Introduction

Virtus International Journal of Research (VIJR) expects authors, reviewers, and editors to act with honesty, integrity, fairness, and respect for the rights of others. This policy addresses responsible research conduct, ethical reporting, participant protection, and the handling of suspected misconduct.

The policy applies to submissions and published articles across the journal’s multidisciplinary scope, including Engineering, Technology, and Applied Sciences. Requirements concerning human participants, biological materials, animals, and clinical investigations apply only where relevant to the research and within the journal’s scope.

1. Research Integrity and Scholarly Responsibilities

Authors must present research accurately and transparently. Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, deceptive image manipulation, and concealment of material research limitations are unacceptable.

Authors are responsible for:

• Reporting methods, results, and interpretations faithfully.
• Acknowledging sources and disclosing substantive overlap with related work.
• Identifying authorship and contributions accurately.
• Disclosing relevant funding, competing interests, and sponsor involvement.
• Obtaining applicable ethical approvals, permissions, and consent before undertaking activities that require them.
• Retaining supporting records in accordance with applicable institutional, funder, and regulatory requirements.
• Cooperating with reasonable requests to clarify ethical or integrity concerns.

Image processing, data cleaning, and analytical exclusions must not misrepresent the evidence. Material adjustments and exclusions should be explained sufficiently to permit informed evaluation.

Reviewers must provide objective assessments, preserve confidentiality, disclose conflicts of interest, and report suspected ethical concerns to the editor. Editors must assess concerns impartially and avoid participating in cases where their interests could compromise independent judgment.

2. Ethical Approval and Applicability

Research must meet the ethical, institutional, and regulatory requirements applicable to its location, design, participants, materials, and data.

Where prior ethical review is required, authors must obtain approval from an appropriately constituted ethics committee or equivalent authorized body before beginning the relevant research activities.

The manuscript should state:

• The name of the approving committee or review body.
• The approval or reference number, where issued.
• The approval date, where relevant.
• Any approved consent waiver or other material condition.
• The ethical framework applicable to the study.

Where approval is not required, authors should explain the basis for that determination and identify any institutional exemption or equivalent assessment where available. Authors must not imply that retrospective documentation substitutes for required prior approval.

Research involving only simulations, non-personal technical measurements, or other activities outside human or animal research should be assessed according to its actual ethical implications rather than assigned an inapplicable approval requirement.

3. Research Involving Human Participants

Human-participant research may include surveys, interviews, user testing, wearable-device studies, human–computer interaction experiments, and assessments of engineering or technological interventions.

Authors must explain how participant rights, welfare, autonomy, and safety were protected. Medical research involving human participants should be conducted consistently with the applicable principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki, alongside relevant local and institutional requirements. The Declaration specifically concerns medical research involving human participants. The World Medical Association

For other forms of human-participant research, authors should identify the ethical standards appropriate to their discipline and study setting.

4. Informed Consent

Participants must receive understandable information about the research before agreeing to participate, unless an authorized waiver or alteration applies.

Information should address:

• The study’s purpose and relevant procedures.
• Foreseeable risks, burdens, and potential benefits.
• How personal information will be collected, used, protected, and shared.
• The voluntary nature of participation.
• Withdrawal arrangements and any limitations that participants need to understand.

Where participants cannot legally or practically provide valid consent, appropriate authorization must be obtained from a legally authorized representative in accordance with applicable requirements. Participant assent should also be sought where appropriate.

Any waiver or alteration of consent must be justified under the applicable ethical framework and approved by the responsible ethics body where required. The manuscript must describe the consent arrangements without disclosing confidential participant information.

5. Privacy and Consent for Publication

Authors must minimize unnecessary collection and disclosure of identifiable information. Manuscripts, supplementary files, and shared datasets should be checked for direct identifiers and combinations of details that could enable identification.

Identifiable photographs, recordings, personal histories, health information, or other participant details should be published only where scientifically necessary and supported by explicit, documented consent for publication or another applicable authorized basis.

Consent to participate in research does not automatically constitute consent to publish identifiable information.

Authors should:

• Remove unnecessary identifiers.
• Describe relevant confidentiality safeguards.
• Explain any important limits to anonymity.
• Ensure that data-sharing arrangements are compatible with consent and applicable requirements.

Signed consent forms should be retained securely by the responsible researchers or institution. They should not be included in routine manuscript files or supplementary materials.

6. Participants in Situations of Vulnerability

Additional safeguards are necessary where participants face increased risks of coercion, exploitation, exclusion, or harm. Vulnerability should be assessed in context rather than assumed solely from membership of a demographic group.

Relevant safeguards may include accessible information, supported decision-making, appropriate representative consent, independent recruitment arrangements, and measures to prevent undue influence.

Authors should explain safeguards relevant to their study, including arrangements for participants whose relationship with researchers could affect the freedom to decline participation.

7. Human Biological Materials and Personal Data

Studies using human tissues, specimens, genetic material, medical records, biometric information, or other personal data must explain:

• The source and authorized use of the materials or data.
• Relevant ethical approval or exemption.
• Consent arrangements or the basis for an authorized waiver.
• Privacy protections and access controls.
• Any restrictions affecting reuse or sharing.

Public availability of information does not, by itself, resolve every ethical question about its collection, analysis, linkage, or republication. Authors must consider applicable requirements and foreseeable risks of identification or harm.

8. Research Involving Animals

Animal research must comply with applicable welfare requirements and institutional oversight. Where required, ethical approval must be obtained before the research begins and identified in the manuscript.

Authors should explain the scientific justification for animal use and the measures taken to minimize pain, distress, and suffering. Relevant reporting includes animal numbers, procedures, welfare monitoring, pain relief, and humane endpoints.

Research design should reflect the principles of:

• Replacement: Using suitable alternatives to animals where possible.
• Reduction: Using scientifically justified numbers without compromising valid study design.
• Refinement: Improving procedures and care to minimize suffering.

Authors reporting in vivo animal experiments are encouraged to consult the ARRIVE Guidelines, which support sufficiently detailed and transparent reporting of animal research. ARRIVE Guidelines

9. Clinical Trials

Where a submission reports a clinical trial within VIJR’s scope, authors must disclose its registration status.

Prospective registration in a suitable publicly accessible registry, before enrollment of the first participant, is the appropriate standard for transparent trial reporting. Manuscripts should provide the registry name, registration identifier, registration date, and any explanation of delayed or absent registration.

The WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform provides information about recognized primary registries. ICTRP is a platform for accessing trial information, rather than a registry in which researchers directly register trials. who.int

Registration does not replace ethical approval or informed consent.

10. Transparent Reporting

Authors should use reporting guidance appropriate to the research design and discipline. Relevant examples include CONSORT for randomized trials, PRISMA for systematic reviews, STROBE for observational studies, CARE for case reports, ARRIVE for animal experiments, and SPIRIT for trial protocols.

Engineering, computational, and applied-science manuscripts should describe experimental conditions, datasets, equipment, software, validation methods, and analytical decisions sufficiently for informed assessment.

Reporting guidelines support transparency; completing a checklist does not establish that a study was ethically approved or properly conducted.

11. Assessment of Ethical Concerns

Concerns may arise from authors, reviewers, editors, readers, or supporting documentation. Reports should identify the manuscript or article, describe the concern, and provide available evidence.

Ethical concerns should receive timely, impartial, and confidential assessment. An allegation alone does not establish misconduct.

Assessment may involve:

1. Examining the reported concern and relevant evidence.
2. Requesting an explanation and supporting records from the authors.
3. Seeking independent advice where appropriate.
4. Considering whether institutional or other authorized investigation is necessary.
5. Determining the editorial response supported by the findings.

Requests for approval records, consent evidence, original data, or other documentation must respect participant privacy and legitimate access restrictions. Sensitive records should be provided only through an appropriate secure arrangement.

Relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) may inform the assessment of publication misconduct. Reference to COPE guidance does not imply COPE membership, certification, or endorsement.

12. Editorial Outcomes and the Published Record

Before publication, unresolved ethical deficiencies may require clarification, suspension of consideration, or rejection. Scientific merit does not override a serious failure to protect participants or meet applicable ethical requirements.

After publication, the response should reflect the evidence, seriousness of the concern, and consequences for the scholarly record. Appropriate outcomes may include:

• A correction for a limited, remediable problem.
• An expression of concern while a serious issue remains unresolved.
• Retraction where established ethical breaches or unreliable content warrant it.

Findings must distinguish deliberate misconduct from honest error while addressing any necessary correction in either case. Legitimate image processing should not be treated as equivalent to deceptive manipulation.

Where justified, relevant concerns or findings may be communicated to the authors’ institutions, funders, or other affected parties. Disclosure should be limited to what is necessary and should distinguish allegations from established conclusions.

Authors remain responsible for notifying the journal of significant ethical problems discovered after submission or publication and for assisting with appropriate corrective action.