Corrections and Retractions

POST-PUBLICATION POLICY
Correction, Retraction and Expression of Concern Policy
 
1. General Principles

The Da Nang Journal of Medicine and Pharmacy (DJMP) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the published scientific record.

When errors, omissions, or concerns are identified after publication that may affect the reliability of an article, DJMP will assess their significance and take appropriate action, including:

• Correction;
• Retraction;
• Expression of Concern;
• Other appropriate post-publication measures where necessary.

The purpose of these actions is to correct and protect the scientific record, not to punish authors.

2. Corrections

DJMP may publish a Correction when a published article contains an error that does not fundamentally undermine the reliability of the work as a whole.

• Errors in author names or affiliations;
• Errors in data, tables, or figures;
• Errors in the description of methods;
• Reference errors;
• Presentation or metadata errors;
• Missing information that can be added without changing the essential conclusions;
• Other errors affecting accuracy without invalidating the principal findings.

A correction notice should:

• Clearly identify what has been corrected;
• Link to the original article;
• State the date of the correction;
• Allow readers to clearly identify the version or content that has been amended.

DJMP does not silently alter important scientific content in a published article without a transparent record of the change.

3. Minor Errors

Minor spelling, grammatical, or presentation errors that do not affect scientific meaning or the reader’s understanding may not require a separate Correction notice.

However, if an error could cause misunderstanding or affect the article's discoverability, citation, or interpretation, DJMP may issue an appropriate public correction.

4. Retraction

DJMP may retract an article when reliable evidence indicates that the article is no longer trustworthy or has serious scientific-integrity concerns.

• Fabricated or falsified data;
• Unreliable findings resulting from serious error or misconduct;
• Serious plagiarism;
• Substantial duplicate publication;
• Unlawful use of data, images, or other materials;
• Serious violations of research ethics;
• Fraudulent or seriously problematic authorship;
• Peer-review manipulation;
• Serious undisclosed conflicts of interest that compromise the reliability of the work;
• Other misconduct that makes the article unsuitable to remain in the scientific record as a reliable publication.
5. Retraction Does Not Mean Removal

When an article is retracted, DJMP generally does not remove the article completely from the publication record, except in exceptional circumstances involving legal requirements or other serious risks.

• The article remains available on the Journal website;
• It is clearly marked as “Retracted”;
• The retraction notice is linked bidirectionally with the article;
• DOI and bibliographic information are maintained;
• The reason for retraction is disclosed to an appropriate extent.

This approach preserves transparency in the scientific record.

6. Retraction Notice

A retraction notice should:

• Clearly identify the retracted article;
• State who requested or decided the retraction;
• Explain the reason for retraction;
• Distinguish honest error from misconduct where possible;
• Avoid abusive or unnecessary language;
• Be published and clearly linked to the article.

The notice should provide sufficient information for readers to understand why the article is no longer considered reliable.

7. Author-Requested Retraction

Authors may request retraction after publication, but DJMP will consider such requests in light of the interests of the scientific record, not solely the author’s personal preference.

Where serious grounds for retraction exist, an author’s disagreement does not prevent DJMP from retracting the article where sufficient evidence is available.

Conversely, an author cannot require removal of a published article simply because the author has changed their views or no longer wishes the work to remain public.

8. Expression of Concern

DJMP may publish an Expression of Concern when there are substantial reasons to question the reliability or integrity of an article, but insufficient information is available to make a final decision.

• A misconduct investigation is ongoing;
• The outcome of an investigation by a relevant institution is not yet available;
• Existing evidence is insufficient for correction or retraction;
• Serious concerns exist, but additional time is required for verification;
• A competent authority has not yet reached a conclusion.

An Expression of Concern is an interim measure intended to alert readers that the reliability of the article is under review.

9. Outcomes Following an Expression of Concern
• Remove the Expression of Concern if the matter is resolved and the article remains reliable;
• Publish a Correction;
• Retract the article;
• Take another appropriate action.

All updates must be transparently linked to the article and to any previous notice.

10. Post-Publication Authorship Changes

Requests to add, remove, or change the order of authors after publication must be carefully reviewed. DJMP may require:

• A written explanation;
• Agreement from all authors;
• Confirmation from the relevant institution where a dispute exists;
• An updated author contribution statement.

Where an authorship change is approved, DJMP may publish a Correction to ensure that the publication record is updated transparently.

11. Metadata and Version Updates
• Article titles and status are updated appropriately;
• Metadata accurately reflects the current status;
• DOI and links remain functional;
• Post-publication notices are linked to the original article;
• The original version is not silently altered in a way that erases the publication history.
12. Review Process
1. Receive information or identify a concern;
2. Conduct a preliminary assessment;
3. Request an explanation from the authors;
4. Request relevant data or documentation;
5. Seek advice from editors, experts, or competent authorities;
6. Manage conflicts of interest during the review;
7. Reach an appropriate decision;
8. Publish and link the post-publication notice.

In complex cases, DJMP may need to contact the authors’ institution, an ethics body, a funder, or another relevant organization.

13. Independence of Post-Publication Decisions

A person with a conflict of interest relating to the article or case must not be the sole decision-maker regarding a Correction, Retraction, or Expression of Concern.

Decisions must be based on evidence, the effect on the scientific record, and DJMP’s publication policies.

14. Right to Respond and Appeal

Authors should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond before DJMP makes a post-publication decision, except where urgent action is necessary to protect readers or the scientific record.

Authors may appeal under DJMP’s Complaints and Appeals Policy.

The existence of an appeal does not necessarily delay a post-publication action where DJMP determines that such action is necessary to protect the integrity of the scientific record.