Ethics and Misconduct, Correction and Retraction Policy

The journal ensures ethical procedures throughout its editorial process, from submission and evaluation to publication, with no tolerance for academic misconduct by either the Editorial Team or its authors.

The Brazilian Journal of Occupational Therapy adheres to the principles of SciELO’s Codes of Ethics, as detailed in the “Guidelines on Best Practices for Strengthening Ethics in Scientific Publication”, the “Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Academic Publishing” recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the principles of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and the principles of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). All authors, editors, section editors, and reviewers must be aware of and follow these guidelines at all stages of the publication process.

For research in virtual environments, the document from the Brazilian  Research Ethics Commission (CONEP) is used as a reference. Foreign researchers should consult an equivalent document or contact the editorial office.

Studies involving experiments with humans or animals must be approved by an Committee on Publication Ethics.

Clinical trials must be registered with the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC).

All cases involving suspected misconduct will be investigated by the journal to resolve all doubts. There is a commitment to publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions, as well as notes of concern if necessary.

Authors, when submitting texts for evaluation, should always ensure to:

  •  Follow the criteria for authorship attribution, including only researchers involved in the study and not including as co-authors those who did not participate in the work;
  •  Cite and correctly reference all data and data interpretations from other publications;
  •  Report any conflict of interest of all authors;
  •  Disclose all sources of funding;
  •  Submit only original texts for evaluation, which have not been presented to other publications, ensuring the fidelity and authenticity of the data;
  •  Make retractions or corrections of errors when necessary.

Reviewers, when invited to evaluate any text, should commit to:

  •  Decline the invitation if there are any conflicts of interest;
  •  Perform the evaluation themselves with the utmost rigor;
  •  Accept invitations only when able to complete the evaluation within the stipulated timeframe or contact the editor to check the possibility of an extension;
  •  Inform about any relevant reference published that was not cited in the text;
  •  Maintain absolute confidentiality about the reviewed texts, not discuss them with colleagues, nor use information to their benefit until the article is published.

Editors must always:

  •  Ensure a peer review process that is unbiased and impartial;
  •  Guarantee the anonymity of reviewers from the authors, except for articles available on preprint servers;
  •  Evaluate and investigate all cases and suspicions of misconduct and unethical behavior;
  •  Prevent financial interests from compromising the ethical standards of the publication;
  •  Ensure there is no plagiarism and that fraudulent data and results are not published.

For cases requiring retraction, the journal will adopt the policies of SciELO as outlined in the Guidelines on Best Practices for Strengthening Ethics in Scientific Publication, the Guide to Recording, Marking and Publishing Correction, and the Guide for Registering, Marking and Publishing a Retraction.