The journal seeks to bridge basic, translational, and clinical research by publishing work that clearly articulates its implications for patient care, population health, and health systems, while ensuring that authors receive timely editorial decisions and accelerated online publication. Clinical Biomedical Communications also aims to improve the clarity and accessibility of scientific writing, supporting concise, well‑structured manuscripts that can be rapidly reviewed, understood, and applied by clinicians, researchers, and policymakers worldwide.

Clinical & Biomedical Communications welcomes manuscripts that advance knowledge at the interface of clinical medicine and biomedical science, with a strong emphasis on studies that can benefit from a rapid and streamlined review and publication process. The journal publishes: original research articles, brief reports and fast‑track communications, clinical trials, translational and experimental studies, systematic reviews and meta‑analyses, high‑quality case reports and series, methodological and educational papers, and focused perspectives or commentaries.

Mission of the Journal

The journal is committed to rigorous, fair, and timely peer review by experts in the field. Clinical Biomedical Communications adheres to the highest standards of research ethics, data reporting, and reproducibility, ensuring that all published work is both scientifically sound and clinically meaningful.

 ·         Clinical research across all medical and surgical specialties, including observational and interventional studies suited for rapid dissemination.

·         Translational and experimental medicine linking mechanistic insights to diagnostics, prognostics, or therapies, where fast communication can accelerate clinical impact.

·         Clinically relevant biomedical sciences, such as molecular and cellular mechanisms of disease, immunology, genetics and genomics, pharmacology, and biomarker research.

·         Public health and epidemiology with clear clinical or policy implications that benefit from timely availability of evidence.

·         Diagnostics, therapeutics, devices, and medical technologies, including precision medicine, digital health, and decision‑support tools requiring fast visibility to end‑users.

·         Health services research, implementation science, and quality‑improvement projects where rapid feedback and dissemination can directly inform practice.

·         Studies that clarify disease mechanisms, treatment response, or safety signals and that require rapid review and publication to inform clinical practice.

·         Research that improves communication between patients and providers or multidisciplinary teams, including tools and interventions designed for practical, fast uptake.

·         Work addressing equity, access, and context‑specific solutions, especially in low‑ and middle‑income settings, where rapid access to new evidence can change practice.

·         Methodological and reporting innovations that enhance transparency, reproducibility, and efficient evaluation, enabling a consistently fast and high‑quality peer‑review process.

Clinical and Biomedical Communications (CBC) is an international, open-access journal committed to rigorous scientific standards, ethical publishing, and transparent communication with all stakeholders. The policies below explain in a comprehensive and practical way what is expected from authors, reviewers, and editors at every stage of the publication process.

1. About the Journal

CBC publishes peer‑reviewed research that connects fundamental molecular biology with clinical practice, emphasizing translational work that moves discoveries from “bench to bedside.” The journal welcomes multidisciplinary submissions from basic scientists, clinicians, and allied health researchers, as long as the work clearly addresses clinically relevant mechanisms, diagnostics, therapeutics, or prognostic tools.​

As an open-access journal, all articles are freely available immediately upon publication, allowing researchers, clinicians, patients, policymakers, and the public to read and reuse content without paywalls. The journal does not charge article processing charges (APCs), removing financial barriers to submission and enabling equitable participation from authors regardless of institutional or regional resources.

CBC aligns with recognized best‑practice frameworks such as COPE and ICMJE, which provide detailed guidance on research integrity, authorship, peer review, and handling of errors and misconduct

2.      Editorial and peer review policy

CBC considers a range of article types, including original research, reviews, case reports, short communications, and educational or methodological papers to support different kinds of scientific contributions. Each manuscript must be original, not under review elsewhere, and prepared in line with the journal’s ethical and formatting requirements, including mandatory ethics approval documentation for human and animal studies.​

The editorial process begins with an initial screening by the Editor‑in‑Chief or Section Editors to confirm relevance, novelty, ethical compliance, and basic quality; manuscripts that clearly fall outside the scope or standards may be desk‑rejected to avoid unnecessary delay for authors. Manuscripts that pass this stage enter a blind peer review process, where at least two independent experts assess scientific validity, methodological rigor, clarity, and significance, leading to one of four outcomes: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. For revised submissions, authors must address each reviewer’s comment point‑by‑point; the editor may send revised versions back to reviewers if changes are substantial, and the final decision rests with the editor, ensuring editorial independence and consistency

3.      Authorship and accountability

Authorship is based on widely accepted criteria (e.g., ICMJE), which require meaningful intellectual contribution to the design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the work, involvement in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approval of the final version, and willingness to be accountable for all aspects of the work. This helps prevent “guest,” “gift,” or “ghost” authorship and ensures that all listed authors can legitimately claim responsibility for the research.​

CBC requires a detailed author contribution statement specifying the roles of each author (for example, conception, data collection, analysis, writing, supervision), often following models such as CrediT. Changes to authorship after submission—such as adding, removing, or reordering authors—are generally discouraged and, when necessary, must be justified in writing and approved by all authors before editorial consideration; once a paper is accepted, changes are normally not allowed, reflecting best practices in authorship transparency. Generative AI tools, including large language models, cannot be listed as authors because they cannot accept responsibility or accountability; any use of such tools must be clearly disclosed (e.g., in the Methods or Acknowledgements) and carefully checked by human authors

4. Publication Ethics and Research Integrity

CBC follows established ethical frameworks from organizations such as COPE, ICMJE, and WAME, which provide structured guidance on issues like plagiarism, data manipulation, authorship disputes, and handling corrections or retractions. Scientific misconduct includes plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, data fabrication or falsification, inappropriate or unethical research practices, and intentional manipulation of images or datasets to mislead readers.​

When credible concerns are raised, the journal may pause review or publication while investigating, sometimes in collaboration with the authors’ institutions or funders. Possible actions range from requesting clarifications or corrections to rejecting submissions, retracting published articles, issuing expressions of concern, or notifying relevant authorities when serious breaches of integrity are confirmed.

5. Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

Conflicts of interest—financial or non‑financial—are situations that could reasonably be perceived to influence an individual’s judgment regarding a manuscript. Financial COIs include funding, employment, patents, stocks, or consulting fees, while non‑financial COIs include advisory roles, memberships, personal relationships, or strong academic or ideological positions.​

Authors must declare all relevant COIs and funding sources in a dedicated section or statement, allowing readers to assess potential biases. Editors and reviewers are also required to disclose their own conflicts; when a conflict exists, they should recuse themselves so decisions and evaluations remain objective.

6. Protection of Human Participants and Animal Welfare

Any research involving human participants or animals must be conducted under formal approval from an appropriate ethics committee, such as an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Ethics Committee, or Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), and the approval body and reference number must be reported in the manuscript. For human studies, CBC expects adherence to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, which emphasize respect for persons, beneficence, and justice in biomedical research.​

Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants or their legal representatives, using language and procedures appropriate to the participants’ context and capacity. When manuscripts include identifiable personal data, images, or case details that could reveal an individual’s identity, specific consent to publish that material is required, and authors should take care to minimize unnecessary identifiers in text or figures. For animal studies, authors should describe welfare measures, housing, and efforts to reduce pain or distress, in line with recognized guidelines for humane animal research.

7. Clinical Trials and Regulated Clinical Research

For clinical trials, CBC expects compliance with Good Clinical Practice (ICH‑GCP) standards, which cover trial design, conduct, monitoring, and reporting to protect participants and ensure reliable data. Trials must be prospectively registered in a recognized public registry (such as CTRI or another WHO‑approved registry), and the registration number and protocol details should be included at submission and in the final article.​

Trial reports should clearly describe randomization, blinding, outcome measures, and analysis plans and should adhere to ecognized reporting guidelines like CONSORT where applicable. Registration and transparent reporting help prevent selective outcome reporting and enable readers to compare published results with original protocols

8. Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA Compliance)

Meta‑analyses and systematic reviews should follow established reporting standards, notably the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑Analyses) checklist and flow diagram. These tools require authors to document search strategies, eligibility criteria, study selection, risk‑of‑bias assessment, and synthesis methods in a structured and transparent manner.​

Including the completed PRISMA checklist and flow diagram helps editors, reviewers, and readers assess the completeness of reporting and the robustness of the review process. It also facilitates reproducibility, allowing others to update or extend the review as new evidence emerges.

9.      Availability of materials, methods, and data

To support reproducibility, authors are expected to provide access to key materials (such as unique reagents, plasmids, or software), detailed methods, and underlying datasets whenever feasible. If materials are subject to material transfer agreements or legal restrictions, authors should state these limitations and provide information on how qualified researchers can request access.​

Clear descriptions of analytical methods and software, including version numbers and parameter settings, are important for replication and independent verification. When essential data or materials cannot be shared, editors may weigh this limitation during review and, in extreme cases, may decline publication if it significantly undermines the scientific value of the work.

A Data Availability Statement (DAS) is required for original research articles, explaining where the underlying data can be found (such as a public repository) or, if data cannot be shared, why access is restricted (for example, due to privacy, legal, or contractual constraints). Clear data availability policies promote transparency, enable replication and secondary analyses, and align with evolving open science expectations.

10. Copyright, Licensing and Archiving policy

CBC allows authors to retain copyright, which means they keep legal ownership of their work while granting the journal rights to publish it. Articles are released under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, which permits broad reuse, including redistribution, adaptation, and commercial use, as long as the original authors and source are properly credited, supporting maximal dissemination and impact.​

To protect the scholarly record, CBC uses secure, cloud‑based digital archiving (e.g., on platforms equivalent to AWS) so that all published content remains permanently accessible and recoverable. This approach supports long‑term preservation, version control, and disaster recovery, and may be complemented by deposit in external preservation services or indexing in major databases.​

Reliable archiving ensures that citations remain valid over time, helping researchers, clinicians, and policymakers to verify and build upon previously published work. It also supports the journal’s open access mission by minimizing the risk of loss due to technical failures, institutional changes, or platform migration

11. Editorial Workflow and Peer Review Process

Editorial decisions are made by the Editor‑in‑Chief or designated editors, often with input from an editorial board and external reviewers, but always under the principle of editorial independence. Decisions weigh scientific rigor, originality, ethics, and relevance, rather than commercial or personal interests.​

After publication, minor errors (e.g., typographical mistakes that do not affect data or conclusions) may be corrected via errata or minor corrections notices. More serious issues that compromise interpretation or validity may require expressions of concern, retractions, or, in rare cases, republication with corrected data, following COPE guidance.

12. Responsibilities and Conduct of Reviewers

Reviewers play a central role in maintaining scientific quality and are expected to provide fair, evidence‑based, and constructive evaluations that focus on the work rather than the authors. They should comment on methodology, interpretation, clarity, originality, and significance, and suggest specific improvements where possible.​

Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality, using the manuscript only for review purposes and not sharing or citing unpublished data. They must promptly declare any real or perceived conflicts of interest (for example, overlapping collaborations, competition, or personal relationships) and decline reviews when unbiased assessment is not possible. If reviewers suspect plagiarism, data manipulation, or other ethical issues, they should alert the editor confidentially with as much detail as possible.

13. Plagiarism, Text Recycling, and Image Manipulation

All submissions are checked using established plagiarism‑detection tools to identify uncredited overlap with previously published material. Acceptable similarity may include properly cited methods or necessary technical phrases, but unattributed copying, even of the authors’ own earlier work, is considered problematic.​

Minor, unintentional overlap may be handled by requiring revision and improved citation, whereas substantial plagiarism, including copying of text, ideas, or data without proper acknowledgment, typically results in rejection or retraction. Serious cases may be reported to authors’ institutions, funders, or professional bodies to support broader efforts to uphold research integrity.

14. Use of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Tools

Authors must disclose any use of AI tools (for example, for language editing, summarization, or drafting sections) and remain fully responsible for the accuracy and originality of the content. AI must not be used to fabricate, alter, or simulate data, images, or analyses, nor to generate fake references or manipulate peer review processes.​

Because AI systems can introduce undisclosed biases or inaccuracies, human authors must critically review and verify all AI‑assisted text, tables, and figures, ensuring they reflect the actual data and methodology. Editorial staff and reviewers may use AI only for ancillary tasks such as grammar checking or summarization, and not for making substantive editorial or scientific judgements.

15. Prior, Duplicate, and Overlapping Publications

CBC does not permit duplicate or redundant publication, where substantially the same data or findings are published more than once without clear justification and cross‑referencing. However, certain related outputs are acceptable: for example, thesis chapters or conference abstracts, provided the journal submission represents a significantly extended and original contribution and properly cites any earlier versions.​

When reusing figures, tables, or substantial data from previous work (including by the same authors), authors must obtain and document permission when required and clearly indicate prior publication in the manuscript. Transparency about overlap protects the literature from inflation and confusion and helps maintain trust in the publication record.

16. Manuscript Withdrawal and Submission Cancellation

Withdrawal after submission is treated seriously because it consumes editorial and reviewer time; authors must submit a written explanation signed or agreed to by all co‑authors. Reasons may include serious errors discovered post‑submission, ethical concerns, or institutional requirements, and the journal may record the withdrawal for internal tracking.​

Withdrawal after acceptance is allowed only under exceptional circumstances, typically involving ethical or substantial scientific issues that cannot be resolved through correction. In some cases, where concerns arise after acceptance but prior to publication, the journal may opt for further investigation instead of withdrawal, to preserve the integrity of the process

17. Post‑Publication Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Retraction is reserved for serious issues that render findings unreliable or unethical to keep in the literature, such as clear evidence of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or undisclosed major ethical violations. Retractions follow established guidelines, usually including a formal notice explaining the reasons and identifying the affected article, without unnecessary defamation.​

Retracted articles are not simply removed; instead, they remain accessible with prominent labelling (for example, a “Retracted” watermark and linked retraction notice) so that readers understand the historical record and reasons for concern. This approach preserves transparency while warning users against relying on compromised data or conclusions.

18. Proofs, Production, and Access to Final Published Versions

Once a manuscript is accepted, authors receive proofs (typically in PDF or similar format) to check for typographical errors, formatting problems, or minor clarifications. At this stage, only small changes are usually allowed; substantive alterations that affect data or interpretation may require additional review or, in some cases, cannot be accommodated.​

Timely return of corrected proofs is essential to avoid publication delays. After publication, authors can download the final article from the journal website and share links or versions in line with the open access license, helping to disseminate the work widely.

19. Acknowledgements, Non-Author Contributions, and Support

The acknowledgements section is used to recognize individuals or organizations that contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria, such as technical staff, medical illustrators, language editors, or administrative support. It is also the appropriate place to mention certain forms of assistance, including AI‑based language tools, where disclosed.​

Funding agencies, grant numbers, and institutional support should be explicitly acknowledged to ensure transparency about financial backing and to comply with funder requirements. Authors should obtain consent from individuals named in acknowledgements where appropriate, especially if their association with the work could be interpreted as endorsing its content.

20. Advertising, Sponsorship, and Commercial Influence Policy

CBC does not accept advertisements, which helps maintain a clear separation between editorial content and commercial interests. This policy reduces potential pressure or perceived bias from advertisers and reinforces the journal’s commitment to independent, science‑driven decision‑making.​

By avoiding advertising revenue, the journal relies on other support mechanisms (such as institutional backing or publication fees elsewhere) but gains flexibility to prioritize scientific merit and ethical standards over commercial considerations.​

Regulations for Editorial, Ethical, and Operational Standards

1.      About the Journal and Scope

Clinical Biomedical Communications (CBC) operates under comprehensive regulations designed to uphold scientific integrity, transparency, and quality in biomedical publishing. These regulations apply to authors, reviewers, editors, and all contributors involved in the editorial and publication process and are aligned with international best practices. CBC publishes high-quality, peer‑reviewed research in:

·         Clinical sciences

·         Biomedical research

·         Translational medicine

·         Public health and epidemiology

·         Diagnostics, therapeutics, and medical innovations

·         Molecular and cellular biology with clinical relevance

·         Interdisciplinary Science and Research

2.      Governance and editorial independence

2.1 CBC is governed by an independent Editorial Board, including the Editor‑in‑Chief, Associate Editors, and subject‑matter experts drawn from relevant disciplines.​

2.2 Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scientific merit, originality, methodological quality, and relevance to the journal’s scope, and are not influenced by commercial, institutional, political, or personal pressures.​

2.3 Editors must declare any actual or perceived conflicts of interest in relation to submitted manuscripts and must recuse themselves from the review and decision process when appropriate.​

2.4 The publisher supports full editorial independence and does not intervene in manuscript selection, peer review, or editorial decisions.​

2.5 Editorial structure

Editor‑in‑Chief: Provides strategic leadership, oversees editorial policy, and has final responsibility for editorial decisions.

Associate Editors: Manage peer review for assigned manuscripts, select reviewers, evaluate reports, and recommend decisions.

Editorial Board Members: Advise on policy, promote journal standards, and contribute to strategic development and expert review.

Managing Editor/Editorial Office: Coordinates communication with authors and reviewers, manages workflows, and supports production and publication.

3.      Ethical Standards and International Guidelines

3.1 CBC adheres to internationally recognized guidelines and frameworks, including:​

·         COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)

·         ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors)

·         WAME (World Association of Medical Editors)

·         Declaration of Helsinki (for human research)

·         ARRIVE and institutional animal ethics guidelines (for animal research)

3.2 Human rights and ethical compliance

·         Research involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant national and institutional regulations, including ICMJE recommendations for conduct, reporting, editing, and publication. Authors must:​

·         Ensure inclusion of appropriate and representative populations (for example, sex, age, ethnicity) and report these clearly.

·         Use sex and gender terminology accurately and consistently.

·         State compliance with applicable laws, institutional policies, and oversight by recognized ethics committees, including committee name, approval date, and reference number where applicable.

·         Confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants or legally authorized representatives.

·         Protect privacy and confidentiality, including appropriate de‑identification of data.

·         If ethics approval or explicit consent is not legally required (for example, certain anonymized database studies), this must be clearly justified and stated in the Methods section.

3.3 Informed consent and patient information

·         Studies involving patients, volunteers, or donors (including tissues, organs, or identifiable biological samples) must document informed consent in the manuscript. Authors must:

·         Obtain explicit written permission for publication of case reports, images, or any potentially identifying personal information.

·         Retain consent forms and make them available to the journal on request (they should not be submitted routinely to protect confidentiality).

·         Remove or mask identifying information unless explicit, documented permission to publish has been obtained from the patient or next of kin.

3.4 Research misconduct

Violations such as plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, duplicate or redundant publication, unethical research practices, inappropriate image manipulation, and authorship fraud are considered serious breaches of ethics. Possible actions include:​

·         Rejection of the manuscript at any stage

·         Retraction or withdrawal of published articles

·         Issuing expressions of concern or corrections

·         Notification of authors’ institutions, funders, or regulatory authorities

4. Patient privacy and consent

4.1 Patient confidentiality must be protected at all times. Identifiable personal information should not be included unless it is essential and explicit written consent for publication has been obtained.

4.2 Photographs, imaging, audio, video, or other material that could reveal identity (including names, initials, medical record numbers, or recognizable features) require documented consent from the patient or legal representative.

4.3 Consent documentation must be retained by authors and provided to editors upon request for verification.

5. Authorship regulations

5.1 All listed authors must meet ICMJE authorship criteria, including substantial contribution to the work, involvement in drafting or critical revision, final approval of the version to be published, and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.​

5.2 Guest, gift, and ghost authorship are strictly prohibited. Individuals who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately rather than listed as authors.​

3.3 All authors must review and approve the final manuscript and must agree to its submission to CBC.

5.4 Any changes in authorship (addition, removal, or reordering) after initial submission require a written request with justification and documented consent from all authors; changes are subject to editorial approval and are generally not permitted after acceptance.​

5.5 A maximum of two corresponding authors may be designated, and their roles and contact details must be clearly indicated.

6. Submission regulations

6.1 Manuscripts submitted to CBC must be original, not previously published (except in permitted forms such as theses or abstracts), and not under consideration by any other journal.

6.2 Submissions must comply with the journal’s formatting, structural, and reporting requirements, including appropriate use of reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, ARRIVE, as relevant).​

6.3 Authors must include, where applicable:

·         A cover letter summarizing novelty, significance, and ethical compliance

·         Ethics approval documentation (or justification for exemption)

·         Conflict of interest declaration

·         Author contribution statement (CRediT taxonomy is strongly encouraged)

6.4 CBC reserves the right to reject submissions that fail to meet scientific, ethical, or formal standards at any stage, including after peer review.

7. Peer‑review regulations

7.1 CBC uses a blind peer‑review model, in which reviewers are not routinely informed of authors’ identities, to reduce bias and promote objective assessment.​

7.2 Each manuscript is typically evaluated by at least two independent expert reviewers, and additional reviewers may be invited when necessary.

7.3 Reviewer duties: Reviewers must:

·         Maintain strict confidentiality and not share, discuss, or use the manuscript outside the review process.

·         Declare any conflicts of interest and decline review if they cannot provide an unbiased evaluation.

·         Provide fair, evidence‑based, and constructive feedback within agreed timelines.

·         Not use unpublished data, methods, or ideas obtained during review for personal or competitive advantage.

7.4 Standard review outcomes include:

ü  Accept

ü  Minor revision

ü  Major revision

ü  Reject

7.5 Revised manuscripts must include a detailed, point‑by‑point response to each reviewer and editor comment, indicating how changes were made or explaining why changes are not appropriate.

7.6 The Editor‑in‑Chief (or designated handling editor) has final authority over all editorial decisions.

8. Submission Regulations

8.1 Manuscripts submitted to CBC must be original and not under consideration elsewhere.
8.2 Submissions must follow journal formatting and structural requirements.
8.3 Authors must include:

• A cover letter

• Ethics approval (if applicable)

• Conflict of interest declaration

• Author contribution statement (CRediT format encouraged)

8.4 CBC may reject submissions that do not meet scientific or ethical standards even after peer review.

9. Research Integrity Regulations

9.1 All data must be accurate, complete, and honestly presented.
9.2 Manipulation of images, figures, or data is prohibited.
9.3 Authors must ensure reproducibility by providing:

·         Raw data

·         Code or software (if used)

·         Details of materials, reagents, and protocols

9.4 For omics data, depositions in repositories (GEO, SRA, ENA, CNGBdb) are required.
9.5 Clinical trial registration (CTRI/clinicaltrials.gov) is mandatory before patient enrollment.

9.6. CBC reserves the right to issue expressions of concern or corrections if necessary.

10. Conflict of interest regulations

10.1 All authors, reviewers, and editors must fully disclose any financial or non‑financial relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the submitted work. This includes, but is not limited to:​

·         Employment, consultancies, honoraria, speaking fees

·         Patents, royalties, stock ownership, or options

·         Research funding, grants, or sponsorship

·         Institutional, personal, or professional affiliations and roles

10.2 Undeclared or undisclosed conflicts of interest may result in rejection of manuscripts, retraction of published articles, and, where appropriate, notification of institutions or funders.​

10.3 The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all authors provide complete and accurate conflict of interest disclosures or explicitly state “no conflicts of interest,” and that these statements are included in the manuscript.

11. AI use and digital integrity regulations

11.1 AI tools must not be used to generate primary scientific content such as results, data analyses, or substantive interpretations, nor to fabricate or manipulate data, images, or references.​

11.2 AI and digital tools may be used for:

·         Grammar, spelling, and style corrections

·         Formatting and reference management

·         Language clarity and organization

11.3 Any use of generative AI or AI‑assisted tools in manuscript preparation must be transparently disclosed (for example, in the Acknowledgements or Methods), including the tool name and purpose of use.

11.4 AI systems cannot be credited as authors and cannot assume responsibility or accountability for the work.

11.5 AI‑generated references, fabricated citations, or synthetically created data are strictly prohibited and constitute grounds for rejection, retraction, and potential further action.

119.6 Authors are encouraged to use wording such as:

“During the preparation of this work, the authors used [Tool Name] for [purpose, e.g., language editing]. The authors reviewed and edited the content and take full responsibility for the final version of the manuscript.”

12. Plagiarism and similarity regulations

12.1 All submissions are screened using similarity‑detection software to identify overlaps with published and unpublished material.​

12.2 As a general guide, a similarity index of ≤15% (excluding references, standard phrases, and methods where appropriate) is considered acceptable, provided all overlapping text is properly cited and does not indicate plagiarism.

12.3 Submissions with overall similarity exceeding approximately 25%, or with substantial unattributed overlap in key sections (Introduction, Results, Discussion), may be rejected without review.

12.4 Self‑plagiarism, including reuse of text, figures, or tables from the authors’ own previously published work, must be clearly cited and justified, and may require permission from the original publisher where copyright applies.​

12.5 Confirmed plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, or unethical authorship practices will lead to rejection or retraction and may trigger notification of relevant institutions or funders.

13. Publication and archiving regulations

13.1 Accepted manuscripts undergo editorial editing, copy‑editing, and typesetting to ensure clarity, consistency, and compliance with style and technical standards.

13.2 Authors receive proofs for review and must return corrections within the specified timeframe; failure to respond promptly may delay publication.

13.3 All published content is permanently archived on:

The CBC server and associated cloud infrastructure (for example, secure AWS‑based systems)

·         Publisher repositories, where applicable

·         External indexing and archiving services, as the journal becomes indexed

13.4 This archiving strategy ensures long‑term preservation, accessibility, and integrity of the scholarly record.

14. Retraction and correction regulations

14.1 Articles may be retracted when:

·         Major ethical violations are confirmed

·         Data are fabricated, falsified, or otherwise unreliable

·         Duplicate or redundant publication is identified

·         Serious plagiarism is detected

·         Fundamental methodological or analytical errors invalidate the main conclusions

14.2 Retractions follow COPE recommendations and are accompanied by a clear, accessible retraction notice explaining the reasons and linking to the original article.​

14.3 Minor errors that do not affect the overall conclusions may be corrected by publishing an Erratum (journal‑initiated) or minor correction notice.

14.4 When significant errors originate from authors but do not warrant full retraction, a Corrigendum may be published to clarify and correct the record.

15. Open access and copyright regulations

15.1 CBC operates as an open-access journal under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, or an equivalent license clearly indicated on the journal website.​

15.2 Authors retain copyright to their work while granting CBC the right to publish and disseminate the article in all formats and media, under the agreed license.

15.3 Use of third‑party materials (such as images, figures, or tables) requires documented permission from copyright holders, unless such materials are available under a compatible open license; these permissions must be acknowledged in the manuscript.

15.4 All articles are freely accessible online without embargo periods, enabling immediate sharing and reuse in line with the CC BY license terms.

16. Advertising and commercial influence

16.1 CBC does not carry commercial advertising, sponsored content, or advertorials within the journal content.

16.2 No commercial entity, sponsor, or advertiser may influence editorial decisions, peer review, or publication outcomes, preserving the independence and objectivity of the journal.

17. Appeals and complaints

17.1 Authors may appeal editorial decisions when they believe a decision was made in error or without due consideration; appeals must include a detailed rebuttal letter addressing reviewer and editor comments with evidence.

17.2 Appeals are reviewed by a senior editorial panel or an independent editor not involved in the original decision, and may result in upholding the decision, seeking additional reviews, or reconsidering the manuscript.

17.3 Complaints concerning ethical issues, editorial conduct, or suspected misconduct are investigated in line with COPE guidance and, where appropriate, may involve consultation with institutions or other stakeholders.

18. Fees, waivers, and transparency

CBC operates as a gold open-access journal.

18.1 Any Article Processing Charges (APCs), if applicable, will be clearly and transparently listed on the journal website, including currency, scope of services, and timing of payment.​

18.2 Waivers or discounts may be offered for authors from low‑ and lower‑middle‑income countries or in cases of demonstrable financial hardship; criteria and procedures for requesting waivers will be published and applied consistently.​

18.3 Editorial decisions are never influenced by an author’s ability to pay APCs.

19. Withdrawal regulations

19.1 Authors should avoid withdrawing manuscripts after submission unless there are compelling ethical or scientific reasons.

19.2 Manuscripts may not be withdrawn after formal acceptance except in exceptional circumstances, which must be explained in writing and approved by the editorial office.

19.3 Unauthorized or repeated withdrawal without justification may lead to restrictions on future submissions.

20. Funding disclosure

20.1 All sources of financial support (grants, institutional support, industry funding, foundations) must be disclosed, including grant numbers and the roles of funders in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, and the decision to submit the article.

20.2 If funders had no role in one or more of these stages, this should be explicitly stated.

20.3 Transparency about funding allows readers to assess potential influences on the research.

21. Permissions

21.1 Authors must obtain and document permission to reproduce, reuse, or adapt figures, tables, or substantial text segments from previously published or copyrighted material, unless those materials are under compatible open licenses.

21.2 At the time of submission, authors should confirm that all necessary permissions have been secured and that appropriate acknowledgements and credit lines are included in the manuscript.

22. Data sharing and accessibility

22.1 Where ethically and legally feasible, data underlying published results should be deposited in trusted public repositories that adhere to FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles; resources such as re3data.org can assist in selecting repositories.​

22.2 The manuscript must include a Data Availability Statement specifying where data can be accessed, under what conditions, or providing a justified explanation if data cannot be shared (for example, due to privacy or legal restrictions).​

22.3 Authors are encouraged to share code, workflows, and protocols alongside data to maximize transparency and reusability.

23. Journal updates

23.1 CBC reserves the right to revise these regulations periodically to reflect evolving ethical standards, technological developments, and community expectations.

23.2 All updates will be documented and made publicly available on the journal website, with indication of the effective date.

24. Disclaimer

24.1 The views, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in published articles are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Journal, Editorial Board, or Publisher.

24.2 Clinical recommendations and treatment decisions must always be made by qualified practitioners, taking into account individual patient circumstances, local regulations, and current standards of care.