| Established 2012. 03. 03. Revised 2015. 04. 30. Revised 2017. 02. 20. Revised 2019. 03. 01. |
Chapter 1. General
Article 1 (Purpose) The purpose of this research ethical codes (hereinafter referred to as "ethical code") is to prescribe the principle and the standard of the research ethics during the process of conducting studies and training related to research based on the regulation of Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (hereafter known as KAOMS).
① Researchers shall contribute to the improvement of the people's health and quality of life by maintaining bioethics and safety in the life science field to prevent the infringement upon the dignity and the value of man, and by creating a circumstance for the life science technology to be developed and used to treat or prevent diseases.
② Researchers shall establish policies to effectively cope with the problems related to life ethics and safety that might occur during the process of developing and using dental medicine and life science technology.
③ Persons to study, develop and use dental medicine and life science technology shall make efforts to ensure that the life science technology will not infringe upon the dignity and the value of mankind and shall be appropriate in respect to life ethics and safety.
Article 2 (Scope) This regulation applies to the members of KAOMS as well as to the nonmembers who submit to the journals published by KAOMS or present their views at the symposiums or societies sponsored by KAOMS (hereinafter referred to as "nonmember").
Article 3 (Pledge Related to Ethical Codes) Members or nonmembers who contribute articles to the journals published by KAOMS shall make pledge to observe this codes.
Article 4 (Reporting Violation of Ethical Codes) If a member recognizes that another members or nonmembers have violated ethical codes, he/she shall make efforts to correct the problem by reminding relevant members of the ethical codes. However, if the problem cannot be corrected or if it clearly violates ethics regulation, the member may report it to the Research Ethics Committee of KAOMS. The Research Ethics Committee shall not disclose the identity of the member who has report the case to the KAOMS. The journal follows the COPE Flowcharts (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts) for resolving cases of suspected misconduct.
Chapter 2. Ethical Codes Related to Research
Section 1. Ethical Codes for Authors
Article 5 (Plagiarism) The author shall not present, in the manuscript or writing, the part of other individuals' researches or assertions as if theirs. Even though researchers may cite the results of other studies many times, presenting the part of such results as their own results or assertions shall constitute plagiarism.
Article 6 (Authorship) ① The journal follows the recommendations for authorship by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE; http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/). Authorship credit should be based on (1) substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; (2) drafting the work or revising it 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. Authors should meet conditions of 1, 2, 3, and 4.
② The order of the authors (translators) of (manuscript) or publications shall be accurately indicated according to the level of contribution to research activities irrespective of relative position. Becoming a writer or 1st writer simply by his/her certain position cannot be justified. On the other hand, if a person is not mentioned as a co-writer (translator) or a joint researcher despite to researches or writing (translation), it also cannot be justified. For minor contribution to researches or writing (translation), gratitude shall be expressed in an appropriate way through footnotes, introduction or acknowledgement.
Article 7 (Redundant Publications of Research Products or Duplicate Publications) The author cannot, internally or externally, publish or attempt to publish (submit manuscript) his/her previously printed research products (including accepted paper or those currently under examination) as if they are new research products. If author tend to publish articles using the already-presented research results, he/she shall provide information on previous publications to the editor of the journal to be published, and verify whether the intended publications constitute redundant or duplicate publications.
Article 8 (Quoting and Indicating Sources) ① To quote published academic materials, the researcher try to accurately describe related materials, and reference of the source must be made as long as they do not belong to common sense. In the case of materials obtained while evaluating other's theses or research proposal or obtained through private contacts, such data may be quoted only after obtaining consent from the researcher who has provided such information. ② To quote other person's writing or use someone else's idea; it should be indicated through footnotes (endnotes).
Article 9 (Correcting Manuscript) The author shall accommodate the comments of the editor and the reviewer presented during the process of evaluating as much as possible, and make efforts to reflect such opinions in the manuscript.
Article 10 (Responsibility) The editor shall take full responsibility to make decisions for publish the submitted manuscript, and shall respect the author's integrity as a scholar and his/her right to do independent research.
Article 11 (Handling) The editor shall fairly treat all papers submitted to journals, only by paper quality and submission policy, not by author's gender, age, division, prejudices or private relationships.
Article 12 (Fair Request for Review) The editor shall request to the reviewer with expertise in the relevant field and. For objective evaluation, the reviewers must be avoided who are excessively close or hostile to the author. When 2 reviewers' evaluations are too different, a third reviewer in the relevant field shall be requested to conduct examination.
Article 13 (Confidentiality) Until the final decision has been made, the editor shall not disclose the identity of the author or the contents of the manuscript to others except the reviewers.
Article 14 (Honest Review) The reviewer shall honestly review the manuscript requested by the journal editor (committee) within deadline, and shall send the results of review to the editor (committee). If the editor is not considered qualified, the researcher shall immediately inform the fact to the editor (committee).
Article 15 (Impartial Examination) The reviewer shall objectively evaluate manuscript not having personal academic faith or private relationship with the author. The reviewer shall not reject manuscript without specifying sufficient basis or shall not simply reject because it conflicts with the reviewer's own viewpoint or interpretations, or shall not review without careful reading.
Article 16 (Respect to Author) The reviewer shall respect the integrity as a scholar and his/her right to do the independent research. The reviewer shall explain his/her judgment in the review comment, and if supplementary explanation needed, reasons shall be described in details. The commentary should be courteous and constructive, and should avoid the expressions which might belittle or insult the author.
Article 17 (Confidentiality) Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Unless special advice is sought in relation to examination of the manuscript, it must not be shown to, or discussed with others. In addition, unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not ve used in a reviewer's own research without consent of the author.
Chapter 3. Research Ethics Committee
Article 18 (Membership and Voting) ① The Research Ethics Committee shall consist of 3 or more members, and Editor-in-Chief shall appoint the members recommended by editorial board.
② The Research Ethics Committee shall have 1 Committee Chair, and the Chair shall be voted by members.
③ The Research Ethics Committee shall adopt resolutions by the vote of 2/3 of the registered members.
Article 19 (Rights) ① The Research Ethics Committee shall investigate the case of Ethical Codes violation over the reporter, violator, witness, person for reference and evidence, and report the results to the Editor-in-Chief.
② Committee Chair can make a proposition to the president for restriction when article 5 or 8 was violated.
Article 20 (Research Ethics Committee's Investigation and Deliberation) Members or nonmembers violating Ethical Codes follow the Research Ethics Committee's investigation. Responding negatively to the Research Ethics Committee's investigation shall constitute violating Ethical Codes.
Article 21 (Guarantee Opportunity to Explain) The Research Ethics Committee shall provide sufficient opportunities to explain to the members or nonmembers reported as violating Ethical Codes.
Article 22 (Restriction Procedures and Details for the Violating Ethical Codes) ① When accordance with Article 19, the Research Ethics Committee reports or requests restrictions against violating members or nonmembers, the Editor-in-Chief shall convene an editorial board, and the board shall consider post measure to restriction.
② If the editorial board decides to violating members or nonmembers of Article 5 through Article 8, the board shall impose any one of the following restrictions in accordance with the seriousness of the violation. Note that restrictions specified in each item may be imposed concurrently.