Allegations of Research Misconduct Policy

BMB takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. Concerns are handled fairly, confidentially to the extent reasonably possible, objectively, and in accordance with recognized publication ethics guidance.

Allegations may concern manuscripts under review or articles that have already been published. An allegation alone does not establish misconduct. Decisions must be based on a careful assessment of relevant evidence and the responses provided by the parties concerned.

BMB's role is to assess publication-related concerns and take appropriate editorial action. Where a matter requires a formal investigation beyond the journal's authority, BMB may refer the concern to the relevant institution or competent authority.

Important distinction: Honest errors, reasonable differences of scholarly interpretation, and authorship disagreements are not automatically findings of research misconduct. Each concern must be assessed in its specific context and under the applicable ethical standards.

Authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, and other concerned parties may report suspected misconduct to the BMB Editorial Board through the journal's official contact channels.

Reports should, where possible, include:

• The manuscript title or published article details.
• A clear description of the suspected concern.
• Relevant supporting evidence, such as documents, citations, data records, or other verifiable information.
• Contact details where the reporting party is willing to provide them for follow-up.

BMB will handle reports confidentially to the extent reasonably possible, subject to the need for a fair assessment and any applicable legal or institutional obligations. Retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith is not acceptable.

Depending on the nature of the concern, the strength of the evidence, and the effect on the scholarly record, BMB may:

• Request clarification, additional evidence, correction, or revision.
• Pause editorial processing while a serious concern is assessed.
• Reject a submission where serious ethical violations are substantiated.
• Publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction when warranted.
• Contact relevant institutions, publishers, or competent authorities where appropriate.
• Take other proportionate editorial measures consistent with the journal's policies.

Editorial actions are based on an assessment of evidence and are not imposed solely because an allegation has been made, a similarity score is high, or an automated tool has flagged content.

BMB seeks to protect the confidentiality of allegations, evidence, correspondence, and the identities of the parties involved, to the extent reasonably possible. Information is shared only when needed for a fair assessment, appropriate consultation, or compliance with applicable obligations.

Individuals whose work is the subject of an allegation will normally be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to the material concerns before an editorial determination is made, except where urgent protective action is justified.

Editors, reviewers, and advisers involved in handling a case must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and should not participate in decisions where their impartiality may reasonably be questioned. The journal will seek to handle each matter objectively and without retaliation against good-faith reporters.

Concerns identified after publication are assessed according to their seriousness and their potential effect on the reliability, validity, or ethical acceptability of the published work.

Where warranted, BMB may publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction. The type of notice will depend on the available evidence and the nature of the issue.

Post-publication notices should identify the affected article clearly, explain the reason for the editorial action, and be linked to the relevant article where practicable. Retractions are intended to correct the scholarly record, not merely to punish authors.