CellMed

Chapter 1. General Provisions

Article 1 (Purpose)

These research ethics regulations (hereinafter referred to as “Regulations”) are intended to prevent research misconduct or unethical behavior that may occur in periodic journals and other publications published by the CellMed Cell Modification Medicine Society (hereinafter referred to as “Society”). The purpose is to secure research ethics.

Article 2 (Definition of Terms)

• ① “Journal” refers to a publication with academic value, such as the CellMed journal, published regularly by the Society in accordance with its editorial regulations, etc.
• ② “Publication” means something produced on paper or special media with records such as researcher, publisher, date of publication, and international standard book number (ISBN or ISSN, etc.) displayed so that the contents can be understood.
• ③ “Researcher” or “Author” means a person who has submitted a research paper in accordance with the editorial regulations in order to publish a research paper in the academic journal under Paragraph ①, a member of an academic society, or a person who wishes to submit a paper as an editorial committee member.
• ④ “Research paper” means a work that summarizes and expresses his/her research results in the form of a paper submitted by the researcher in Paragraph ③ for publication in the academic journal in Paragraph ①.
• ⑤ “Informant” means a person who has recognized research misconduct in relation to the research paper under Paragraph ④ and has notified the Society of the recognized facts or related evidence.
• ⑥ “Investigator” means a person who has become the subject of investigation for research misconduct due to a report by an informant or the knowledge of the academic society, including all researchers of the research paper in Paragraph ①, or a person who is suspected of participating in research misconduct during the investigation process and is therefore subject to investigation. It means the person included.
• ⑦ “Editor” refers to the member of the society who is responsible for managing the overall process, such as reviewing papers submitted to the journal under paragraph ① and deciding whether to publish them.
• ⑧ “Reviewer” means the person responsible for evaluating the academic excellence of papers submitted to the journal under Paragraph ① and making judgments on whether or not to publish them.

Article 3 (Scope of Application)

This regulation applies to researchers under Article 2, Paragraph ③ in relation to research papers under Article 2, Paragraph ④ that are published or announced in journals under Article 2, Paragraph ① published by academic societies. However, if the Research Ethics Committee determines that a research ethics investigation pursuant to the proviso to Article 14, Paragraph ③ is necessary in relation to academic society members, the procedures of this regulation may be applied.

Article 4 (Relationship with other norms)

Matters not specified in these regulations shall follow the Guidelines for Securing Research Ethics (Ordinance of the Ministry of Education) and academic practices.

Chapter 2. Roles and responsibilities of researchers, etc.

Article 5 (Editor’s roles and responsibilities)

• ① The editor takes full responsibility for the overall process, such as reviewing submitted papers and deciding whether to publish them, and establishes strict and fair review standards and procedures.
• ② The editor selects and appoints reviewers in consideration of academic activities, expertise, etc., and if there is no suitable person among the editors, the review is requested from an external expert to ensure a fair review.
• ③ The editor shall ensure that the submitted paper is reviewed fairly based on the quality level of the paper and the paper review regulations without prejudice due to the researcher's gender, age, affiliated institution, or personal relationship.
• ④ The editorial committee shall keep information about the researcher and the content of the paper confidential until publication of the submitted paper is confirmed.
• ⑤ Editors must prevent sponsoring organizations or publishing organizations from exercising undue influence on whether or not to publish a paper or on a published paper. In addition, necessary information must be provided so that readers can know the role and nature of the sponsoring or issuing organization. Editors must separate activities related to sales and other operations within the journal from the editing and review process.
• ⑥ When a report on research ethics is received, the editor must establish a procedure to handle it and confirm that the procedure is being carried out.
• ⑦ If an editor suspects misconduct in research ethics, he or she must request an explanation from the researcher.

Article 6 (Role and responsibility of reviewer)

• ① The reviewer must accept review only if he or she can fairly review the paper with expertise. If not, the paper must be returned immediately and the reason must be notified.
• ② Reviewers must review objectively and fairly, excluding factors outside of academics.
• ③ Reviewers must keep the contents of the manuscript and the review process confidential. Information obtained during the screening process must not be used for personal purposes.
• ④ If a reviewer suspects research ethics misconduct during the review process, he or she must notify the editor.

Article 7 (Researcher’s research ethics)

• ① Researchers must not falsify research by creating false data or research results that do not exist.
• ② Researchers must not falsify research by distorting research content or results by artificially manipulating, modifying, or deleting data, devices, or processes.
• ③ When researchers perform statistical analysis, experiments, interviews, etc., they must faithfully record the results and store them systematically to preserve the basis for the paper. Additionally, if the reviewer or editor requests relevant supporting data during the review process, it must be provided.
• ④ Researchers must not engage in research plagiarism, which involves arbitrarily stealing other people’s ideas and research results without proper approval or acceptance.
• ⑤ If a researcher cites data that has already been made public, unless it is common sense, he or she must indicate the citation and reference accurately so that the researcher's original part can be clearly distinguished.
• ⑥ Researchers must not use information and data obtained during the paper review process for personal purposes without permission.
• ⑦ The researcher must transparently disclose all information received during the research process, including the researcher's interests that may affect the research results. By disclosing the details of support for the research, researchers must help editors and readers understand the research results while being aware of this.
• ⑧ If an error is found in the paper even after it has been submitted or published, the researcher must immediately notify the editor and discuss follow-up measures.
• ⑨ Researchers must actively cooperate with requests from editors or readers even after the paper is published, and if errors or other problems are found in the paper, they must cooperate with the editor to resolve the problem.

Article 8 (Prohibition of duplicate submissions)

• ① If a research paper submitted to an academic society is a research paper that has already been published in another publication, whether domestic or foreign, or if there is a similar research paper, it must not be submitted repeatedly as if it were a new research paper.
• ② Research papers submitted to academic journals must not be submitted to other academic journals at the same time or while review is in progress, and may be submitted to other academic journals after the review results are confirmed as unpublishable or the researcher voluntarily withdraws and the withdrawal request is approved.
• ③ If it is confirmed that a research paper submitted to the academic society violates Paragraph 1, it will be judged as research misconduct and processed.

Article 9 (Responsibilities and obligations of co-researchers)

• ① When conducting joint research with other researchers, researchers must clarify their roles and mutual relationships and fulfill their responsibilities accordingly. Before starting research, mutual agreement and understanding must be reached on the goals and expected results of the research project, each person's role in the collaborative relationship, methods of data collection, storage, and sharing, author decision and ranking, selection of the principal investigator, and intellectual property and ownership issues. do.
• ② The lead author and corresponding author have overall responsibility for the paper data and author indication, and are also responsible for the research of co-authors. Researchers must comply with requests for proof of their contributions.
• ③ The lead author and liaison author must be determined as someone who can take overall responsibility for the research results and proof.
• ④ The author is responsible for the content of the submitted paper, and if part of the work, such as data collection and analysis, is entrusted to a third party, the author also assumes final responsibility for it.

Article 10 (Standards for authorship determination and author indication)

• ① Researchers must participate as paper authors only for research they actually conducted or contributed to, and the first author and corresponding author must be clearly designated according to the researcher's role.
• ② Persons who did not make academic contributions to the research content or results should not be included as authors for reasons such as expressions of gratitude or courtesy. However, the content of other contributions, such as data collection or input or translation into other languages, may be indicated in an acknowledgment note.
• ③ The indication of authorship must be determined fairly, reflecting research contribution, based on consultation between all researchers.

Chapter 3. Research misconduct and other unethical research practices

Article 11 (Concept and types of research misconduct)

• ① “Research misconduct” refers to acts of forgery and falsification, plagiarism, and unfair authorship of papers that occur during the entire research process (research proposal, research performance, reporting and presentation of research results, research review and evaluation, etc.) This refers to acts, duplicate postings, and other illegal acts.
  • “Forgery” refers to the act of creating false data or research results that do not exist.
  • “Falsification” refers to the act of distorting research content or results by artificially manipulating the research process or arbitrarily modifying or deleting data (here, “deletion” refers to intentionally altering data that interferes with the derivation of expected research results). refers to the act of excluding and selecting and using only advantageous data).
  • “Plagiarism” refers to the act of using someone else’s work, research idea, idea, hypothesis, theory, or other research results protected under copyright law as if it were the author’s own research results or claims without proper approval or citation.
  • “Unfair paper author indication” refers to the act of not granting paper authorship to a person who has made an academic contribution to research content or results without justifiable reason, or granting paper authorship to a person who has made no academic contribution.
  • “Duplicate publication” refers to resubmitting and publishing a paper with completely identical or almost identical text to an already published paper to an academic journal without informing the editor or readers of the existence of the paper already published.
• ② In addition to research misconduct in accordance with the above regulations, the research ethics committee of the academic society may conduct research misconduct for acts that seriously deviate from the scope normally accepted in academia, undue pressure or interference with the activities of the research ethics committee, and inappropriate writing practices in Article 9. It can be judged by action.

Article 12 (Regulations on conflict of interest)

• ① If a conflict of interest occurs or is likely to arise for the researcher in relation to research planning, data collection, analysis, interpretation, publication, use of results, etc., the fairness of the research, the safety of research subjects, and social trust in academic research may be damaged. Therefore, researchers must manage conflicts of interest.
• ② Conflict of interest means a case that may have a negative impact on fair professional judgment or research performance due to any of the following reasons.
  • Financial conflict of interest: Cases caused by the researcher’s financial interests related to the research.
  • Interpersonal conflict of interest: Cases caused by personal relationships such as personal friendship, influence of affiliated organization, personal conflict, or research competition.
  • Intellectual conflict of interest: Cases arising from religious beliefs, worldview, moral convictions, or theoretical convictions regarding a specific type or field of research.
  • Conflict of interest due to role conflict: When the role of a member of the affiliated organization, such as education, volunteer work, or external activities, conflicts with research activities.
  • Other conflicts of interest: Cases arising from other reasons equivalent to items 1 to 4.
• ③ If there is a realistic or potential possibility that a conflict of interest may arise in relation to research, researchers must disclose it in full to ensure transparency and accountability, and make every effort to ensure that it does not have a negative impact on research.
• ④ Researchers must specify research funding details, sponsors, affiliated organizations, and other reasons for possible conflicts of interest as stipulated in Article 12 in the research plan, and must disclose this to the academic journal when announcing research results. If necessary, research subjects must also be informed of this.
• ⑤ If the degree of conflict of interest is serious and there is a realistic risk of negative impact on the research, the researcher must stop the research without delay, or when continuing the research, request supervision regarding the fairness of the research from an expert group independent of the conflict of interest. shall. The principal investigator must take appropriate measures, such as exclusion from certain research stages, to ensure that the fairness of the research is not damaged by co-researchers with conflicts of interest.

Article 13 (Inappropriate Writing Behavior)

• ① The following acts are considered inappropriate writing practices and minor research misconduct.
  • In case of inappropriate source citation
  • In case of distorting references
  • When citing a work that has not been read as a source
  • When content is intensively borrowed from one source and the source is only partially disclosed
• ② Research papers written through inappropriate writing practices in Paragraph 1 cannot be published in academic journals.
• ③ If the article is published in an academic journal despite the inappropriate writing practices described in Paragraph 1, the publication may be canceled within 5 years from the publication date of the relevant academic journal.

Article 14 (Ethical Code Pledge)

Before conducting research and submitting a research paper, authors must self-examine and familiarize themselves with the regulations on research ethics, pledge to comply with the research ethics regulations, and submit a research ethics compliance pledge provided by the academic society.

Chapter 4. Judgment on Research Misconducts

Article 15 (Role of Research Ethics Committee)

• ① The Research Ethics Committee deliberates on all matters related to the ethics of academic society members and acts that violate the research ethics regulations set forth in these regulations, and determines necessary measures based on the results of the deliberation.
• ② The Research Ethics Committee reviews and decides on violations of research ethics in an independent position when the possibility of research misconduct is recognized by the editorial committee or review committee, or when an individual or other organization requests the conduct of an investigation.
• ③ The decision on whether or not to investigate research misconduct by the Research Ethics Committee is made when the editorial committee or review committee under Paragraph ② recognizes the possibility of research misconduct and requests the Research Ethics Committee to investigate. However, in cases where an investigation is requested from an individual or another organization in relation to a member of the society, or when research misconduct at the society level is recognized, the standing board of directors of the society decides whether a research ethics investigation is necessary at the request of the research ethics committee. It follows.

Article 16 (Composition and operation of the research ethics committee)

• ① In order to deliberate and decide on the contents stipulated in these regulations, a research ethics committee composed of up to 10 research ethics committee members, including one research ethics committee chairperson, shall be established.
• ② The research ethics committee chairperson is appointed by the president of the academic society, and the research ethics committee member is appointed by the academic society president upon recommendation of the chairperson.
• ③ The term of office of the research ethics committee chair and research ethics committee members is five years and may be reappointed.
• ④ The research ethics committee decides with the attendance of a majority of the research ethics committee members and a majority of the members present.
• ⑤ The Research Ethics Committee observes confidentiality regarding all information obtained in relation to the deliberation of research ethics.

Article 17 (Investigation, action and disciplinary action for violations of research ethics)

• ① If a researcher is recognized or reported to have violated research ethics, the Research Ethics Committee must investigate and report the details to the president of the academic society.
• ② When the Research Ethics Committee investigates violations of research ethics, researchers must be given sufficient opportunity to explain themselves and their identity must not be disclosed to the outside world.
• ③ If a researcher violates research ethics, such as plagiarizing a paper or publishing duplicates, the president of the society must take the following measures based on the details of the investigation by the Research Ethics Committee and the resolution of the standing board of directors.
  • It is deleted from the list of papers in the journal of this society.
  • Applicants for paper publication are prohibited from submitting papers for the next 3 years.
  • Announce the fact of violation of research ethics on the academic society website.
  • Notify the Korea Research Foundation (KCI) of the research violation and withdraw the paper.
  • A warning notice is sent to all authors of the paper, and all authors' affiliated institutions and supervisory agencies are notified of cancellation of the paper.
• ④ If the President of the Society receives a report from the Research Ethics Committee of a researcher's violation of research ethics, he/she may take disciplinary action, such as suspension of qualifications or withdrawal, in addition to the preceding paragraph, upon resolution by the Executive Board.
• ⑤ If a researcher applies for reconsideration, the president of the society may have the Research Ethics Committee conduct a reinvestigation, and the details of the action and disciplinary action may be changed upon resolution by the standing board of directors.

Chapter 5. General Management Provisions

Article 18 (Budget)

Expenses incurred for the work of the Research Ethics Committee are supported by the academic society's budget.

Article 19 (Opening and Closing)

Any revision or abolition of this regulation shall be decided by the Board of Directors of the Society.

Chapter 6. Guidelines for securing research ethics

Article 20 (Measures for author information of researchers’ research works)

In accordance with the Ministry of Education's revised guidelines for securing research ethics (July 2018), the researcher's affiliation and position (author information) are accurately disclosed when presenting the researcher's research results to enhance the reliability of the research.

Article 21 (Records)

For papers published in our academic journals, a separate paper author information file is created and managed.

Article 22 (Gender Innovation Policy Submission Regulations)

• ① Manuscripts must distinguish between sex, which refers to biological differences, and gender, which refers to identity or mental or cultural distinctions.
• ② Manuscripts must report the sex, gender, or both of the research participants, and the sex of the animals or cells. You should also describe the methods used to determine sex and gender.
• ③ If the research targets only one sex or gender, the author must reasonably explain the reason in the manuscript, except in obvious cases (e.g. prostate cancer).
• ④ The author must describe the method of determining race or ethnicity and the necessity of such classification for research.

Article 23 (Guidelines for Specially Related Persons)

• ① In order to prevent research misconduct by co-authors of specially related persons, papers in which the researcher participated as a minor (person under 19 years of age) or family member (spouse, children, and blood relatives within the 4th degree of consanguinity) must have a clear contribution of the specially related person to the research and writing of the paper. There must be.
• ② For joint research papers with specially related persons, submit the ‘Pre-disclosure form when co-authoring papers with specially related persons’ when submitting the paper.
• ③ When the research misconduct of a co-author of a specially related person is confirmed, the fact of the research misconduct of the specially related person shall be notified to the relevant organizations (schools related to entrance and advancement, research-related institutions, etc.) where the specially related author benefited from the paper.

Article 24 (Ethics of human subjects research)

• ① Researchers conducting research involving humans must respect the human rights, health, and welfare of research subjects as much as possible.
• ② After fully explaining to research subjects the purpose and procedures of the research, expected risks, etc., their voluntary consent must be obtained.
• ③ Risks to research subjects must be minimized and research that seriously compromises the health and welfare of research subjects must not be conducted.

Article 25 (Deliberation by the Bioethics Review Committee)

Research on human subjects must begin after submitting a research plan to an accredited bioethics review committee and receiving approval.

Article 26 (Ethics of research on animal subjects)

• ① Researchers using animals must respect the health and welfare of experimental animals and conduct research in an overall scientific and ethical manner.
• ② Non-animal models or lower animals should be used as test subjects whenever possible, and various methods to reduce the number of subjects should be used. Animal pain and anxiety must be eliminated or minimized. Research on animals must begin after submitting a research plan to an accredited animal testing ethics committee and receiving approval.
• ③ At the end of research on animal subjects, animals whose experiments have ended must be euthanized in a humane manner. Carcasses of laboratory animals must be stored in accordance with the provisions of the head of each laboratory animal facility and disposed of in accordance with the infectious waste disposal standards under the ‘Waste Management Act’.
• ④ Regarding other matters, the relevant regulations within the ‘Animal Protection Act’ and the ‘Act on Laboratory Animals’ must be complied with.