Editorial Policies

The Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) is committed to upholding high standards of editorial integrity, publication ethics, transparency, and scholarly publishing practice. GMJ's editorial policies are aligned with internationally recognised frameworks developed by leading organisations in scientific publishing, biomedical research ethics, and open scholarship, including the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing jointly developed by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME.

This page should be read in conjunction with GMJ's dedicated policy pages: Policies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed Consent · Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy · Peer Review Policy · Advertising Policy · Plagiarism Policy · Open Access Policy · Archiving Policy · Preprint Policy · AI Policy · Corrections, Retractions & Expressions of Concern · Complaints & Appeals · Price Policy.

Standards Compliance at a Glance

Domain	Standard / Body	Status
Manuscript preparation	ICMJE Recommendations	Applied / referenced
Publication ethics	COPE Core Practices	Applied / referenced
Editorial standards	CSE Recommendations, EASE Handbook, WAME Policies	Applied / referenced
Open access transparency	DOAJ / COPE / OASPA / WAME Joint Principles	Applied / referenced
Reporting guidelines	EQUATOR Network (CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE, CARE, ARRIVE, SPIRIT, TRIPOD)	Required where applicable
Research ethics	Declaration of Helsinki, CIOMS, WHO	Required where applicable
Persistent identifiers	Crossref DOI (10.66636), ORCID	Active / in use
Plagiarism screening	Crossref Similarity Check (iThenticate)	Used in editorial screening
Long-term preservation	PKP PN, LOCKSS, CLOCKSS	Active / in use
Open licensing	Creative Commons CC BY 4.0	Standard journal licence
Preprint policy	ICMJE / medRxiv / bioRxiv	Policy published
Anti-predatory verification	Think. Check. Submit.	Referenced resource
Citation & metadata standards	NLM Citation Style, NISO JATS	Applied / referenced

Foundational Editorial Frameworks

GMJ's editorial policies are explicitly informed by the following internationally recognised organisations and standards:

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) — Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. The ICMJE Recommendations are the de facto standard for biomedical manuscript preparation. GMJ implements ICMJE authorship criteria, the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form, and clinical trial registration requirements.
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) — Core Practices and case-by-case guidance for editors. GMJ follows COPE's flowcharts for handling authorship disputes, data fabrication, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and misconduct allegations.
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) — GMJ aligns with WAME's policies on editorial independence, the WAME Recommendations on Predatory Journals, and WAME's position statements on AI-generated content and the integrity of the medical literature.
European Association of Science Editors (EASE) — The EASE Handbook provides practical guidance on language, structure, and editorial conventions, with particular attention to non-native English authors — a population GMJ actively supports.
Council of Science Editors (CSE) — Recommendations for Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications (formerly the CSE White Paper on Publication Ethics). GMJ adopts CSE's recommendations on the roles and responsibilities of editors, authors, reviewers, sponsors, and publishers, including its 2023–2024 updates on AI use and supplements/special series.
Think. Check. Submit. — Cross-industry checklist (jointly endorsed by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME, STM, ALPSP, ISSN, UKSG and others) helping authors verify trusted journals. GMJ encourages authors to use this checklist before submitting anywhere.
WHO Manual for Editors of Health Science Journals — World Health Organization (Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean) guidance for editors of health science journals (2009, ISBN 978-92-9021-688-9).

Reporting Standards and Methodological Frameworks

GMJ requires authors to follow internationally accepted reporting guidelines hosted by the EQUATOR Network. Authors should use the reporting guideline appropriate to the study design, as specified in GMJ's Author Guidelines:

EQUATOR Network — Comprehensive resource for reporting guidelines across study types.
CONSORT — for randomised controlled trials.
PRISMA — for systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
STROBE — for observational studies in epidemiology.
CARE — for case reports.
ARRIVE — for animal research.
SPIRIT — for clinical trial protocols.
TRIPOD — for prediction model studies.
STARD — for diagnostic accuracy studies.
SQUIRE — for quality improvement studies.
COREQ — for qualitative research.

Research Ethics

GMJ requires research involving humans or animals to comply with applicable ethical, legal, institutional, and recognised international standards:

Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2024 revision) — Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. A principal ethical framework for medical research involving human participants.
CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines — for health-related research involving humans, by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences in collaboration with WHO.
WHO Research Ethics Review Committee Standards — Operational guidelines for ethics review.
ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP — Interventional clinical trials must satisfy applicable ICMJE registration requirements in an accepted publicly accessible registry; prospective registration before enrolment of the first participant is expected.

For full details, see Policies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed Consent.

Open Access and Open Scholarship

GMJ is a fully open-access journal published under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Authors retain full copyright. Our open-access practices align with:

Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing — jointly developed by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME. A major transparency and best-practice framework for scholarly journals.
Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) — Code of Conduct for open-access publishers.
Creative Commons — Standard licensing framework for open scholarship.
ORCID — All authors are required to provide an ORCID iD for unambiguous identification.
Crossref — GMJ is a Crossref member (DOI prefix 10.66636). Published scholarly content is assigned a persistent DOI as applicable; current Crossref registrations use prefix 10.66636.
Crossref Similarity Check (powered by iThenticate) — Used as an editorial similarity-screening tool where applicable; similarity reports are interpreted in context and do not by themselves establish plagiarism.
GMJ Preprint Policy — GMJ accepts manuscripts previously posted on recognised preprint servers (medRxiv, bioRxiv, Preprints.org, OSF Preprints, SSRN, Research Square). Preprint posting does not constitute prior publication, consistent with ICMJE recommendations. Read the full Preprint Policy →
Crossmark — Where implemented for an item, provides an additional mechanism for communicating corrections, retractions, and Version-of-Record updates.
CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) — NISO/ANSI standard Z39.104-2022 for transparent author contribution attribution.

Citation, Metadata, and Technical Standards

NLM Citation Style — National Library of Medicine reference style (Vancouver/ICMJE) used throughout GMJ for biomedical citations.
NISO JATS (Journal Article Tag Suite) — ANSI/NISO Z39.96 standard for structured XML article markup and scholarly-content interoperability; used where supported by GMJ's production workflow.
NISO Standards — National Information Standards Organization, including KBART for knowledge bases and STS for standards documents.

Preservation and Long-term Access

PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) — PKP PN plugin enabled in GMJ's OJS installation; preservation remains subject to PKP PN eligibility, ingest, and preservation status.
OAI-PMH — Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, enabling indexing services to access GMJ metadata.
LOCKSS — Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe distributed preservation framework.
CLOCKSS — CLOCKSS archiving is enabled in GMJ OJS settings; preservation and triggered access are subject to the network’s applicable participation and preservation procedures.

Indexing and Discoverability

Discovery, repository deposit, catalogue listing, directory inclusion, and formal citation-index coverage are distinct statuses. GMJ therefore maintains one authoritative Indexing & Discoverability page for current, verifiable information. As of September 2026, Web of Science journal evaluation and Scopus application/evaluation are in progress; these processes do not constitute current inclusion in the Web of Science Core Collection or Scopus.

Publication Schedule

Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) publishes four regular issues per year. Articles may be published online following completion of the editorial, peer-review, and production processes and subsequently assigned to an issue. GMJ may also publish supplements and special issues where appropriate. Any material change to the regular publication schedule will be communicated transparently through the journal website.

Core Editorial Principles

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made on the basis of scientific merit and ethical standards alone, free from commercial, political, or institutional pressure. The Editor-in-Chief and editorial board operate independently of the publisher, the Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG).

Peer Review Integrity

Research manuscripts that pass initial editorial screening undergo double-anonymised peer review, normally by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are screened for conflicts of interest and bound by confidentiality. The peer review process follows ICMJE and COPE guidelines. Decision criteria and the appeals process are publicly described in the journal's policies. For full details, see Peer Review Policy.

Authorship and Contributorship

GMJ applies the ICMJE four-criterion definition of authorship. All authors must (1) make substantial contributions to the conception, design, data acquisition, or analysis; (2) draft or critically revise the manuscript; (3) approve the final version; and (4) agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Contributorship statements using the CRediT taxonomy (NISO Z39.104-2022) are required where applicable under the Author Guidelines.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

All authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, professional, or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the work. Disclosures are submitted using the ICMJE Disclosure of Interest Form and published with each article. For full details, see Policies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed Consent.

Research Integrity and Misconduct

Definitions of Research Misconduct

GMJ defines research misconduct as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism (FFP) in proposing, performing, reviewing, or reporting research. Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

Fabrication: Making up data, results, or other research records and reporting them as genuine.
Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, or data, or changing or omitting data or results, such that the research is not accurately represented.
Plagiarism: Appropriating another person's ideas, processes, results, text, images, or other creative work without giving appropriate credit, including self-plagiarism (undisclosed text recycling).

Additional prohibited practices include:

Image manipulation: Altering images in ways that misrepresent the data (e.g., selective cropping, contrast adjustment, splicing, or duplication of bands, cells, or fields) without disclosure and justification.
Duplicate or redundant publication: Submitting or publishing substantially the same work in more than one journal without disclosure, cross-referencing, and justification.
Citation manipulation: Artificially inflating citations to a particular journal, author, or article.
Peer-review manipulation: Suggesting fabricated reviewers, interfering with the peer-review process, or impersonating reviewers.
Authorship misconduct: Gift, guest, or ghost authorship; failure to meet ICMJE authorship criteria; or exclusion of individuals who meet authorship criteria.
Failure to disclose: Concealment of competing interests, ethics committee decisions, or data that contradict the manuscript's conclusions.

Plagiarism Detection and Prevention

All manuscripts are screened for textual similarity using Crossref Similarity Check / iThenticate or Turnitin at the time of initial submission. Screening may be repeated after major revision if warranted. There is no single fixed percentage threshold that automatically defines plagiarism; the editorial team evaluates similarity reports in context, considering the nature, extent, and location of overlapping text. Matching text in the Methods section that describes standard procedures may be acceptable when properly attributed. Unattributed copying of results, discussion, or conclusions from another work is considered plagiarism regardless of the overlap percentage. Self-plagiarism (text recycling) must be disclosed by authors at submission; undisclosed text recycling is treated as misconduct.

Image and Data Integrity

Images submitted with manuscripts must not be manipulated in ways that could mislead:

Any adjustments to brightness, contrast, or colour balance must be applied uniformly to the entire image, not selectively to specific regions.
Grouping of images from different experiments or time points must be clearly indicated with borders or labels.
No features may be added to, rearranged, moved, removed, or obscured within an image.
High-resolution original, unprocessed image files must be provided to editors on request.
Any processing applied to images must be described in the Methods section or figure legends.

GMJ editors may use forensic image analysis tools to detect manipulation. Manuscripts found to contain manipulated images will be handled according to COPE flowcharts.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

GMJ takes all allegations of research or publication misconduct seriously and investigates them following COPE flowcharts. The process applies regardless of whether the allegation arises before, during, or after publication.

Sources of allegations. Allegations may originate from editors, reviewers, readers, authors, institutions, whistleblowers, or through editorial screening (e.g., similarity checks, image analysis). Anonymous allegations are accepted and investigated if they contain sufficient detail.

Initial assessment. The Editor-in-Chief (or a designated deputy) conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the allegation has substance and warrants formal investigation. Minor issues (e.g., inadvertent errors, minor overlapping text with proper attribution) may be resolved through correspondence with the authors.

Formal investigation. If the initial assessment suggests that misconduct may have occurred:

The corresponding author is contacted in writing and given an opportunity to respond within a reasonable timeframe (typically 14–30 days).
The response is evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with other editors or external advisors as needed.
If the manuscript is still under review, the review process may be paused pending resolution.
All communications and evidence are documented and retained confidentially.

Outcomes. Actions are proportionate to the nature, seriousness, evidentiary basis, and effect of the concern and may include one or more of the following:

A letter of explanation and education to the author(s).
A request to correct or amend the manuscript.
Rejection of the manuscript.
Publication of a correction (erratum or corrigendum) for published articles with errors that do not invalidate the findings.
Publication of an expression of concern while an investigation is ongoing or when evidence is inconclusive.
Retraction of the article if the findings are unreliable due to misconduct or serious error.
Notification to the author's institution, employer, ethics committee, or funding body.
Reporting to relevant professional or regulatory bodies.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

GMJ follows COPE Retraction Guidelines for handling errors and misconduct discovered post-publication.

Corrections (Errata / Corrigenda): Address errors — whether by the authors or the journal — that do not affect the validity of the findings, conclusions, or overall integrity of the article.
Retractions: Issued when the findings are unreliable (due to misconduct or serious error), when the article constitutes plagiarism, when it reports unethical research, or when the peer-review process was compromised. Retracted articles are not removed from the archive but are clearly watermarked as "RETRACTED."
Expressions of Concern: Published when there is inconclusive evidence of misconduct or unreliability, when an investigation is ongoing and unlikely to be resolved promptly, or when the institution responsible has not conducted an adequate inquiry.

Correction notices, expressions of concern, and retraction notices are linked to the affected Version of Record and reflected in relevant article metadata. Persistent identifiers are assigned where applicable. Where Crossmark is implemented for an item, its status information may also be updated.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

GMJ's AI policy aligns with the joint position statements of ICMJE, COPE, and WAME:

Authors must transparently disclose substantive use of generative or content-producing AI in manuscript preparation, identifying the tool/system and explaining how it was used. The disclosure must appear in the Methods section and/or a dedicated AI Use Disclosure statement in the Declarations section.
AI tools cannot be listed as authors and cannot bear accountability for the work.
Editors and reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or confidential editorial material to public or third-party generative AI systems where confidentiality, retention, reuse, or data protection cannot be assured.
AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, or misleadingly alter research data or evidentiary images. Legitimate material AI generation or modification must be disclosed and scientifically justified.
Authors must not upload confidential patient data, unpublished research data, or identifiable personal information into AI tools without appropriate ethical approval and data-protection safeguards.
Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, ethical compliance, and integrity of all content in the manuscript, including any AI-assisted output.

See the dedicated Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy.

Data Availability and Reproducibility

Authors are required to include a Data Availability Statement with each manuscript and are encouraged to share underlying data through trusted FAIR-principle repositories (Zenodo, Dryad, Figshare, OSF). Code, protocols, and analytic plans are welcomed as supplementary materials. For full details, see Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy.

Whistleblower Protection

GMJ encourages any individual who suspects research or publication misconduct to report their concerns to the Editor-in-Chief at editor@gmj.ge. The identity of the person raising the concern will be kept confidential to the fullest extent possible. GMJ will not retaliate against, or tolerate retaliation against, any individual who makes a good-faith report of suspected misconduct. Anonymous reports are accepted and investigated when they contain sufficient detail to enable assessment.

Appeals and Complaints

Editorial appeals and complaints are handled under GMJ's Complaints and Appeals Policy. Matters are assigned to an appropriately independent editor or other qualified person where required; anyone with a relevant conflict is recused. The policy describes submission, assessment, review, and escalation procedures.

Responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors

Responsibilities of Authors

Ensure that all research has been conducted ethically and in compliance with applicable regulations.
Report findings accurately, completely, and without fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting.
Disclose all competing interests, funding sources, and the role of funders.
Comply with ICMJE authorship criteria and the CRediT contributor taxonomy.
Provide ethics committee approval details, informed consent statements, and data availability statements.
Submit only original work that has not been published or is not under consideration elsewhere, unless fully disclosed.
Cooperate with editorial investigations and respond promptly to queries regarding their manuscript.
Correct errors promptly when they are identified.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Conduct reviews objectively, constructively, and in a timely manner.
Maintain strict confidentiality of all manuscript content and not share or discuss it with others.
Disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when appropriate.
Not use information obtained during peer review for personal or third-party advantage.
Report any suspected misconduct to the handling editor.
Not upload confidential manuscript or review material into external AI systems or third-party platforms where confidentiality and data governance cannot be assured.

Responsibilities of Editors

Make editorial decisions based solely on scientific merit, relevance, and ethical compliance.
Maintain the confidentiality of the editorial process.
Manage conflicts of interest transparently and recuse themselves when necessary.
Investigate allegations of misconduct fairly and in accordance with COPE flowcharts.
Issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions promptly when warranted.
Ensure the integrity of the published record.

Ownership, Management, Editorial Independence and Revenue

Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) is owned and published by the Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG). PHIG provides the institutional, administrative, technical, and financial infrastructure necessary for the operation and sustainability of the journal.

Editorial authority is exercised independently by the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial team. The publisher does not influence manuscript selection, peer-review outcomes, editorial decisions, acceptance or rejection decisions, or the scientific conclusions of published articles.

GMJ's operations are currently supported by PHIG institutional resources. GMJ charges no manuscript submission fee, and publication is free for manuscripts submitted through 31 December 2027 under the current institutional-support policy. Any future charges, grants, sponsorship, advertising, or other material revenue sources will be disclosed transparently before they take effect.

Financial considerations have no influence on editorial decision-making. Current or future financial arrangements, an author's ability to pay, institutional affiliation, funding source, sponsorship, or eligibility for support do not influence peer review, acceptance, rejection, publication priority, or any other editorial decision.

Commercial or financial interests are kept separate from editorial decisions, safeguarding the editorial independence and integrity of GMJ.

Direct Marketing and Journal Communications

Any direct marketing activities undertaken by or on behalf of GMJ—including calls for papers, manuscript invitations, newsletters, announcements, and other promotional communications—must be appropriate, professional, targeted, and unobtrusive.

All communications concerning GMJ's indexing status, metrics, affiliations, editorial processes, peer review, publication charges, services, and publication timelines must be accurate, transparent, verifiable, and not misleading.

GMJ does not guarantee manuscript acceptance, does not use deceptive or indiscriminate solicitation practices, and does not make misleading claims concerning indexing, impact, editorial review, or publication.

Contact information obtained through manuscript submission, peer review, registration, or correspondence is used only for legitimate journal operations and communications and is handled in accordance with applicable privacy and data-protection requirements.

Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

GMJ is committed to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, jointly developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

GMJ maintains publicly accessible information and policies addressing the 16 areas covered by these principles:

Journal name and identity
Journal website
Publishing schedule
Archiving and digital preservation
Copyright
Licensing
Publication ethics and related editorial policies
Peer review
Access model
Ownership and management
Advisory body and editorial board
Editorial team and contact information
Author fees and charges
Other sources of revenue
Advertising
Direct marketing

These principles are implemented across GMJ's Editorial Policies and dedicated policies on publication ethics, peer review, conflicts of interest, human and animal research, informed consent, plagiarism, open access, copyright and licensing, archiving, data sharing and reproducibility, preprints, advertising, artificial intelligence, corrections and retractions, and related editorial procedures.

GMJ reviews these policies regularly and updates them as international standards and best practices in scholarly publishing evolve.

Updates to This Policy

These editorial policies are reviewed periodically and updated when material changes in journal procedures, infrastructure, or relevant scholarly-publishing standards require revision. Substantive changes may be communicated through journal announcements or the relevant policy page.

Last reviewed and updated: September 2026 · Editor-in-Chief: Prof. Giorgi Pkhakadze, MD, MPH, PhD · Contact: editor@gmj.ge · Publisher: Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG), 3 Betlemi Rise, 0105 Tbilisi, Georgia · ISSN: 3088-4322 (Online) · DOI prefix: 10.66636 (Crossref)