, reused, or shared.
• May use AI for generic language editing of their own review text, but not for content analysis that involves copying substantial parts of the manuscript into the tool.
• Must ensure that their reviews remain independent, critical, and human driven, and that AI does not introduce bias or breach confidentiality.
• Must not use AI to generate template reviews that lack specific engagement with the manuscript.

If a reviewer uses AI for minor language editing of their comments, this does not require formal disclosure to AMP, but reviewers remain responsible for the content and must ensure no confidential manuscript text is processed by AI.

3. Procedure Step 3: Compliance by Editorial Board and Staff

Use of AI by editors and the journal

AMP editors and editorial staff:

• Must not upload full manuscripts, peer review reports, or confidential correspondence to AI tools where confidentiality and data handling are unclear or incompatible with UP Manila and AMP policies.
• May use AI tools for:
  • Administrative support: triaging submissions, generating reminder emails, or drafting generic communication templates (which must be reviewed by staff).
  • Language editing of editorial content (e.g., editorials, announcements), with human verification.
• Must ensure that any AI assisted decision support (e.g., plagiarism screening, statistical checks) is supplementary and not a substitute for human editorial judgment.
• Must maintain editorial independence and integrity, ensuring AI does not influence decisions based on non scientific factors (e.g., topic popularity, institution, or geography).

AMP will:

• Publish this AI policy on its website and in the “Instructions for Authors.”
• Periodically review and update the policy in line with ICMJE updates, leading journal practices, UP Manila regulations, and Philippine law.

4. Procedure Step 4: Compliance with UP Manila and Philippine regulations

All AI use in AMP related work must comply with:

• UP Manila policies on academic integrity, responsible use of digital tools, and research ethics (including IRB/REC requirements).
• Philippine Data Privacy Act and institutional data privacy policies, especially for patient information and student/employee data.
• Institutional policies on cybersecurity, information systems, and digital platforms.

Where UP Manila or national regulations are more restrictive than this policy, the more stringent standard applies.

IV. Responsibilities

• EIC and EdBoard: Crafts and declares the policies with the approval of the editorial board
• Editorial Staff in Charge of Policy: Ensures implementation of policies
• Authors and Peer Reviewers: Monitors compliance with policies

Notes on enforcement

Misconduct, corrections, and sanctions

Failure to appropriately disclose or responsibly use AI may be considered research or publication misconduct, including but not limited to:

• Nondisclosure of substantial AI use in manuscript preparation.
• Use of AI to fabricate or falsify data, images, or references.
• Breach of confidentiality by uploading manuscripts or sensitive data to AI tools.
• Plagiarism or copyright infringement arising from AI generated content.

AMP may respond with:

• Rejection of manuscripts under review.
• Retraction or correction of published articles.
• Notification of institutional authorities (e.g., UP Manila, other affiliated institutions).
• Restriction of future submissions or reviewer/editor roles for individuals involved.

Implementation and author instructions

AMP will integrate this policy into:

• Instructions for Authors:
  • Mandatory AI disclosure section in the cover letter.
  • Recommended wording for AI use statements in the manuscript.
• Submission system:
  • Checkboxes or fields requiring authors to declare whether AI was used and in what capacity.
• Reviewer and editor guidelines:
  • Training materials on confidentiality, responsible AI use, and recognition of AI related misconduct.

AMP encourages authors, reviewers, and editors to:

• Use AI critically and conservatively, prioritizing scientific rigor and ethical standards.
• Seek guidance from institutional ethics committees or UP Manila offices when uncertain about AI use in research or publishing.

V. Definitions

• Artificial Intelligence (AI): Computational systems that perform tasks typically requiring human intelligence, including generative models (text, image, audio), predictive analytics, and decision support tools.
• AI assisted technologies: Tools such as large language models (LLMs), chatbots (e.g., Copilot type systems), image generators, code assistants, and automated editing tools.
• Generative AI: AI that produces new text, images, code, or other content based on training data.
• Sensitive data: Any information that can identify individuals or institutions, including patient data, student records, confidential manuscripts, peer review reports, and proprietary datasets.

VI. Review and Revision History

This policy will be reviewed every 2 years or as needed.

Duplicate and Overlapping Publication

Acta Medica Philippina (the Journal) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. Consistent with the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Journal enforces strict policies regarding concurrent and duplicate submissions, and redundant (overlapping) publication.

1. Concurrent Submissions

Authors must not submit the same manuscript, in the same or different languages, simultaneously to more than one journal. Concurrent submission is considered an unethical practice as it:

• Wastes the time of editors and peer reviewers.
• May result in multiple journals unknowingly proceeding toward publication of the same work.
• Can artificially inflate citation counts and reviews.
• May indicate potential paper mill activity.

Any manuscript found to be under concurrent consideration by another journal will be immediately rejected.

2. Duplicate and Redundant Publication

The Journal defines redundant or duplicate publication as the publication (or attempted publication) of whole or substantial parts of work, data, or analysis that have already been published or submitted elsewhere, without transparent declaration and referencing.

2.1 Author Responsibilities

• Verification of Originality: Authors must verify that their manuscript is original and has not been published elsewhere.
• Disclosure: Upon submission, authors must disclose any related manuscripts that are in preparation, under consideration, or already published by any of the authors.
• Citing Previous Work: If a manuscript contains data or text that has been previously published, authors must explicitly cite the original work and clarify how the current submission overlaps with or adds to the previous publication.

2.2 Salami Slicing (Salami Publication)

"Salami slicing" refers to the practice of dividing data or research findings into their smallest publishable units to increase the total number of publications. This practice is discouraged because it:

• Reduces the academic impact of individual publications.
• Can artificially skew findings in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

In cases where minor redundancy is detected, the Journal may require a correction or a clearer citation of the earlier data. Substantial overlap without transparency may lead to rejection or retraction.

3. Acceptable Overlapping Publications

In accordance with ICMJE guidelines, certain types of overlapping publications may be acceptable if they meet specific criteria for transparency and necessity:

• Translations: Publication of a translation of a previously published article may be considered if the editors of both journals agree and the original source is clearly credited.
• Secondary Publications: Manuscripts that target different audiences (e.g., clinical guidelines translated for a local context) may be acceptable provided the original publication is cited, and permissions are secured.
• Preliminary Reports: Brief reports or abstracts presented at scientific meetings are generally not considered prior publication, but must be disclosed at the time of submission.

4. Editorial Review and Investigation

The Journal employs various measures to detect and handle suspected misconduct:

• Screening: Manuscripts may be compared against existing literature using specialized software to identify significant overlap in text or data.
• Investigation: If suspected redundancy or concurrent submission is identified, the Journal will follow the established COPE flowcharts for investigation.
• Communication: Editors may share information regarding suspected misconduct with Editors-in-Chief of other involved journals, as per COPE guidelines.

5. Sanctions and Actions

Based on the nature and extent of the overlap, the Journal may take the following actions:

• Rejection: Immediate rejection of a submitted manuscript if deliberate attempts to recycle material are found.
• Correction: For minor overlaps, a statement of duplicate publication or a correction may be published.
• Expression of Concern: In cases where an investigation is ongoing but evidence of potential redundancy is significant.
• Retraction: Retraction of the published article if it is found to be redundant and lacks sufficient new material.
• Notification: Reporting the misconduct to the authors' superiors or the individuals responsible for research governance at their institution.

Transparency in Journal Metrics and Article Processing Timelines

I. Introduction and Scope

Acta Medica Philippina is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in medical publishing. As stated in our COPE aligned policies, “The Journal adopts and implements the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices as the foundation of its editorial, peer review, and post publication processes.”

This policy establishes the Journal’s commitment to transparent reporting of journal metrics, including acceptance rates, review durations, publication timelines, and indexing performance. It also outlines procedures for public disclosure of article processing timelines, ensuring authors, reviewers, and readers have clear expectations of editorial workflow efficiency.

This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted to Acta Medica Philippina and governs all editorial stages from submission to post publication.

II. Policy Statement

A. Commitment to Transparency

The Journal shall publicly disclose key performance indicators (KPIs) related to editorial operations, including but not limited to:

• Median time from submission to first decision
• Median time for peer review
• Median time from acceptance to publication
• Annual acceptance and rejection rates
• Reviewer turnaround time
• Frequency of revisions per manuscript
• Annual publication volume
• Top cited articles and reviewer recognition metrics

B. Alignment with COPE Core Practices

Transparency in metrics is part of the Journal’s ethical responsibility. As stated in our COPE policy, “All editorial actions follow COPE Core Practices, ensuring fairness, transparency, and integrity.”

C. Public Availability

All journal metrics and timelines shall be:

• Published annually on the Journal website
• Included in the Journal’s Annual Editorial Report
• Presented during editorial board meetings
• Shared with authors upon request

D. Accuracy and Verification

All reported metrics must be:

• Derived from validated editorial tracking systems
• Reviewed by the Editor in Chief and Managing Editor
• Updated at least once per calendar year

III. Procedures

Procedure Step 1: Collection of Editorial Metrics

The Managing Editor shall compile data from the manuscript tracking system, including:

• Submission dates
• Reviewer assignment dates
• Reviewer completion dates
• Editorial decision dates
• Acceptance and publication dates

These steps mirror the Journal’s documented workflow (e.g., “Procedure Step 1: The manuscript is uploaded… Procedure Step 2: The submission is reviewed…”).

Procedure Step 2: Calculation of Key Indicators

Metrics shall be calculated as follows:

• Submission to First Decision: Median number of days from submission to initial editorial decision
• Peer Review Duration: Median number of days from reviewer assignment to receipt of reviewer reports
• Revision Cycle Duration: Median number of days authors take to submit revisions
• Acceptance to Publication: Median number of days from acceptance to online publication

Procedure Step 3: Publication of Metrics

Metrics shall be published:

• On the Journal website under “Journal Statistics”
• In the Annual Editorial Report
• In the “Instructions for Authors” section
• During anniversary or recognition events

Procedure Step 4: Disclosure of Article Processing Timelines

Authors shall be informed of expected timelines at submission, including:

• Estimated time to first decision
• Estimated time for revisions
• Estimated time to publication

Procedure Step 5: Annual Review

The Editorial Board shall review metrics annually to:

• Identify workflow bottlenecks
• Improve reviewer recruitment
• Enhance editorial efficiency
• Strengthen transparency and accountability

IV. Responsibilities

• A. Editor-in-chief:
  • Ensures accuracy and integrity of reported metrics
  • Approves annual transparency reports
  • Oversees compliance with COPE standards
• B. Managing Editor:
  • Collects and validates data
  • Prepares annual metrics reports
  • Updates website and author guidelines
• C. Associate Editor:
  • Ensure timely reviewer assignment
  • Monitor reviewer performance
  • Support data verification
• D. Peer Reviewers:
  • Uphold timely and ethical review practices
  • Contribute to accurate reporting of review timelines
• E. Journal:
  • Maintain transparent editorial processes
  • Archive all decisions and communications
  • Ensure compliance with COPE Core Practices

V. Review and Revision History

• This policy will be reviewed every 2 years or as needed.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is defined by the Journal as the presentation of a piece of work that has been copied in whole or in part from the work of another individual or group of individuals (for example, someone else’s work, partly or in entirety, published or unpublished books, periodicals, internet sites, etc.) without proper documentation and/or acknowledgement.

Even if articles and/or work are cited, but substantial portions are incorporated, and/or very little original information is provided, it can still be considered plagiarism. Infrequent and occasional self-citation may be allowed if found appropriate (e.g., for previously published study procedures and/or data).

The Journal uses software and editorial scrutiny to detect possible plagiarism.

Author(s) may be given the opportunity to make revisions and/or respond to clarification regarding instances of possible plagiarism.

Article Withdrawal, Retractions, and Corrections

Article withdrawal refers to a decision by authors to remove submitted manuscripts from further consideration in the journal. This can be done at any time during the publication workflow.

The withdrawal request must be in writing and signed by all authors. Given the time and resources invested in the peer-review process, article withdrawal must be accompanied by a strong justification for the same.

The Journal reserves the right to blacklist author(s) who request article withdrawal with no valid reason.

Article correction refers to the issuance of a correction notice for published articles that contain errors or omissions that do not alter a paper’s scientific integrity. Authors may submit requests for corrections in writing to the journal Editorial Office. Requests for corrections shall be decided by the Editor-in-Chief considering relevant ICMJE recommendations (http://icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/corrections-and-version-control.html). Corrections will be published under erratum in a later issue of the journal.

Article retraction pertains to a mechanism for correcting the literature in relation to a published article that has serious flaws or erroneous content. Acta Medica Philippina shall consider and manage retractions consistent with the COPE retraction guidelines (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4). Authors are given the opportunity to respond to claims of fraud or otherwise anomalous activity in connection with the manuscript sent by a reader.

Articles may be retracted upon approval of a submitted signed statement from all the article authors. A notice of retraction, including the reasons for the retraction, will be published. The original article will then be marked as retracted.

Appeals, Complaints, Disputes

A manuscript can be rejected for publication in Acta Medica Philippina. It can be rejected outright because it is not in a subject area that the Journal publishes (see About the Journal). Or the authors have failed to comply with submission requirements in a timely manner (see Submission Requirements). Failure to respond in an appropriate and timely manner to reviewer comments can also be a reason for rejection (see Author Responses and Revisions). Finally, failure to participate and/or approve the article galley in a timely manner can be a reason for rejection.

In such cases, an appeal, complaint, or dispute can be raised. These are reviewed according to the Editorial Policies shared on this website. Additionally, the COPE Guidelines can be used to evaluate such appeals, complaints, or disputes. Visit https://publicationethics.org.

Communication related to rejected manuscripts should be submitted formally to the Editor-in-Chief, either as a message in the manuscript document tracking using the submission portal or directly to the Editor-in-Chief: acta_eic.upmanila@up.edu.ph.

Specific response(s) to the issue raised (e.g., the reason for manuscript rejection) should be stated as part of the appeal. Supporting documents can be provided as appropriate (e.g., timeliness of author responses).

The Journal will acknowledge receipt of this communication. An investigation of the matter will be conducted. As needed, particularly if it involves Journal Editorial policies, the Editorial Board will also be consulted.

The Journal endeavors to address this within a two (2) week period. In case extra time is needed (e.g., to gather more evidence), a notification of the need to extend the time will be sent.

Once a decision is reached, this will be shared with the complainant. These decisions are held final.

Issuance of Official Documentation and Certifications

I. Purpose and Scope

This policy standardizes the criteria, workflow, and ethical boundaries for issuing official documentation and certifications by Acta Medica Philippina. It applies to all submitted manuscripts, accepted articles, published works, and peer review engagements.

The objective of this policy is to maintain institutional transparency, align with international scholarly publishing standards—including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)—and comply with the directives of the UP Manila Office of Research Integrity (UPM ORI).

II. Policy Statements by Certificate Category

1. Acknowledgment of Manuscript Submission

Issuance Mechanism: Automatically generated by the journal's official submission platform (Open Journal Systems / OJS) immediately upon complete upload of the manuscript and required author declarations.

Editorial Status: Serves as confirmation that the manuscript has entered the initial editorial assessment stage. It does not guarantee peer review or acceptance.

Included Information:

• Manuscript ID (Auto-generated system reference).
• Complete Title of the Submitted Manuscript.
• Corresponding Author and Co-author names.
• Date of Submission and Direct Portal Dashboard URL.

Formality: Manual certificates of submission are not required for standard tracking, as the automated system notification and dashboard URL serve as official receipt.

2. Certificate of Acceptance for Publication

Issuance Criteria: Issued only after a manuscript has successfully completed double-blind peer review, all reviewer and editor revisions have been satisfactorily addressed, and the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) has rendered a formal decision of acceptance prior to copyediting.

Tenure and Administrative Fast-Tracking: Manuscripts accepted and scheduled for future thematic or regular issues may be facilitated for early publication ahead of the chronological order of completion of the editorial process if required for institutional academic tenure, faculty reclassification, or promotion.

Included Information:

• Full Title of the Accepted Article.
• Complete Author List as approved in the author signature forms.
• Formal Date of Acceptance.
• Statement of Journal Indexing (PubMed Central, Scopus, Google Scholar, ACI, WPRIM, Herdin Plus). Official Digital Signature of the Editor-in-Chief.

Prohibition: No Certificate of Acceptance shall be issued while a manuscript is still undergoing peer review or editorial evaluation.

3. Certificate of Publication

Primary Proof: The appearance of the published article on the official Acta Medica Philippina website, complete with Volume/Issue designation, constitutes the primary, self-authenticating proof of publication.

Information Included with the Primary Proof:

• Complete Article Title and Full Author List.
• Online Publication Date and Issue/Volume/Page details or URL link.
• Electronic ISSN (eISSN 2094-9278) and indexing details.

Issuance Criteria: No additional Official Certificates of Publication will be issued to requesting parties, and they will be directed to submit the Primary Proof to comply with formal institutional verification for academic promotions, research grants, or administrative clearances.

4. Peer Reviewer Certificate

Confidentiality and COPE Ethics: In strict accordance with COPE ethical guidelines and UPM ORI directives, peer review at Acta Medica Philippina operates under a closed review system. The process is strictly confidential.

Strict Non-Disclosure Restrictions::

• Certificates of Peer Review shall not disclose manuscript titles, manuscript IDs, author names, or copies of reviewed papers.
• The journal will not furnish manuscript titles or review copies to reviewers or their home institutions.

Included Information:

• Reviewer's Full Name and Academic Degrees as provided in their information card.
• Aggregate number of completed manuscript reviews and/or date/period of completed reviews.
• Journal Name, ISSN, and UP Manila Publisher Details.
• Official Signature of the Editor-in-Chief.

Official Review Invitations: The standard invitation email generated by the submission portal serves as the official invitation for peer review. The journal does not issue separate customized engagement letters certifying specific duration or short-term consultancy periods. Certifications are based solely on completed review activity.

III. Summary Matrix of Certificate Standards

Administrative Responsibilities

• Editor-in-Chief: Exercises final authority over the authorization and issuance of Certificates of Acceptance and Peer Reviewer Certifications.
• Managing Editor and Editorial Staff: Responsible for verifying completion of submission requirements, confirming reviewer task completions, and generating standard certified forms.
• Authors and Peer Reviewers: Responsible for submitting formal requests through official editorial channels and ensuring all personal credentials match official records.

Publication Processing Fees

The Journal charges processing fees to evaluate manuscript submissions from outside the Philippines. No evaluation for compliance with Journal requirements and progress of the submission will take place until complete payment is received by the Journal. Manuscripts considered inappropriate at the outset for publication by the Journal do not need to pay the processing fee.

Payment of fees does not guarantee publication.

All submissions need to comply with the requirements of the Journal as part of the quality assurance and due diligence needed to ensure transparency, integrity, and ethical conduct of scientific publications. These include the documentary requirements and undergoing peer review. Regardless of payment, manuscripts will also need to satisfy editorial decisions.

Submissions from Outside the Philippines

Material/s originating from outside of the Philippines are covered in this requirement. These include studies done and/or involving patients coming from outside of the Philippines. This applies as well to manuscripts that include some authors connected with Philippine institutions.

• For individual manuscripts, a fee of USD 250.00 needs to be paid before any evaluation can be made. Bank transfer details will be provided upon request. Author(s) will still need to comply with submission requirements as detailed.
• For several manuscripts that are intended to be published together in a single issue (Institutional Issues), host institutions will need to pay USD 5,000.00. A minimum of 11 and a maximum of 15 manuscripts are recommended for these issues. Bank details will be provided upon request.

Submissions from the Philippines

Individual submissions from authors connected with Philippine public or private learning institutions currently do not need to pay the processing fee.

Individual submissions from authors connected with commercial institutions (e.g., pharmaceutical and/or marketing companies) will need to pay PhP 30,000.00. The commercial use of any published article is covered under the Section on License.

Institutional Issues (a compilation of 11-15 articles in a single issue) will require payment of a processing fee. This is set at PhP 250,000.00. Bank details will be provided upon request. No processing of manuscripts included in such institutional issues will be done prior to full payment of the processing fees.

Any study that has received institutional assistance for publication (e.g., from a sponsoring agency) will need to pay a processing fee that is at least 50% of the publication assistance received; subject to the provisions of the sponsoring agency. All submissions require an attestation of whether publication assistance was received. The Journal can provide an Acknowledgement or Official Receipt in the name of the sponsoring agency for such fees.

Privacy Statement

The names and contact details provided to the journal submission portal will be used exclusively for getting in touch with the Corresponding Author concerning the submission. In line with the journal peer review policy, authors may be invited to participate in peer review of future submitted manuscripts.

Acceptance of manuscripts will not be affected by acceptance to do peer review.

All contact details are not made available to external parties. The contact details of the Corresponding Author in the publication are included to allow readers to get in touch with the authors for clarifications and other purposes which may be related to the article.