Retraction Policy

The editorial board of the journal adheres to international ethical standards, including the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, and reliability of the scholarly record. Retraction is considered a formal mechanism for correcting the literature when significant ethical issues or invalid findings are identified.

An article may be retracted in cases including, but not limited to:

• plagiarism or self-plagiarism;
• data fabrication or falsification;
• duplicate publication without proper cross-referencing or permission;
• serious methodological or analytical errors that invalidate the results or conclusions;
• violations of research ethics (e.g., lack of ethical approval where required);
• copyright infringement or incorrect attribution of authorship;
• undisclosed conflicts of interest that may have influenced the research;
• other forms of academic or publication misconduct.

Retraction may be initiated by the authors of the article, the editor-in-chief or editorial board, peer reviewers, readers or external researchers, institutions or funding organizations. All claims must be clearly substantiated with relevant evidence or documentation.

Upon receipt of a retraction request, the editorial office:

• conducts an initial assessment of the claim;
• may consult independent experts or members of the editorial board;
• requests clarifications from the authors when necessary;
• evaluates the case in accordance with principles of fairness, objectivity, and confidentiality.

The duration of the review process depends on the complexity of the case.

Following the review, one of the following actions may be taken:

• rejection of the complaint as unsubstantiated;
• publication of a correction (erratum or corrigendum);
• publication of an expression of concern;
• full retraction of the article.

If an article is retracted:

• an official retraction notice is published, clearly stating the reasons;
• the original article remains accessible in the journal archive but is clearly marked as “Retracted”;
• metadata and indexing records are updated accordingly;
• the scholarly record is preserved to ensure transparency.

Authors are formally notified of the decision and its justification. If applicable, complainants are informed of the outcome, while respecting confidentiality requirements.

Authors may submit an appeal within a specified timeframe. Appeals are reviewed by independent experts or the editor-in-chief, and the final decision is considered conclusive.