Public Health Frontier is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The journal adheres strictly to the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and requires all parties involved—editors, authors, peer reviewers, and publishers—to follow these ethical standards.

Duties of Authors

1. Originality and Plagiarism
   Authors must ensure that their work is original and properly cite others' work. Plagiarism in any form (including self-plagiarism) is unethical and unacceptable.
2. Data Accuracy and Fabrication
   Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the data presented in their manuscript. Fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data is considered unethical.
3. Acknowledgment of Sources
   All sources of data, financial support, and institutional or personal contributions must be appropriately acknowledged.
4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submissions
   Manuscripts must not be submitted to more than one journal at the same time or published previously (except as an abstract or thesis).
5. Authorship
   Only individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study should be listed as authors. All co-authors must approve the final manuscript.
6. Conflicts of Interest
   Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
7. Ethical Research Practices
   Studies involving human or animal subjects must include an ethical approval statement from an appropriate ethics committee, and consent must be obtained when applicable.

Duties of Editors

1. Fair Evaluation
   Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on academic merit and relevance to the journal's scope, regardless of the authors' race, gender, religion, nationality, or political beliefs.
2. Confidentiality
   Editors must protect the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and must not disclose any information to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, or the publisher.
3. Conflicts of Interest
   Editors must not use unpublished information for personal advantage and should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist.
4. Decision-making
   The editor-in-chief has full authority over the editorial content and the timing of publication, and is responsible for ensuring integrity in the publication process.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Confidentiality
   All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be disclosed or discussed with others.
2. Objectivity
   Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive feedback without personal criticism.
3. Acknowledgment of Sources
   Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited and alert the editor to any potential plagiarism.
4. Conflict of Interest
   Reviewers should not review manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions.

Handling Misconduct

1. Allegations of misconduct such as plagiarism, falsification, or ethical breaches will be investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines.
2. If misconduct is proven, actions may include manuscript rejection, retraction of published articles, notification to the author's institution, and bans from future submission.

Corrections and Retractions

1. Errata will be published to correct significant errors.
2. Retractions will be issued in cases of proven unethical behavior or serious scientific flaws.

Anti-Plagiarism Policy

All submitted manuscripts are screened using reputable plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts showing significant similarity with previously published content will be automatically rejected or returned for revision.