To standardize the manuscript writing, review, editing, and publication procedures, and to uphold academic integrity while preventing academic misconduct, the Editorial Office of the Guoji Yanke Zazhi (Int Eye Sci) formulates this Publishing Ethics Policy based on the guidelines of the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://www.publicationethics.org/), the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China, the Regulations on the Publication Administration, the Academic Publishing Specification—Definition of Academic Misconduct for Journals (CY/T 174—2019), and the publishing ethics standards issued by the National Press and Publication Administration of China and other relevant institutions. This Publishing Ethics Policy is formulated by the Editorial Office of the Guoji Yanke Zazhi (Int Eye Sci) for all authors, peer reviewers, and editors and must be strictly adhered to by all concerned.

I. Ethical Requirements for Authors

Authors are obliged to ensure that their manuscripts involve no state secrets, political biases, or intellectual property infringements.
  Authors should comply with the following principle: No ghostwriting by third parties; No submission by third parties; No content revision by third parties; No fabrication of peer reviewer information; No violation of authorship attribution norms.

1. Originality and Authenticity: Manuscripts submitted must be original (review articles excepted). Plagiarism, appropriation, fabrication, and falsification of figures, text, or data are strictly prohibited. References must be properly cited. Authors should proactively disclose research procedures and key information to enhance scientific transparency and should provide supporting materials that verifies the integrity of published academic works.

2. Authorship Standardization: Authorship is limited to personnel involved in research design, analysis, manuscript drafting and final approval. Guest authorship by persons with no substantial academic contributions is strictly prohibited. In principle, the author order is based on contributions, agreed upon by all named authors, and finalized upon submission. After submission, changes to the authorship or affiliations are generally not permitted. Should changes be absolutely necessary, the principal authors (the first author and the corresponding author) must submit a written request to the editorial office with clear justification, and the request must be signed by all listed authors for confirmation and verified with the official stamp of the affiliated institution(s).

3. Prohibition of Duplicate Publication: Duplicate submission, fragmented publication, and disguised republication are prohibited. Previously published results must not be resubmitted. It must be ensured that the content has not been previously published in other journals or media.

4. Ethics Compliance Review: Research involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki 2024. For animal-based experimental studies, the Methods section of the manuscript should clearly state that all animal procedures were conducted in compliance with the Regulations on the Administration of Laboratory Animals (2017 Revision) and the ARVO Statement for the Use of Animals in Ophthalmic and Vision Research. Upon submission, authors are required to provide formal ethical approval documents and proof of informed consent, and strictly adhere to the norms of research ethics.

5. Proactive Information Disclosure: All research grants, approval documents, commercial collaborations, and potential conflicts of interest must be truthfully disclosed. An explicit declaration should be provided when there are no conflicts of interest.

6. Copyright Terms: All content published in this journal is released under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 License. Upon publication, manuscripts will be made publicly accessible for permanent free reading, downloading, reproducing, printing, searching, or linking to the full text. To ensure the authors’ right of authorship and intellectual property rights, the authors are required to sign the “Copyright License Agreement”. After manuscript publication, the authors agree to transfer the copyright of the manuscript to the editorial office, including the rights for electronic publishing, multimedia publishing, online publishing, and publishing in any other formats. The authors retain the right to share and use their paper in accordance with the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 License.

II Ethical Requirements for Reviewers

Reviewers should ensure that they evaluate manuscripts scientifically and accurately, and provide objective and impartial assessments. They must maintain strict confidentiality regarding all review materials and respect authors’ research findings. Reviewers should recuse themselves from handling any manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

1. Reviewers should adhere to the principle of fairness and impartiality, evaluate the academic quality of manuscripts objectively, and refrain from identity-based discrimination or subjective bias. Drawing on their professional expertise, reviewers should assess the novelty, scientific soundness, and practical value of each manuscript. They should render fair evaluations regarding the appropriateness of research methods, rationality of study design, validity of results and conclusions, and potential risks of confidential information disclosure, so as to assist the editors in making decisions on manuscript. Reviewers should provide detailed revision suggestions addressing specific issues in the manuscript to help authors improve the quality of their papers. If the manuscript falls beyond the reviewer's area of expertise, the reviewer has the responsibility to decline the review invitation.

2. Reviewers should abide by the conflict of interest recusal policy. Reviewers should proactively recuse themselves or disclose any relationships associated with the manuscript, including but not limited to mentor-student, collaborative, competitive, or familial relationships.

3. During the peer review process, if a reviewer identifies that the manuscript under review contains identical or substantially similar content to a previously published paper, the reviewer should, to the best of their knowledge, notify the editorial office of the similarities or overlaps between the submitted manuscript and the published paper or data. Furthermore, if a reviewer encounters a manuscript that they have previously reviewed, they have an obligation to report this to the editorial office.

4. Reviewers should abide by the confidentiality rules for peer review. Reviewers must not disclose manuscript content, author information or review details, nor may they privately exploit the research ideas or data outcomes contained in manuscripts for personal gain. Reviewers should decline review assignments in fields outside their areas of expertise.

5. Reviewers should complete review reports for assigned manuscripts on schedule and submit them to the editorial office within the specified time frame. If unable to complete the review on time, they should explain the circumstances and return the manuscript. Perfunctory reviews, unjustified negative evaluations, personal attacks, and other inappropriate behaviors are prohibited. Reviewers may suggest potential reviewers; however, without prior approval from the editorial office, reviewers must not unilaterally entrust their students, colleagues or other personnel to conduct the review on their behalf.

III Ethical Requirements for Editors

Editors should strictly comply with relevant national laws and regulations, and adhere to academic publishing ethics and standards. All submitted manuscripts should be processed promptly and impartially. Editors should respect authors’ research outcomes and reviewers’ comments. The personal information of authors and reviewers should be kept confidential. Editors should avoid any preferential treatment based on personal relationships.

1. Editors should prioritize academic quality and select manuscripts impartially, free from external factors such as the author’s identity, affiliation, professional title and seniority. Strive for the sustained development of the journal and ensure all accepted manuscripts are published on schedule with high quality.

2. Editors should fully implement the primary responsibility for ideological work, the three-review and three-proofreading system, and the peer review system. Standardize editorial and publishing procedures to guarantee the publication quality of the journal.

3. Editors have the duty to properly safeguard and maintain the confidentiality of all materials generated during the review and revision processes, and should not disclose any key information pertaining to the manuscript to third parties. Editors should ensure that authors' submission information is neither used for their own research nor shared with others for research purposes. In double-blind peer review, the identities of authors, reviewers, and other relevant editorial staff should be fully protected.

4. Editors should comply strictly with confidentiality and recusal rules. Manuscript disputes and any indications of academic misconduct should be handled impartially.

5. Editors should respect the academic perspectives of the authors. Any essential or major revisions to the manuscript must be promptly communicated to the authors, and their approval should be secured.

6. Any commercial practices or interest exchanges that compromise academic integrity must be resolutely prohibited.

   7. Editors should ensure that the peer review process is conducted fairly and impartially. In cases where a conflict of interest or collaborative relationship arising from competition or cooperation exists between the reviewer and the authors, their affiliated institutions, or relevant enterprises, the editor must request a reviewer replacement. The manuscript should then be handled by the Editor-in-Chief or other editorial board members.

IV. Rules for Handling Academic Misconduct

In cases of confirmed academic misconduct, including but not limited to plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, duplicate submission, unethical research, and undisclosed conflicts of interest, the journal should, depending on the severity of the violation, take measures such as rejection for unpublished submissions, retraction for published articles, temporary suspension or permanent banning of submission privileges, and issuance of corrigenda or retraction statement. Where necessary, the journal will notify the authors’ affiliated institutions and competent authorities, record the case in the research integrity archives, and refer suspected illegal conduct to judicial authorities.