Misconduct is Confirmed

Procedures when Misconduct is Confirmed

When an allegation of scientific or publication misconduct has been investigated and confirmed, the Libyan Journal of Dentistry follows a clear, proportionate, and well-documented set of procedures, in accordance with the COPE flowcharts.

Stages of the Response

Stage 1 — Confirmation of the Finding

The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the handling editor and at least one other senior member of the Editorial Board not previously involved with the manuscript, formally records the finding.

Stage 2 — Notice to the Authors

The corresponding author (and, where appropriate, every co-author) is notified in writing of the finding, the evidence supporting it, the proposed actions, and the deadline for any final response from the authors.

Stage 3 — Selection of the Appropriate Action

The journal selects one or more of the actions in §11.2 below, in proportion to the nature and severity of the misconduct, the harm to the scientific record, and the degree of culpability.

Stage 4 — Publication of the Appropriate Notice

Where the misconduct concerns a published article, the journal publishes a Correction, Expression of Concern, or Retraction notice in accordance with the Corrections & Retractions policy.

Stage 5 — Communication with Third Parties

The journal notifies the authors' institutions, other journals where the authors have published or have submissions under review, indexing services, and (where appropriate) relevant professional or regulatory bodies.

Stage 6 — Record-keeping

The journal retains a complete and confidential record of the case for at least ten years.

Available Actions

For submitted but unpublished manuscripts

  • Rejection of the manuscript;
  • Confidential notification of the corresponding author and, in serious cases, of the authors' institution;
  • A bar on resubmission of the same or substantially similar work to LJD.

For published articles

  • Issue of a Correction notice, where the error does not affect the conclusions and can be transparently corrected;
  • Issue of an Expression of Concern, where investigation is ongoing or inconclusive;
  • Issue of a formal Retraction, where the findings are unreliable or the work was conducted unethically;
  • Permanent flagging of the original article with the relevant notice and DOI.

Against the authors

  • Confidential written warning;
  • Formal written notification to the authors' institution requesting an institutional investigation;
  • Notification of other journals where the authors have published or have manuscripts under review;
  • Temporary ban on submissions to LJD (typically one to five years);
  • Permanent ban on submissions to LJD, reserved for the most serious cases;
  • Removal from the LJD reviewer database or Editorial Board where applicable;
  • Referral to relevant professional bodies, regulatory authorities, or law-enforcement agencies.

Right of Representation

Before any sanction is imposed, the corresponding author (and, where appropriate, every co-author) is given a reasonable opportunity to respond in writing to the finding and the proposed sanction.

Right of Appeal

Authors who consider that a sanction has been imposed in error or with manifest unfairness may appeal in writing to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of the decision. The appeal is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief together with two senior members of the Editorial Board not previously involved with the case. Decisions reached after appeal are final.

Restoration

Where a sanction was imposed on the basis of evidence later shown to be flawed, the Editor-in-Chief lifts the sanction, retracts any published notice that was based on the flawed evidence, and issues an apology to the authors concerned.

Confidentiality

All proceedings under this policy are confidential, except where the publication of a notice is itself part of the sanction.