Editorial Policies
Publishing standards for Tissue Repair and Regeneration (JTRR).
Integrity, fairness, and transparency
Tissue Repair and Regeneration follows rigorous peer review and responsible publishing standards.
Policies protect research integrity, author rights, and reader trust.
Fair evaluation
Editors base decisions on scientific merit and relevance.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts and reviews are handled with strict confidentiality.
Conflict management
Editors and reviewers disclose conflicts and recuse when needed.
Transparency
Authors receive clear decision letters and actionable feedback.
- Originality is required; duplicate submission is not permitted.
- All authors must meet authorship criteria and approve the submitted version.
- Data fabrication or image manipulation is grounds for rejection.
- Ethics approvals and consent must be documented.
- Corrections and retractions are issued when needed.
Editorial policy guidance ensures consistency, integrity, and transparency.
Clear standards reduce delays and protect the scholarly record for authors and readers.
These practices align with global expectations for ethical publishing.
Transparent policies support trust across authors, reviewers, and readers.
Editors and reviewers follow confidentiality and conflict of interest standards.
Policies protect authors, participants, and the integrity of published research.
Ethics screening
Integrity checks protect the scholarly record. This protects integrity and trust.
Conflict disclosure
Transparent disclosures reduce bias risk. This supports transparent decision making.
Appeals process
Clear appeals preserve fairness and accountability. This reduces editorial delays.
Data integrity
Accurate reporting protects reproducibility. This protects integrity and trust.
Correction workflow
Transparent updates maintain trust. This supports transparent decision making.
Reviewer conduct
Confidential and respectful peer review is required. This reduces editorial delays.
Plagiarism checks
Screening reduces duplicate or unattributed content. This protects integrity and trust.
Authorship clarity
Authorship criteria prevent disputes and misattribution. This supports transparent decision making.
Consent requirements
Ethics approvals and consent protect participants. This reduces editorial delays.
Funding disclosure
Funding transparency supports accountability. This protects integrity and trust.
Image integrity
Image checks detect manipulation or duplication. This supports transparent decision making.
Data access
Availability statements enable verification and reuse. This reduces editorial delays.
Retraction policy
Clear retraction steps protect the scholarly record. This protects integrity and trust.
Correction policy
Corrections are documented to maintain accuracy. This supports transparent decision making.
Reviewer anonymity
Reviewer identities are protected where applicable. This reduces editorial delays.
Policy updates
Policies are reviewed to reflect evolving standards. This protects integrity and trust.
Preprint policy
State how preprints are handled and cited. This supports transparent decision making.
Data ethics
Require ethical approval for data reuse or secondary analysis. This reduces editorial delays.
Complaint handling
Define how complaints are reviewed and resolved. This protects integrity and trust.
- Confirm originality and avoid duplicate submission.
- Ensure all authors meet authorship criteria.
- Provide ethics approvals and consent documentation.
- Disclose funding and conflicts of interest.
- Report limitations clearly and avoid overstatement.
- Use appropriate citations for reused content.
- Keep reviewer identities confidential.
- Document corrections or retractions when necessary.
- Follow policy for AI assisted tools if used.
- Inform editors promptly if errors are discovered.
- Provide data availability statements when required.
- Confirm permissions for third party content.
- Confirm preprint disclosures are included when applicable.
- Verify datasets have appropriate ethical approval.
- Document how complaints or appeals are logged and resolved.
Quick editorial policy compliance reminders help keep submissions smooth and expectations clear.
Clarity
Keep requirements concise and easy to follow for editorial policy compliance. This reduces confusion and delays.
Completeness
Ensure the most important steps are visible in one place. This improves reader confidence.
Communication
Provide a clear path for questions and follow up. This supports efficient processing.
- Confirm contact details are correct.
- Check that required statements are included.
- Maintain consistent wording across the page.
A final set of editorial policy compliance checkpoints helps keep the page complete and consistent.
Consistency check
Align terminology and labels across the page for editorial policy compliance. This improves consistency and clarity.
Readability check
Confirm wording is clear to readers and administrators. This reduces editorial back and forth.
Policy alignment
Verify that editorial policy compliance statements match journal policy. This supports a smoother review process.
Timeline readiness
Confirm timing expectations are realistic and visible. This improves consistency and clarity.
- Confirm terminology matches the page scope.
- Ensure key statements appear in the correct section.
- Verify timelines and contact details are accurate.
- Double check that supporting materials are referenced.
