Expressions of Concern Policy

Multidisciplinary Journals (MJ)  |  e-ISSN 3047-8499

1. Purpose, Scope, and Policy Boundary

This policy applies after an article, review, editorial, case report, dataset description, or other journal item has been formally published as a Version of Record. It governs the criteria, assessment, publication, visibility, review, and resolution of an Expression of Concern.

This page does not determine whether an error should be corrected, define research or publication misconduct, conduct an institutional investigation, establish retraction criteria, remove content, resolve authorship or competing-interest disputes, or govern manuscript withdrawal before publication. Those matters remain governed by the specialist policies identified in Section 13.

2. Definition and Function

An Expression of Concern is a permanent, citable post-publication notice issued by the Editor-in-Chief, an uninvolved delegated editor, or the publisher when readers need to be alerted to a serious unresolved concern about a published item. The notice does not erase, replace, or automatically invalidate the article. It communicates the current status and the limits of what has been established.

3. Circumstances That May Warrant an Expression of Concern

MJ may consider an Expression of Concern when at least one credible, material concern exists and a final outcome is not yet reasonably available. Examples include:

• evidence suggesting that findings, data, images, analysis, methods, or conclusions may be unreliable, but the evidence is inconclusive or disputed;
• a credible allegation of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, undeclared use of another person's work, or manipulation that requires further investigation;
• serious questions about ethics approval, informed consent, participant identification, clinical-trial registration, animal welfare, permits, community authorization, biosafety, or other ethical oversight;
• a potentially material undisclosed conflict of interest, funding relationship, sponsor influence, authorship issue, or contributor dispute that could affect interpretation or accountability;
• evidence of compromised or manipulated peer review, reviewer identity, editorial conflict, confidentiality breach, citation coercion, or improper editorial influence;
• supporting data, code, materials, or documentation cannot be produced and this absence creates a serious unresolved question about the article's reliability;
• an institution, ethics committee, funder, regulator, court, or other competent body has opened an investigation relevant to the article;
• the responsible institution will not investigate, cannot investigate, has an unmanaged conflict, or its process appears materially delayed, incomplete, unfair, or inconclusive;
• different competent investigations reach conflicting outcomes that the journal cannot responsibly reconcile; or
• continued unqualified reliance on the article could create a significant risk to research, education, clinical practice, public policy, safety, communities, animals, or the environment while assessment continues.

4. Circumstances That Do Not Normally Warrant an Expression of Concern

An Expression of Concern is not normally appropriate for:

• a minor or clearly bounded error that can be corrected without questioning the article's overall reliability;
• a difference of scientific interpretation, a methodological debate, an unconfirmed alternative explanation, or later evidence that advances the field without demonstrating an error;
• an allegation that is vague, unsupported, knowingly false, outside the article's relevance, or incapable of affecting the reliability or integrity of the publication;
• routine delay, difficult correspondence, personal criticism, institutional rivalry, or disagreement about editorial judgment;
• a concern arising before formal publication, which should be handled by pausing review, seeking clarification, rejecting, or applying the Manuscript Withdrawal Policy;
• a case in which reliable evidence already requires a correction or retraction; or
• a private dispute whose disclosure would serve no legitimate scholarly-record or reader-protection purpose.

5. Reporting a Concern

Concerns may be submitted by authors, participants, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, funders, regulators, indexers, whistleblowers, or other persons. A report should provide, where available:

• the article title, authors, publication details, DOI, and specific part of the article involved;
• a clear description of the concern and why it may affect reliability, ethics, attribution, review integrity, legality, or safety;
• documents, data, images, calculations, correspondence, registry records, public sources, or other supporting evidence;
• information about any related institutional, legal, ethical, regulatory, or journal process;
• known conflicts of interest or relationships relevant to assessing the report; and
• any immediate risk requiring urgent action.

Anonymous reports may be assessed when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information. The journal will not reject a concern solely because of the identity, status, nationality, affiliation, or anonymity of the person reporting it. At the same time, anonymity may limit clarification and the journal's ability to reach a conclusion.

6. Assessment and Decision Process

7. Content of the Notice

An Expression of Concern is written in neutral, precise, and non-defamatory language. It distinguishes verified facts, allegations, unresolved questions, external findings, and editorial inference. The notice normally includes:

• the title “Expression of Concern: [Original Article Title]”;
• the complete citation, authors, DOI, and link to the original publication;
• a concise description of the concern and the parts of the article potentially affected;
• the basis for considering the concern credible and material, without disclosing unnecessary confidential information;
• what has and has not been established;
• whether an investigation, review, legal process, institutional inquiry, or other assessment is ongoing;
• the reason a definitive correction or retraction cannot yet be issued;
• the date, issuing editor or publisher, and planned review status where appropriate; and
• a statement that readers will be informed through a linked notice when the matter is resolved.

8. Publication, Linking, and Metadata

• The notice is published promptly, free to read, and listed as a citable item in the journal's table of contents.
• The notice receives its own DOI where technically available and identifies the DOI of the original publication.
• The article landing page and full-text formats display a prominent label and link to the Expression of Concern.
• The Expression of Concern links back to the article, creating a bidirectional relationship.
• The original article remains accessible and is not rewritten to conceal the reason for the notice.
• The update relationship is deposited with Crossref and relevant indexing or preservation services where technically supported.
• Crossmark may be used only if implemented consistently across journal content and its update metadata is maintained accurately.

The notice will remain part of the scholarly record even after resolution. It is not deleted merely because a concern is later unsubstantiated; instead, MJ publishes and links a clear resolution so that readers can understand the complete history.

9. Review, Duration, and Resolution

MJ reviews an active Expression of Concern when material new information is received and normally checks its status at least every six months. The journal records contacts, responses, external updates, evidence, decisions, and reasons for delay. Complex institutional, legal, regulatory, cross-border, or multi-journal matters may remain open for longer than the journal would prefer.

The journal does not allow indefinite inactivity. When an external body does not respond, MJ may repeat the request, contact another competent authority, seek independent advice, and make a proportionate publication decision from the evidence it can responsibly verify.

10. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Non-Retaliation

• Information is shared only with persons who need it to assess, investigate, advise on, or resolve the matter, subject to legal and research-integrity obligations.
• The identity of a reporter is not disclosed without consent unless disclosure is legally required or essential to a fair and competent investigation.
• Authors and other persons whose conduct or work is questioned are normally given the material concern and a reasonable opportunity to respond.
• No person will be disadvantaged for raising a concern in good faith. Deliberately false allegations, fabricated evidence, threats, or harassment may be addressed proportionately after evidence review and an opportunity to respond.
• Nationality, affiliation, professional status, reputation, payment, and institutional influence do not determine whether a notice is issued.
• The notice avoids identifying private individuals, participants, reporters, or confidential evidence unless identification is necessary, lawful, proportionate, and supported by the public record.

11. Editorial Independence and Responsibilities

An Expression of Concern may be issued without author consent when necessary to protect readers and the scholarly record. No Article Processing Charge, correction charge, withdrawal penalty, or other payment is imposed for publishing or resolving the notice. Payment status has no role in the decision.

12. Appeals and Complaints

An author or affected party may appeal by identifying a material factual error, serious procedural defect, unmanaged conflict of interest, disproportionate scope, or relevant evidence that was overlooked. Mere disagreement with a neutral warning, without supporting evidence, is not sufficient.

Appeals follow the Appeals and Complaints Policy. An appeal does not automatically remove or suspend a notice when the editor determines that continued visibility is necessary to protect readers. A successful appeal may lead to clarification, narrowing, updating, or a linked resolution, but the publication history remains preserved.

13. Relationship with Other MJ Policies

14. Reference Frameworks

• COPE Guidelines: Expressions of Concern.
• COPE Retraction Guidelines.
• COPE Position: Visibility of Corrections and Retractions.
• ICMJE Recommendations: Scientific Misconduct, Expressions of Concern, and Retraction.
• Crossref Crossmark Update Metadata, where implemented by the journal.

15. How to Report a Concern

Submit a concern through the journal's official contact page or the OJS discussion associated with the published article. Use the subject line “Post-Publication Concern — [Article DOI or ID]”. Include the information described in Section 5 and identify any immediate safety, legal, privacy, or evidence-preservation issue.