Complaints Policy

The International Journal of Nutrology (IJN) welcomes good-faith complaints, appeals, concerns, and requests for review concerning its editorial processes, published content, ethical standards, services, or conduct. All submissions will be considered fairly, respectfully, confidentially, and without retaliation.

This policy is informed by the COPE guidance on complaints and appeals, the ICMJE Recommendations on journal responsibilities, and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. Following these standards does not imply membership in the organizations that developed them.

Scope of this policy

This policy covers:

appeals against editorial decisions;
complaints about peer review, editorial handling, unreasonable delay, communication, or procedural fairness;
concerns about authorship, conflicts of interest, plagiarism, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, data or image integrity, ethical approval, consent, research participants, animal welfare, or other suspected misconduct;
concerns about published articles, corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other post-publication actions;
complaints about fees, waivers, invoices, licensing, copyright, privacy, advertising, direct marketing, website information, or publisher services; and
complaints about the conduct of authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, staff, service providers, or the publisher.

Complaints and appeals are different

A complaint concerns the journal's process, conduct, service, policy compliance, published content, or research integrity.

An appeal is a request to reconsider an editorial decision because the appellant believes there was a significant factual error, procedural failure, conflict of interest, or material misunderstanding affecting the decision. Disagreement with the editor's scientific judgment or with reviewer comments, without specific evidence of an error or procedural problem, is not sufficient grounds for an appeal.

How to submit a complaint or appeal

Send the request by email to the IJN editorial office at [email protected].

Use one of the following subject lines:

COMPLAINT – [manuscript ID, DOI, or subject]; or
EDITORIAL APPEAL – [manuscript ID].

The message should include, as applicable:

the complainant's name, affiliation, and contact information;
the manuscript identification number, article title, DOI, or webpage involved;
a clear and concise description of the concern or disputed decision;
the specific policy, evidence, factual error, conflict, or procedural issue involved;
relevant documents, dates, correspondence, screenshots, data, or other supporting evidence;
any steps already taken to resolve the matter; and
any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest of the complainant.

Complainants are not required to contact the authors, reviewers, or another person directly before contacting IJN. Concerns involving potential misconduct, harassment, retaliation, patient safety, vulnerable people, confidentiality, or legal risk should be sent directly to the journal.

Time limit for editorial appeals

An editorial appeal should be submitted within 30 calendar days of the decision. Late appeals may be considered when significant new evidence, an undisclosed conflict, a serious procedural failure, or a research-integrity concern is identified.

Complaints and allegations concerning research integrity, ethics, harassment, confidentiality, or the reliability of published content may be submitted at any time.

Acknowledgment and expected response times

IJN aims to acknowledge receipt within five business days.
An initial assessment will normally begin within ten business days.
IJN aims to provide an outcome or substantive progress update within 30 business days.

Complex cases may require additional time, particularly when external experts, institutions, ethics committees, funders, legal advisers, other journals, or multiple parties must be consulted. When a delay occurs, the journal will provide an update when reasonably possible. These targets are service standards and do not prevent a complete and fair investigation.

Initial assessment

The editorial office will record the submission, confirm its scope, preserve relevant documents, and determine who should handle it. IJN may request clarification or additional evidence. The journal may close a submission without further action when it:

does not identify a specific issue within the journal's responsibility;
contains no information that can reasonably be assessed;
merely repeats a matter already concluded without new evidence;
is abusive, threatening, discriminatory, or primarily personal rather than evidence-based; or
is demonstrably frivolous, malicious, or intended to harass.

A legitimate concern will not be rejected solely because it is critical, inconvenient, submitted by a junior researcher, or presented without legal or academic representation.

Independent handling and conflicts of interest

No person who is the subject of a complaint, directly involved in the disputed decision, or affected by a relevant conflict of interest may control the review of that matter.

A complaint about a handling editor will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or an independent senior editor.
A complaint or appeal involving the Editor-in-Chief will be assigned to an independent member of the editorial board or another qualified external person designated for the case.
A complaint concerning administrative or publisher services will be reviewed by a responsible person who was not directly involved in the disputed conduct.
A complaint involving both editorial and administrative matters may be separated so that each component is reviewed independently.

Editorial appeals procedure

The appeal must explain precisely why reconsideration is justified and must address the editor's and reviewers' reasons for the decision. The reviewing editor will examine the manuscript history, decision letter, reviews, author responses, relevant policies, and supporting evidence.

The reviewing editor may:

uphold the original decision;
request clarification from the original editor or reviewers;
seek an additional independent editorial or peer-review opinion;
return the manuscript to the editorial process; or
replace the original decision with a new decision supported by the record.

Normally, one appeal is considered for each editorial decision. The result of the appeal is final within IJN unless significant new evidence or a research-integrity concern emerges. Submission of an appeal does not guarantee external re-review, acceptance, or reversal of the decision.

Research-integrity and ethical complaints

When a complaint raises a credible concern about research or publication integrity, IJN may request original data, images, protocols, ethics approvals, consent documents, registrations, authorship records, conflicts-of-interest disclosures, reviewer information, or other relevant evidence.

The journal may contact authors, reviewers, editors, institutions, employers, funders, ethics committees, research-integrity offices, other journals, or appropriate authorities when necessary. IJN does not replace an institution or competent authority and may refer matters requiring formal investigation.

If readers need to be alerted while a serious investigation is incomplete, IJN may publish an expression of concern. Final action will follow the available evidence and the journal's Corrections, Retractions and Withdrawals Policy.

Anonymous and confidential complaints

IJN will consider anonymous complaints when they provide specific, credible, and assessable information. Anonymous reporting may limit the journal's ability to request clarification, verify evidence, provide progress updates, or communicate the outcome.

A complainant may request confidentiality. IJN will protect identity and personal information as far as reasonably possible, but confidentiality cannot be guaranteed when disclosure is required for a fair investigation, protection of participants or readers, institutional referral, legal advice, or compliance with law. Information will be shared only with those who need it for assessment or action.

Fairness and right of response

Individuals or organizations whose conduct or work is questioned will normally receive a fair opportunity to respond to the substantive concerns, unless doing so would create an immediate risk to people, evidence, confidentiality, or a lawful investigation. The journal will not presume misconduct before reviewing the evidence.

Possible outcomes

Depending on the evidence and the nature of the matter, IJN may:

provide an explanation, apology, or clarification;
correct a process, record, invoice, webpage, metadata item, or communication;
reconsider an editorial decision;
request revision or additional disclosure;
publish a correction, editorial note, expression of concern, retraction, removal notice, or other permanent notice;
refer the concern to an institution, funder, ethics committee, employer, another journal, legal adviser, or appropriate authority;
restrict or end the participation of a reviewer, editor, author, staff member, or service provider when justified; or
close the matter as unsubstantiated or outside the journal's responsibility.

The complainant will receive a written outcome or an appropriate summary. Privacy, confidentiality, employment, legal, and research-integrity restrictions may limit the information that IJN can disclose.

Post-publication comments

Readers may submit evidence-based comments, questions, or criticisms concerning a published article to the editorial office. Scientific commentary intended for publication may be handled as a journal submission and may undergo editorial assessment and peer review. Personal attacks, discriminatory statements, unsupported allegations, and disclosure of confidential or identifying information will not be published.

No retaliation and respectful communication

IJN will not retaliate against authors, reviewers, readers, editors, employees, or whistleblowers who raise concerns in good faith. All parties are expected to communicate professionally. The journal may limit or end communications that are repetitive, abusive, threatening, discriminatory, or unrelated to the substance of the case, while preserving and investigating any credible evidence already received.

Fees and financial disputes

Complaints about APCs, waivers, invoices, or refunds will be assessed independently from peer review and scientific decisions. A financial dispute must not delay a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other action necessary to protect the scholarly record. See the Article Processing Charges Policy.

External referral

If a matter falls outside the journal's authority, IJN may direct the complainant to the relevant institution, ethics committee, funder, regulator, court, data-protection authority, or other competent body. References to external publication-ethics guidance do not mean that the external organization acts as an appeal body for IJN or is required to investigate the complaint.

Records

IJN will maintain an appropriate record of complaints, appeals, evidence, responses, decisions, conflicts, and actions, subject to applicable privacy, confidentiality, retention, and legal requirements. Recurring problems should be reviewed to improve policies, training, communication, and editorial practice.

Related IJN policies

Submit complaints, appeals, and integrity concerns to [email protected].

Last updated: August 2026.