Conflict of Interest: Author, Reviewer, Editor

Introduction: The modern academic environment represents a complex structure of interactions between authors, reviewers, and editors, who play key roles in the creation, evaluation, and publication of scientific knowledge. These roles require adherence to strict ethical standards; however, potential conflicts of interest can compromise the integrity and transparency of the publication process, undermining the entire architecture of scientific communication.

Purpose: The aim of this article is to analyze the main types of conflicts of interest that may arise among authors, reviewers, and editors, and to propose measures to minimize these conflicts to ensure transparency and objectivity in scientific publications.

Materials and Methods: This study employs a qualitative approach, including a systematic analysis of literature, an evaluation of policies and recommendations from academic journals, and a comparison of current conflict of interest management practices with standards proposed by leading organizations in publication ethics. The literature review included publications on financial and non-financial conflicts of interest, as well as an assessment of conflict of interest management policies in various academic journals. Existing policies and recommendations published on the websites of scientific journals were analyzed, focusing on managing potential conflicts of interest among editors, reviewers, and authors. Based on the findings, recommendations were formulated to improve conflict of interest management.

Results: The analysis revealed that not all journals implement policies for disclosing potential conflicts of interest. Some journals focus on financial conflicts of interest, while non-financial aspects, such as personal relationships and professional biases, often receive insufficient attention. Existing guidelines do not always fully cover the potential conflicts of interest of editors, and their enforcement can be inconsistent. The article identifies different types of conflicts of interest, provides examples of potential disclaimers, and suggests strategies for minimizing biases, including developing clear policies, ensuring transparency, independent peer review, and enhancing the competencies of authors, reviewers, and editors.

Conclusion: Managing conflicts of interest is critically important for maintaining trust in scientific publications and academic institutions. The mere disclosure of financial conflicts of interest is insufficient; more stringent and comprehensive policies that address non-financial conflicts are needed to ensure the objectivity of the publication process. Implementing systematic and transparent approaches to conflict of interest management can significantly strengthen the standards of academic ethics and the integrity of scientific research.

1. Al-Khatib, A., & Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2017). Threats to the survival of the author-pays-journal to publish model. Publishing Research Quarterly, 33(1), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-016-9486-z

2. Ancker, J. S., & Flanagin, A. (2007). A comparison of conflict of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in different scientific disciplines. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(2), 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-007-9011-z

3. Bhargava, N., Qureshi, J., & Vakil, N. (2007). Funding source and conflict of interest disclosures by authors and editors in gastroenterology specialty journals. The American Journal of Gastroenterology, 102(6), 1146–1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01268.x

4. Bosch, X., Pericas, J. M., Hernández, C., & Doti, P. (2013). Financial, nonfinancial and editors’ conflicts of interest in high-impact biomedical journals. European Journal of Clinical Investigation, 43(7), 660–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12090

5. Bravo, G., Farjam, M., Grimaldo Moreno, F., Birukou, A., & Squazzoni, F. (2018). Hidden connections: Network effects on editorial decisions in four computer science journals. Journal of Informetrics, 12(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.12.002

6. Cooper, R. J., Gupta, M., Wilkes, M. S., & Hoffman, J. R. (2006). Conflict of interest disclosure policies and practices in peer-reviewed biomedical journals. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(12), 1248–1252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00598.x

7. Emile, S., Hamid, H., Atici, S., Kosker, D., Papa, M., Elfeki, H., Tan, C., El-Hussuna, A., & Wexner, S. (2022). Types, limitations, and possible alternatives of peer review based on the literature and surgeons’ opinions via Twitter: a narrative review. Science Editing, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.257

8. Gallo, S. A., Lemaster, M., & Glisson, S. R. (2016). Frequency and type of conflicts of interest in the peer review of basic biomedical research funding applications: Self-reporting versus manual detection. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(1), 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9631-7

9. Gleicher, N. (2013). Avoiding currently unavoidable conflicts of interest in medical publishing by transparent peer review. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 26(5), 411–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.01.015

10. Haque, W., Minhajuddin, A., Gupta, A., & Agrawal, D. (2018). Conflicts of interest of editors of medical journals. PLOS ONE, 13(5), e0197141. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197141

11. Herteliu, C., Ausloos, M., Ileanu, B., Rotundo, G., & Andrei, T. (2017). Quantitative and qualitative analysis of editor behavior through potentially coercive citations. Publications, 5(2), 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications5020015

12. Kesselheim, A. S., Lee, J. L., Avorn, J., Servi, A., Shrank, W. H., & Choudry, N. K. (2012). Conflict of interest in oncology publications: A survey of disclosure policies and statements. Cancer, 118(1), 188–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26237

13. Kozlowski, L. T. (2015). Coping with the conflict-of-interest pandemic by listening to and doubting everyone, including yourself. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(2), 591–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9658-9

14. Kullas, A. L., & Davis, R. J. (2017). Setting the (scientific) record straight: Molecular and cellular biology responds to post publication review. Molecular and Cellular Biology, 37(11). https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.00199-17

15. Lenzer, J. (2016). When is a point of view a conflict of interest? BMJ, 355, i6194. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6194

16. Liu, J. J., Bell, C. M., Matelski, J. J., Detsky, A. S., & Cram, P. (2017). Payments by US pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to US medical journal editors: Retrospective observational study. BMJ, 359, j4619. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4619

17. Marcovitch, H., Barbour, V., Borrell, C., Bosch, F., Fernández, E., Macdonald, H., Marusić, A., Nylenna, M., & Esteve Foundation Discussion Group (2010). Conflict of interest in science communication: more than a financial issue. Report from Esteve Foundation Discussion Group, April 2009. Croatian Medical Journal, 51(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2010.51.7

18. Mehlman, C. T., Kanu Okike, Bhandari, M., & Kocher, M. S. (2017). Potential financial conflict of interest among physician editorial board members of orthopaedic surgery journals. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 99(5), e19–e19. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.16.00227

19. Momen H. (2014). Institutional journals as an alternative model for open access. Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, 109(7), 847–848. https://doi.org/10.1590/0074-0276140334

20. Raitskaya L., & Tikhonova E. (2023). Academic integrity: Author-related and journal-related issues. Journal of Language and Education, 9(4), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.18489

21. Ruff, K. (2015). Scientific journals and conflict of interest disclosure: What progress has been made? Environmental Health, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-015-0035-6

22. Rumsey, T. S. (1999). One editor’s views on conflict of interest. Journal of Animal Science, 77(9), 2379–2383. https://doi.org/10.2527/1999.7792379x

23. Sterling, T. D., Rosenbaum, W. L., & Weinkam, J. J. (1995). Publication Decisions Revisited: The Effect of the Outcome of Statistical Tests on the Decision to Publish and Vice Versa. The American Statistician, 49(1), 108–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1995.10476125

24. Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2015). A call for greater editorial responsibilities. Science Editing, 2(2), 89–91. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.50

25. Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Al-Khatib, A. (2017). How are editors selected, recruited and approved? Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(6), 1801–1804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9821-y

26. Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Al-Khatib, A. (2018). Should authors be requested to suggest peer reviewers? Science and Engineering Ethic, 24(1), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9842-6

27. Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Dobránszki, J. (2017). Excessively long editorial decisions and excessively long publication times by journals: Causes, risks, consequences, and proposed solutions. Publishing Research Quarterly, 33(1), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-016-9489-9

28. Teixeira da Silva, J. A., Dobránszki, J., Bhar, R. H., & Mehlman, C. T. (2019). Editors Should Declare Conflicts of Interest. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 16(2), 279–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-019-09908-2

29. Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Tsigaris, P. (2018). Academics must list all publications on their CV. KOME, 6(1), 94–99. https://doi.org/10.17646/kome.2018.16

30. Tikhonova, E., & Raitskaya, L. (2022). Academic development in research focus. Journal of Language and Education, 8(1), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.14122

31. Tikhonova E., Kosycheva M., & Kasatkin P. (2023). Exploring academic culture: Unpacking its definition and structure (A systematic scoping review). Journal of Language and Education, 9(4), 151-162. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.18491

32. Verma, V. (2017). Financial relationships with industry of editorial board members of the three journals of the American Society for Radiation Oncology. International Journal of Radiation Oncology and Biological Physics, 99(2), 286–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.03.020

33. Wiersma, M., Kerridge, I., & Lipworth, W. (2018). Should we try to manage non-financial interests? BMJ, 361, k1240. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1240

34. Wong, V. S. S., Avalos, L. N., & Callaham, M. L. (2017). Industry payments to physician journal editors. PLoS One, 14(2), e0211495. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211495