The Netherlands Journal of Critical Care (Neth. J. Crit. Care) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, academic honesty, and responsible publication. The journal takes allegations of research or publication misconduct seriously and follows relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

The journal follows applicable COPE flowcharts and guidance when assessing and responding to allegations of research or publication misconduct. COPE Guidance and Flowcharts

1. Author Responsibility

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their research and manuscripts comply with the journal's Guide for Authors, Submission Guidelines, Research Ethics Policy, Publication Ethics Policy, and other applicable journal policies.

Authors are expected to read and understand these requirements carefully before submission and to ensure that all information provided to the journal is accurate, complete, and truthful.

By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that:

• The work is original and appropriately attributed.
• The manuscript has not been submitted simultaneously to another journal.
• All listed authors meet the journal's authorship requirements.
• All relevant sources have been properly acknowledged.
• Research data have not been fabricated or falsified.
• Required ethical approval has been obtained where applicable.
• Required informed consent has been obtained where applicable.
• Relevant conflicts of interest have been disclosed.
• The manuscript complies with applicable research and publication-ethics requirements.

2. Types of Misconduct

Research or publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

• Plagiarism or substantial unattributed copying
• Fabrication of research data or results
• Falsification or manipulation of data
• Inappropriate manipulation of images or figures
• Duplicate or redundant publication
• Simultaneous submission to multiple journals
• Citation manipulation
• Improper or fraudulent authorship
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest
• Fabricated or manipulated peer review
• Failure to obtain required ethical approval
• Failure to obtain required informed consent
• Unethical treatment of human participants or animals
• Misrepresentation of research methods or findings
• Misuse or inappropriate disclosure of confidential information
• Deliberate concealment of relevant research or publication information

3. Allegations Before Publication

If an allegation is received before publication, the editorial team will assess the concern and determine whether further investigation is warranted.

The journal may:

• Request an explanation from the authors.
• Request supporting documents, original data, ethical approvals, or other relevant information.
• Conduct additional plagiarism or similarity screening.
• Consult reviewers, editors, statistical experts, or other specialists where appropriate.
• Contact the authors' institution or relevant research authority where necessary.
• Suspend editorial processing while the matter is investigated.
• Reject the manuscript where serious misconduct is established or cannot be satisfactorily resolved.

4. Fair and Confidential Investigation

Allegations will be handled as fairly and confidentially as reasonably possible.

Authors will normally be given an opportunity to respond to substantive allegations and provide relevant evidence or clarification.

The journal will avoid making conclusions about serious misconduct solely on the basis of an unverified allegation.

5. Institutional Involvement

Where appropriate, particularly in cases involving suspected fabrication, falsification, serious ethical violations, or disputes that require institutional investigation, the journal may refer the matter to the relevant author's institution, research organization, ethics committee, funder, or other competent authority.

The journal may request that the appropriate institution conduct a formal investigation and communicate the outcome to the editorial office.

6. Allegations After Publication

Research misconduct concerns may arise after an article has been published. The journal will assess credible post-publication allegations and may request explanations, supporting data, ethical documentation, or other evidence from the authors.

Where necessary, the journal may contact the relevant institution or authority and follow the applicable COPE guidance.

7. Editorial Actions

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

• Request clarification or additional documentation.
• Require correction of the manuscript.
• Reject a manuscript before publication.
• Suspend publication.
• Publish a correction.
• Publish an Expression of Concern.
• Retract a published article.
• Notify the relevant institution or authority.
• Take other appropriate measures to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

8. Retraction

An article may be considered for retraction where substantial evidence indicates that its findings are unreliable because of serious research or publication misconduct, unethical research, major errors, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other circumstances that significantly compromise the integrity of the published record.

Retraction decisions will be handled in accordance with applicable publication-ethics principles.

9. Expressions of Concern

Where serious concerns exist but a definitive investigation has not yet been completed, the journal may publish an Expression of Concern to alert readers while the matter is being investigated.

10. Reviewer and Editor Responsibilities

Reviewers and editors are encouraged to report credible concerns regarding research or publication misconduct to the editorial office.

Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and should not investigate allegations independently or contact authors directly about suspected misconduct unless instructed by the editorial office.

Editors will assess allegations objectively and manage them according to the journal's policies and applicable COPE guidance.

11. False or Malicious Allegations

The journal takes legitimate allegations seriously but does not support knowingly false, malicious, defamatory, or bad-faith allegations against authors, reviewers, editors, or other individuals.

Concerns should be supported by reasonable evidence wherever possible.

12. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit an appeal or complaint concerning an editorial or misconduct-related decision where they have substantive grounds for reconsideration.

Appeals should provide clear reasons and relevant supporting information. The journal may seek independent advice or refer the matter to an appropriate authority where necessary.

13. Compliance with Journal Policies

Authors are strongly encouraged to read the journal's Guide for Authors, Manuscript Submission Guidelines, Publication Ethics Policy, Research Ethics Policy, Authorship and Contributorship Policy, Plagiarism Policy, Conflict of Interest Policy, and other relevant policies carefully before submission.

Failure to comply with these policies may result in manuscript rejection or other appropriate editorial action.

14. Commitment to Research Integrity

The Netherlands Journal of Critical Care is committed to protecting the integrity of the scientific record and ensuring that allegations of research misconduct are handled fairly, consistently, confidentially, and transparently.

The journal will use relevant COPE flowcharts and guidance as an important framework when determining appropriate procedures and actions in cases of suspected research or publication misconduct.

The journal may periodically update this policy to reflect developments in research integrity, publication ethics, and guidance from COPE, ICMJE, and other recognized scholarly organizations.