Authors should meet all following criteria for authorship:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND

Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND

Final approval of the version to be published; AND

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.

These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. The criteria are not intended for use as a means to disqualify colleagues from authorship who otherwise meet authorship criteria by denying them the opportunity to meet criterion #s 2 or 3. Therefore, all individuals who meet the first criterion should have the opportunity to participate in the review, drafting, and final approval of the manuscript.

Moreover, the corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer-review, and publication process. The corresponding author typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and disclosures of relationships and activities are properly completed and reported, although these duties may be delegated to one or more co-authors. The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer-review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way, and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication.

When a large multi-author group has conducted the work, the group ideally should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript, and they should be able to take public responsibility for the work and should have full confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the work of other group authors. They will also be expected as individuals to complete disclosure forms.

JEMA obligates authors to declare their contributions by filling this form

The concept of CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) was developed to acknowledge individual author contributions, minimize authorship conflicts, and promote collaboration. It originated from a collaborative workshop led by Harvard University and the Wellcome Trust in 2012, with input from researchers, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and publishers. During the submission process, authors are required to provide CRediT statements, which will be displayed after the references section (About the Authors) in the published paper. The definitions of each contribution category are based on the work of Brand et al. (2015), as outlined in Learned Publishing 28(2).

Conceptualization. Conceptualization or development of overarching research goals and objectives.

Methodology. The creation or design of research methods and models.

Software. The development, programming, and implementation of computer programs, including testing and design.

Validation. Ensuring the replication and reproducibility of research results through verification.

Formal analysis. The use of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze research data.

Investigation. Conducting research experiments, data collection, and evidence gathering.

Resources. Providing necessary study materials, instruments, samples, or computing resources for research.

Data Curation. Managing and annotating research data for initial use and future reference.

Writing - Original Draft. Creating the initial draft of the published work, including substantive translation if needed.

Writing - Review & Editing. Critically reviewing, commenting, or revising the published work, including pre- and post-publication stages.

Visualization. Presenting research findings visually through data visualization.

Supervision. Providing oversight and leadership for research activities, including mentorship.

Project administration. Managing and coordinating research activities.

Funding acquisition. Securing financial support for the research project leading to publication.

Wan: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing - Original Draft, Win: Formal analysis, Data Curation, Visualization, Wun: Supervision, Project Administration, Funding acquisition

or

Wan contributed to the conceptualization of the research goals and aims, as well as the methodology design. Win was involved in the investigation process, including conducting experiments and collecting data. Wun played a role in formal analysis, applying statistical techniques to analyze the study data. All authors contributed to the writing of the original draft, with Wan taking the lead in preparation and creation, Win and Wun contributing to review and editing.

An exact copy or copying text directly from another source without giving credit is considered plagiarism and is easily detectable. This type of plagiarism involves reproducing a work word for word, either in part or in its entirety, without obtaining permission from the original author and without acknowledging the source. This type of plagiarism is blatant and can be identified by comparing the texts in question.

Substantial copying involves replicating a significant portion of a work without obtaining permission from or acknowledging the original source. When evaluating what constitutes "substantial," both the quantity and quality of the copied material are considered. Quality refers to the relative importance of the copied content in relation to the entire work. If the essence of a work is replicated, even if only a small portion, it may still be considered plagiarism. For instance, a brief excerpt from a musical composition that is easily identifiable could be deemed substantial.

For Editor. When assessing substantial copying, it's essential to consider whether the author has gained from the skill and judgment of the original creator. The extent to which the answer is affirmative indicates the presence of substantial copying.

More than one sentence within a paragraph or section of text has been changed, or sentences have been rearranged, without appropriate attribution. Significant improper paraphrasing without appropriate attribution is treated seriously as verbatim copying.

For Editor. To identify unacceptable paraphrasing, it's crucial to apply a similar test as used for substantial copying: examine both the quantity and quality of the material taken, and determine whether the second author has benefited from the skill and judgment of the first author. If it appears likely, based on a balance of probabilities, that the second author has appropriated, without permission or acknowledgment, all or a significant portion of the original work to create a second work, albeit using different wording, then such usage constitutes plagiarism.

For example, using a figure, table or paragraph without acknowledgement, references or the use of quotation marks.

You are expected to submit original content to JEMA publications. Research should only be repeated if it leads to different or new conclusions, or you want to compare it with new data. If any element of your latest submission has been published previously, you must ensure that the original work is fully referenced and make this clear to the editor or publisher at the point of submission.

A plagiarism allegation can have a serious negative effect on a researcher's career. If we are approached by a third party with an allegation of plagiarism, we always seek a response from the original author(s) or copyright holder(s) before we decide on a course of action.

We remain unbiased and will not be influenced by other parties. All allegations will be handled in accordance with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.

We are not obliged to discuss individual cases of alleged plagiarism with third parties, and we reserve the right not to proceed with a case if the complainant presents a false name or affiliation, or acts in an inappropriate or threatening manner towards JEMA editors and staff.