Retraction & Correction Policy

The Celebes Nursing Journal (CNJ) is committed to maintaining the accuracy, integrity, transparency, and permanence of the scholarly record. When concerns arise about published content, CNJ will assess them fairly, promptly, and proportionately in accordance with the COPE Retraction Guidelines and the ICMJE Recommendations on Corrections and Version Control.
Post-publication action is intended to correct the scholarly record and inform readers. It is not primarily intended to punish authors. CNJ distinguishes honest error from research or publication misconduct and will select the action appropriate to the nature and seriousness of the issue.

1. General Principles
CNJ applies the following principles when considering corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other post-publication updates:

• Credible concerns may be submitted by authors, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, research-integrity bodies, or other sources.
• Concerns will be assessed on their evidence and relevance, regardless of the identity or status of the person raising them.
• Authors and other relevant parties will ordinarily be given an appropriate opportunity to respond.
• Editorial action will be proportionate to the effect of the issue on the accuracy, reliability, ethics, or integrity of the published record.
• Honest error will be distinguished from misconduct whenever the available evidence permits.
• Notices will use factual, objective, and non-defamatory language.
• Corrections, expressions of concern, and retraction notices will be freely accessible and permanently linked to the affected article.
• Post-publication notices will identify the article concerned and explain the reason for the action with sufficient clarity.
• Editorial decisions will remain independent of commercial, institutional, personal, or other inappropriate influence.

2. Corrections
A correction may be published when an error or omission affects the accuracy, interpretation, discoverability, attribution, or completeness of an article but does not invalidate its overall findings or conclusions.
Examples may include:

• Errors in data, calculations, analyses, text, tables, figures, or supplementary materials that do not invalidate the article’s principal findings
• Incorrect or incomplete author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, funding information, conflict-of-interest disclosures, or other metadata
• Incorrect descriptions that require clarification
• Production or publication errors introduced by the journal
• Errors or omissions in data availability, ethics, consent, registration, or reporting information that can be appropriately corrected without invalidating the work

A correction notice will ordinarily:

• Be clearly identified as a correction
• Identify and cite the affected article
• Describe what was incorrect and provide the corrected information
• State the date of publication of the correction
• Be linked bidirectionally with the affected article
• Be freely accessible and assigned a persistent identifier where applicable

Where technically feasible and appropriate, CNJ may update the article while preserving a record of the correction, the date of the change, and access to or information about the previous version. Previous versions should indicate that a more recent version is available.
Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect meaning, interpretation, attribution, indexing, or the scholarly record may be corrected administratively without a separate correction notice. Material changes will not be made silently.

3. Retractions
Retraction may be considered when the findings or conclusions of an article are no longer reliable, when publication seriously violates ethical or legal requirements, or when the integrity of the publication process has been materially compromised.
Reasons may include:

• Clear evidence that findings are unreliable because of fabrication, falsification, major analytical error, miscalculation, or another serious problem
• Plagiarism or substantial unattributed use of material
• Redundant or duplicate publication without appropriate disclosure or justification
• Research conducted or reported in serious violation of applicable ethical requirements
• Publication without required participant consent or permission where the deficiency materially affects ethical acceptability
• Serious breaches of participant privacy or confidentiality
• Unauthorized use of data, materials, images, or other protected content
• Manipulation or serious compromise of authorship, peer review, or the editorial process
• A significant undisclosed conflict of interest that materially affected the interpretation, evaluation, or integrity of the work
• Other circumstances in which the article’s findings, conclusions, or publication integrity cannot reasonably be relied upon

Retraction may result from honest error or misconduct. A finding of misconduct is not required when the published findings are demonstrably unreliable.
Retraction will not ordinarily be used solely to resolve an authorship dispute when the findings remain reliable, to address a minor error that can be corrected, or to punish authors who report an honest error.
A retraction notice will ordinarily:

• Be clearly identified as a retraction
• Identify and cite the retracted article
• State who is retracting the article
• Explain the reason for retraction and distinguish honest error from misconduct where this has been established
• Avoid speculative, defamatory, or unnecessarily accusatory statements
• Be published promptly, freely accessible, and permanently linked to the article

The original article will ordinarily remain accessible to preserve the scholarly record but will be clearly marked as retracted on each accessible version. The article metadata and landing page will be updated to indicate the retraction.
Authors’ agreement is not required for CNJ to retract an article when the available evidence supports retraction. Any disagreement among authors concerning the retraction may be described factually in the notice where relevant.

4. Retraction with Republication
Retraction with republication may be considered when a major honest error invalidates the published results or conclusions, but the underlying research question, data, or scientific work remains sufficiently reliable to support a corrected article.
A corrected article considered for republication must undergo appropriate editorial assessment and, where necessary, additional peer review. The retraction and republished article must be clearly linked, and the reason for the replacement and the extent of the changes must be transparently explained.
Retraction with republication will not be used to conceal misconduct or avoid appropriate investigation of serious integrity concerns.

5. Expressions of Concern
An expression of concern may be published when readers need to be alerted to potentially serious concerns but the available information is not yet sufficient to support a correction or retraction.
This may occur when:

• An investigation is ongoing and may take a substantial period to complete
• Available evidence concerning the reliability or integrity of the article is inconclusive
• The authors’ institution is unable or unwilling to conduct an adequate investigation
• Different investigations reach conflicting or uncertain conclusions
• There is a credible risk to participants, patients, public health, or the integrity of the scholarly record requiring an interim notice

An expression of concern will identify the affected article, describe the nature of the unresolved concern, and state that further assessment is underway where applicable. CNJ will review the notice when relevant information becomes available and will issue a correction, retraction, updated expression of concern, or notice that no further action is required, as appropriate.

6. Article Removal
Complete removal of an article from the journal website is exceptional. It may be considered only when continued public access would create a serious legal, privacy, confidentiality, security, or health risk that cannot be adequately addressed by a correction, retraction, redaction, or other less restrictive measure.
Examples may include:

• A binding legal requirement or court order
• Serious infringement of privacy or confidentiality
• Defamatory or unlawful content
• Content that creates a serious and immediate risk of harm

When an article is removed, the bibliographic record and DOI landing page will ordinarily be retained with a notice explaining why the content is unavailable, unless prohibited by law or necessary to protect affected individuals.

7. Assessment and Decision Process
Post-publication concerns will generally be handled through the following process:

1. Initial assessment. The Editor-in-Chief or designated editor determines whether the concern is sufficiently specific, credible, and relevant to require further review.
2. Notification and response. Authors and other relevant parties are ordinarily informed of the concern and invited to provide an explanation or supporting documentation.
3. Evidence review. Editors may review relevant correspondence, data, images, approvals, consent documentation, disclosures, protocols, reviewer reports, or other materials.
4. Independent advice. Additional reviewers, statistical advisers, ethics experts, research-integrity specialists, or other qualified experts may be consulted when necessary.
5. Institutional involvement. CNJ may contact an author’s institution, ethics committee, research-integrity office, funder, regulator, or another appropriate authority when the matter requires powers or evidence beyond the journal’s capacity.
6. Editorial decision. CNJ determines whether no action, clarification, correction, expression of concern, retraction, retraction with republication, removal, or another proportionate response is appropriate.
7. Publication and metadata update. The applicable notice is published and linked to the article, and relevant metadata are updated where technically feasible.

CNJ may take interim action when necessary to protect participants, confidentiality, public safety, or the integrity of the editorial process.
Journal editors do not make formal institutional findings of research misconduct. Such determinations ordinarily fall within the authority of the relevant institution, employer, funder, regulator, or other competent body. CNJ remains responsible for deciding what action is required to protect the published record.

8. Editorial Independence and Conflicts of Interest
Any editor with an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest concerning a post-publication matter must disclose the conflict and recuse themselves from handling or deciding the case.
Concerns involving an article authored or handled by the Editor-in-Chief, an Associate Editor, an Editorial Board member, journal staff, or another person connected to the editorial team must be assigned to another qualified and independent editor.
The publisher, journal owner, authors’ institutions, sponsors, or other interested parties must not improperly influence the editorial outcome.

9. Author and Journal Responsibilities
Authors are expected to:

• Notify CNJ promptly when they identify a material error in their published article
• Respond accurately and within a reasonable period to editorial inquiries
• Provide relevant data, documentation, approvals, permissions, or explanations when legitimately requested
• Cooperate with appropriate post-publication assessment
• Correct inaccurate public statements concerning the status of an article where appropriate

CNJ is responsible for:

• Assessing credible concerns fairly and without unnecessary delay
• Protecting confidentiality while an assessment is underway
• Giving relevant parties an appropriate opportunity to respond
• Maintaining appropriate documentation of the process
• Publishing clear, accessible, and appropriately linked notices
• Updating article status and metadata where technically feasible
• Preserving the integrity and transparency of the scholarly record

10. Appeals and Policy Review
Authors or other directly affected parties may appeal a post-publication decision when they can identify a material factual, procedural, ethical, or evidentiary issue that may have affected the outcome. Appeals are handled in accordance with CNJ’s Complaints & Appeals Policy.
An appeal does not automatically suspend a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other action considered necessary to protect readers or the scholarly record.
This policy is reviewed periodically to maintain consistency with CNJ’s Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement (PEMS), applicable COPE guidance, and relevant developments in scholarly publishing.