Ethical Guidelines and Regulations

Publishing responsibilities of authors

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of work of the author and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior.

Conducting Research

·         Reporting standards

  • Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be identified as such.

·         Hazards and human or animal subjects

  • If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
    Ensure correct use of the terms sex (when reporting biological factors) and gender (identity, psychosocial or cultural factors), and, unless inappropriate, report the sex and/or gender of study participants, the sex of animals or cells, and describe the methods used to determine sex and gender. If the study was done involving an exclusive population, for example in only one sex, authors should justify why, except in obvious cases (e.g., prostate cancer).

·         Use of patient images or case details

Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper.
Appropriate consents, permissions, and releases must be obtained where an author wishes to include case details or other personal information or images of patients and any other individuals in an ASCT publication. Written consents must be retained by the author and copies of the consents or evidence that such consents have been obtained must be provided to ASCT on request.
Particular care should be taken with obtaining consent where children are concerned (in particular where a child has special needs or learning disabilities), where an individual’s head or face appears, or where reference is made to an individual’s name or other personal details.

Writing an Article

·         Originality and plagiarism

  • The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, which this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

·         Data access and retention

  • Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases;;, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

·         Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

  • In general, an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
    In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.

·         Similarity Check

  • Similarity Check is a multi-publisher initiative to screen published and submitted content for originality. To find out more about Similarity Check, visit All manuscripts submitted to ASCT may be screened, using the iThenticate tool, for textual similarity to other previously published works.

·         Acknowledgments of sources

  • Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in those services.

·         Conflicts of interest and disclosure

  • A conflict of interest may exist when an author or the author’s institution has a financial or other relationship with other people or organizations that may inappropriately influence the author’s work. A conflict can be actual or potential, and full disclosure to the journal is the safest course. All submissions must include disclosure of all relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest. The journal may use such information as a basis for editorial decisions and may publish such disclosures if they are believed to be important to readers in judging the manuscript. A decision may be made by the journal not to publish on the basis of the declared conflict. At the end of the text, under a subheading ‘Disclosure Statement’, all authors must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations within three years of beginning the work submitted that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work.
    Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
    All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. This declaration (with the heading ‘Role of the funding source’) should be made in a separate section of the text and placed before the References. Authors must describe the role of the study sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

·         Fundamental errors in published works

  • When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

·         Authorship of the paper

  • Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Co-authorship should be based on the following 4 criteria: (1) substantial contributions to the conception or designing of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; (2) drafting or revising of the work critically for important intellectual content; (3) final approval of the version to be published; and (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.


·         Changes to authorship

  • This policy concerns the addition, deletion, or rearrangement of author names in the authorship of accepted manuscripts. Before the accepted manuscript is published in an online issue:
    • Requests to add or remove an author, or to rearrange the author names, must be sent to the Journal Manager by the corresponding author of the accepted manuscript, and must include:
    • The reason the name should be added or removed, or the author names rearranged
    • Written confirmation (e-mail, fax, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed.
  • Requests that are not sent by the corresponding author will be forwarded by the Journal Manager to the corresponding author, who must follow the procedure described above. Note that:

    • Journal Managers will inform the Journal Editors of any such requests.
    • Publication of the accepted manuscript in an online issue is suspended until authorship has been agreed.
    • After the accepted manuscript has been published in an online issue, any requests to add, delete or rearrange author names in an article published in an online issue will follow the same policies as noted above and may result in a corrigendum.


Ethics Committee

·         Purpose and Function

  • Under the research ethics regulations, an ethics committee shall be established to ensure the ethical nature of the society's papers, publications, and upcoming publications. The following matters shall be deliberated and resolved.
    • Matters concerning the establishment and operation of systems related to research ethics.
    • Matters concerning the monitoring of wrongful acts.
    • Matters concerning the receipt of reports of wrongful acts, member composition of the investigation committee, and the appointment of investigators.
    • Preliminary investigation and commencement of the main investigation.
    • Matters concerning the protection of informants and actions to restore the reputation of the accused.
    • Matters concerning the settlement of preliminary and main investigation results as well as follow-up action.
  • Other discussion matters proposed by the committee president.

·         Composition

  • The Ethics Committee shall consist of no more than five members, including the editorial director, and the Chairman and members of the committee shall be appointed by the president of the society.

·         Chairman

  • The Chairman of the Ethics Committee is responsible for representing the board, convening meetings, and presiding over meetings.

·         Assistant Administrator

  • The administrative manager for the society’s journal shall be an assistant administrator responsible for overseeing the committee’s administrative affairs.

·         Meetings

    • The committee Chairman shall convene meetings and become the chairperson.
    • A meeting shall be resolved with the participation of at least 1/2 of the enrolled members and approval by more than 1/2 of the attendees. At least two-thirds of all members attending must consent to a disciplinary decision on a request for disciplinary action relating to an ethical violation confirmed by the investigation committee established pursuant to Article 14 of the Research Ethics Regulations of the Society. The committee president may proceed with a written deliberation when the agenda for deliberation is minor.

Management of Research and Publication Misconduct

When malpractices are found in an article submitted to the Journal, ASCT will follow the flowchart by the Committee on Publication Ethics ( for settlement of any misconduct. Although the editors and reviewers make every effort to ensure the validity of published manuscripts, please acknowledge the final responsibility rests with the authors.

Supplementary provision

These rules are effective from October 17, 2008.
(Established in October 17, 2008)
(1st Revised in January 11, 2019)