Open Access Policy

HBKU Press is committed to supporting open access in the following ways: 

• Your article will be freely and universally available via the internet
• Your article, in its full text format, will be, where possible, deposited in an internationally-recognized third party repository, without embargo
• Your article will be in a format which is easily readable by humans and machines, currently XML with a stated DTD (NLM v3.0).
• Your article will be archived on many servers worldwide

You agree, via the Creative Commons BY 4.0 licence, to allow anyone to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt your work, provided the original work is attributed.

Ethical guidelines

All authors must declare they have read and agreed to the content of the submitted manuscript.

Experimental research on humans must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee and comply with the Helsinki Declaration.

Informed consent must be documented in cases where information or clinical photographs of a patient are used. Signed copies of consent forms will be required before an article can be considered for review.

Experimental research on animals must follow internationally recognized guidelines.

Manuscripts may be rejected by the editorial office if it is felt that the work was not carried out within an ethical framework.

All authors are asked to complete a declaration of competing interests.

Authors from pharmaceutical companies, or other commercial organizations that sponsor clinical trials, are invited to read GPP3 – Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research. These guidelines also apply to companies or individuals that work on industry-sponsored publications, such as freelance writers, contract research organizations and communications companies.

Medical writers, or anyone else who assisted in the preparation of the manuscript, should be acknowledged in the manuscript, either as an author, or in the Acknowledgements section, as per the guidelines of the European Medical Writers Association. Medical writers should list their source of funding and/or employer as appropriate.

All Editors-in-Chief of QScience.com journals are members of COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics. Authors who are concerned about the editorial process may refer their concerns to COPE.

QScience.com endorses the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) statement on Geopolitical Intrusions on Editorial Decisions.

Informed Consent Policy:

The informed consent policy for QScience journals ensures that all research involving human participants is conducted ethically and with proper consent. Here are the seven main elements that are typically included in our policy:

1. Voluntary Participation: Participation in research must be voluntary, without any coercion or undue influence.
2. Comprehensive details about research: Participants must be fully informed about nature, purpose, benefits, risks, and implications of the research. This includes details about the study’s procedures, potential risks and benefits, confidentiality of personal data, and the right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Additionally, researchers must ensure that participants understand the information provided. This may involve explaining the research in simpler ways and answering all questions participants may have.
3. Documentation: the informed consent must be documented, typically through a signed consent form. If written consent is not feasible, oral consent must be appropriately documented.
4. Special Considerations: Additional safeguards should be done for vulnerable populations, such as children or individuals with cognitive impairments. According to the study nature, consent from a legal guardian or representative may be required.
5. Anonymity and Confidentiality: Researchers must protect the anonymity and confidentiality of participants, handling personal data in compliance with relevant privacy laws and regulations.
6. Use of Data: Participants should be informed about how their data will be used, including the possibility of publication. Consent must be obtained for the use of identifiable data.
7. Ethical Approval: Manuscripts should include an institutional review board (IRB) or a statement confirming that the study was approved by an appropriate ethics committee, along with the name of the approving committee and the approval number.

Prior publication policy

Any article, or substantial parts of it, submitted to the journal should not be under consideration for publication in another journal and should not have been previously published in another journal.

However, we do not prohibit authors from making use of personal homepages or preprint services to disseminate versions of their work prior to submission. In addition, we are also happy to consider submissions if the paper has previously been issued as a technical report or presented at a conference which does not publish formally-reviewed proceedings.

We will occasionally consider translations from another journal for publication, but only with the written consent of the original publisher.

We specifically do not publish papers which have previously been published in other peer-reviewed forums - including conference proceedings - unless the paper presents new data or results, or is a significantly extended treatise of the previously-published work by the same author.

Preprint Policy

We consider for review submissions previously available as preprints (e.g. non-formal publications on servers and have not been peer reviewed, and author retain copyright of that work). At submission, authors must submit the DOI or the URL to that manuscript version. If accepted and published in the journal, authors are requested to update any pre-publication versions with a text saying “this article has been peer reviewed and published in (journal title) and can be viewed on HBKU Press website (provide the DOI of the article). Authors may also post the final published version of the article immediately after publication.

Retraction policy

HBKU Press adheres to the COPE guidelines for retracting articles. We will only retract an article if there is clear evidence of scientific mispractice (i.e. the article is flawed or misleading) and where a Correction or Erratum will not suffice in clearing the error. 

Copyright and licensing

Copyright on any article published by HBKU Press is retained by the author.

Authors grant HBKU Press the right to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.

Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely (copy, distribute transmit, or adapt) provided the original work is cited and attributed.

Formal terms and conditions can be read at the Creative Commons website for Attribution Licences. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode

Archiving policy

HBKU Press endeavors to make your article available in perpetuity. To facilitate that goal, we aim to do the following:

• Your article will be deposited in an internationally recognized, full text subject specific repository, such as PubMed Central, immediately on acceptance (where possible).
• Your article will be archived on multiple servers around the world by our archiving and preservation partners (Portico and CLOCKSS).
• We work with major national libraries to archive our electronic files for future conversion processes

Preprint policy

HBKU Press journals consider for review submissions previously available as preprints (e.g. non-formal publications on servers which have not been peer reviewed, but authors retain copyright of that work).  At submission, authors must submit the DOI or the URL to that manuscript version. If the paper is accepted and published with us, authors are requested to update any pre-publication versions with a text saying "This article has been peer reviewed and published in (insert journal title) and can be viewed on HBKU Press journal's website (provide the DOI of the article). Authors may also post the final published version of the article immediately after publication.

Advertisement policy

HBKU Press does not publish advertisement's on their website.

AI and Generative AI Authorship Disclosure Policy

Effective for all submissions to QScience journals from 2026 onwards.

Overview

Artificial intelligence and generative AI tools, including large language models such as ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, and similar platforms, have become part of the everyday research workflow. HBKU Press welcomes their use where it genuinely supports authors, but with a clear commitment to transparency, scientific integrity, and human accountability.

This policy applies to all manuscript types submitted to QScience journals. It covers the use of AI tools in writing, editing, data organisation, and literature synthesis. It does not cover standard grammar or spell-checkers, reference managers used in their basic form, or AI tools used strictly within the research methodology itself (which should be described in the Methods section as part of the study design).

Core Principles

• AI tools may not be listed as authors or co-authors on any manuscript. Authorship carries legal and ethical accountability, responsibilities that only a human author being can hold.
• Authors are fully responsible for every claim, figure, and conclusion in the submitted work, regardless of whether AI tools were used in its preparation.
• Any use of generative AI in drafting, restructuring, or editing the manuscript text must be disclosed at submission and will appear in the published article.
• AI tools must not be used to generate, alter, enhance, or fabricate research images, figures, or data.
• Peer reviewers must not upload any part of a manuscript into a generative AI tool. Manuscripts shared during peer review are confidential.

Disclosure Requirement

Authors must disclose if they used a generative AI tool to:

• Write, rewrite, or substantially edit portions of the manuscript text
• Generate summaries or overviews of published literature
• Suggest or organize the structure of sections
• Produce or refine tables, lists, or other structured content within the manuscript

Disclosure is not required for:

• Basic grammar and spell-checking tools (e.g., software used in grammar-only mode)
• Reference managers (e.g., Mendeley, Zotero, EndNote) when used without their generative AI features
• AI tools used as part of the study's research methodology, data collection, or analysis (these should be described in the Methods section instead)

How to Disclose AI Use

Authors who have used a generative AI tool should include a brief declaration in a dedicated section titled "Declaration of AI Use", placed before the reference list. The statement should name the tool used, describe the purpose, and confirm that the author reviewed and takes responsibility for the output.

Consequences of Non-Disclosure

Failure to disclose AI tool use when required will be treated as a breach of this journal's publishing ethics. Depending on the nature and extent of undisclosed use, this may result in rejection of the manuscript, retraction if already published, or referral to the author's institution.

Reporting Guideline Compliance

Overview

QScience journals are committed to publishing research that is complete, transparent, and reproducible. To support this, the journals require authors to follow internationally recognized reporting standards that are appropriate to their study design. 

ICMJE Authorship Criteria

All listed authors must meet all four of the following criteria, as set out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE):

• Substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data
• Drafting the work or critically revising it for important intellectual content
• Approving the final version to be published
• Agreeing to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including investigation and resolution of any questions about its accuracy or integrity

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section rather than listed as authors. This includes those who provided technical support, writing assistance, funding, or general supervision.

Corresponding authors are responsible for confirming that all co-authors have met the authorship criteria and have approved the final submitted version.

CONSORT - Randomized Controlled Trials

Manuscripts reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) must be prepared in accordance with the CONSORT 2010 Statement (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials). CONSORT sets out the minimum information needed to assess a trial's design, conduct, and findings.

Authors submitting an RCT manuscript must:

• Complete and submit the CONSORT checklist, indicating the page or paragraph in the manuscript where each item is addressed
• Include a CONSORT flow diagram showing participant enrolment, allocation, follow-up, and analysis at each stage
• State the trial registration number and registry name in the abstract

Trials that commenced enrolment after 1 January 2010 must have been prospectively registered in a publicly accessible registry approved by the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) or in ClinicalTrials.gov. The registration must have occurred at or before the time of first participant enrolment. Retrospective registration will not be accepted for trials initiated after this date.

The CONSORT checklist is available at: www.consort-statement.org

PRISMA - Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses submitted to QScience journals must follow the PRISMA 2020 guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses).

Authors must:

• Submit a completed PRISMA 2020 checklist alongside the manuscript
• Include a PRISMA flow diagram showing the number of records identified, screened, assessed for eligibility, and included at each stage of the review
• Describe the search strategy in sufficient detail that it could be replicated, including the databases searched, date of search, and search terms used

For systematic reviews of interventions, the PROSPERO registration number should be stated in the Methods section if the review was prospectively registered. Registration in PROSPERO is strongly encouraged.

The PRISMA checklist is available at: www.prisma-statement.org

STROBE - Observational Studies

Manuscripts reporting observational research, including cohort studies, case-control studies, and cross-sectional studies, must comply with the STROBE Statement (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology).

Authors must:

• Submit the appropriate STROBE checklist for their study design (cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional)
• Ensure that the checklist maps each item to a specific location in the manuscript
• Describe the study setting, eligibility criteria, how participants were selected, and how potential biases were addressed

The STROBE checklists are available at: www.strobe-statement.org

Other Study Designs

For study designs not covered above, authors should consult the EQUATOR Network (www.equator-network.org), which maintains a comprehensive database of reporting guidelines for health research. Commonly applicable guidelines include:

• STARD - Studies of diagnostic accuracy
• CARE - Case reports
• ARRIVE - Animal research
• SPIRIT - Study protocols

Peer Review Policy

Overview

Peer review is the cornerstone of quality control in scholarly publishing. All research articles, review articles, and clinical reports submitted to QScience journals undergo rigorous peer review before an editorial decision is made. 

Review Type

QScience journals operate a double-blind peer review process as standard. Under this model:

• Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors at any stage
• Author identities and affiliations are removed from the version sent to reviewers

Authors are asked to submit a version of their manuscript with all identifying information removed (author names, affiliations, funding acknowledgements, and any self-identifying references) as a separate file for the review process.

Where a journal operates a different review model, such as single-blind or open peer review, this will be stated clearly on the individual journal's homepage.

Editorial Triage

All manuscripts are reviewed by a member of the editorial team on receipt. Submissions may be returned to authors without external review if they fall clearly outside the journal's scope, do not meet minimum formatting or language standards, or contain an obvious methodological deficiency that would prevent meaningful peer review. Authors will be informed promptly in these cases.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on their demonstrated expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. When identifying and inviting reviewers, editors consider:

• Published track record and domain knowledge relevant to the specific topic
• Any conflicts of interest with the authors or the subject matter
• Availability and likely ability to respond within the requested timeframe
• Diversity of perspective, including geographical region, career stage, and institutional affiliation where possible

Authors may suggest suitable reviewers at the time of submission, along with their contact details and institutional affiliations. These suggestions will be considered but are not binding. Authors may also identify individuals they wish to exclude from reviewing their work, with a brief reason; the editorial team will give this reasonable consideration.

Editors will not invite reviewers who have a close personal, professional, or financial relationship with the authors, who share a current institution with any of the authors, or who have collaborated with the corresponding author within the previous three years.

Number of Reviewers

Original research articles are reviewed by a minimum of two independent external reviewers. Where the two reviewers' recommendations are substantially different, the editor may seek a third opinion before reaching a decision. Final editorial decisions rest with the editor, taking the reviewers' reports as advisory input.

Turnaround Times

HBKU Press is committed to providing authors with timely decisions. The following are target timeframes; actual times may vary depending on manuscript complexity and reviewers’ availability:

Acceptance and Rejection Rates

Acceptance rates vary by journal and are influenced by the volume and quality of submissions received in a given period (look at each journal homepage). As a guide, QScience journals aim to accept manuscripts that make a genuine and clearly evidenced contribution to their field. Across the portfolio, acceptance rates typically range from 15% to 45% of submitted manuscripts.

A rejection decision does not imply the work lacks merit. Manuscripts may be declined because they fall outside the journal's current scope or priorities, do not meet the methodological standards required for publication, or address a topic already well covered in the recent literature. Authors of rejected manuscripts are encouraged to consider the reviewers’ feedback carefully before deciding whether to revise and resubmit or pursue publication in an alternative journal.

Possible Editorial Decisions

• Accept - The manuscript is accepted for publication, subject to minor production edits.
• Minor revision - Minor changes are requested. Authors are typically given 1-3 weeks to revise and resubmit.
• Major revision - Substantial revision is required. Authors are given 6-8 weeks. A revised manuscript will ordinarily be reviewed again.
• Reject with invitation to resubmit - The current submission is declined, but a substantially revised version addressing the stated concerns might be considered.
• Reject - The manuscript is not suitable for this journal. The decision is final.

Confidentiality and Conduct

Submitted manuscripts are confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use the content of a manuscript under review outside the peer review process. Any reviewer who identifies a potential conflict of interest after accepting a peer_review invitation must immediately inform the editor via email.

HBKU Press takes concerns about the integrity of peer review seriously. Suspected cases of reviewer misconduct, including fabricated reviews, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or misuse of confidential information, will be investigated and may be referred to the relevant institution.