Editor Guidelines

JQBio's editors are the custodians of the journal's scientific quality, integrity, and reputation. These guidelines set out what is expected of every editor — from Editors-in-Chief to Associate and Advisory Board Editors — and describe the standards, tools, and policies we use to support that work.

Responsibilities of Editors

In line with practice at leading peer-reviewed journals, JQBio editors are expected to uphold the following core responsibilities:

Editorial independence and integrity

• Make decisions based solely on a manuscript's scientific merit, originality, and relevance, free from commercial, personal, or institutional influence.
• Declare and manage any conflicts of interest — financial, professional, or personal — before accepting an editorial assignment, and recuse themselves where necessary.
• Maintain confidentiality of all submitted material throughout and after the review process.

Fair and rigorous review

• Select reviewers with appropriate expertise and no competing interests, and ensure a balanced, constructive review process.
• Evaluate manuscripts on scientific validity, methodology, and contribution to the field, regardless of authors' nationality, institution, gender, or seniority.
• Ensure timely handling of submissions, keeping authors and reviewers informed of progress and decisions.
• Provide authors with clear, actionable, and respectful feedback, and offer a transparent route for appeal where a decision is disputed.

Research and publication integrity

• Screen for plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, and undisclosed conflicts of interest, and act on suspected misconduct in line with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.
• Ensure appropriate ethical approvals, consent, and data-availability statements accompany relevant submissions.
• Issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions where warranted, promptly and transparently.

Continuous Process Improvement

Editors are expected to continuously and critically review JQBio's editorial and peer-review processes to identify areas for improvement — in efficiency, fairness, transparency, and reviewer and author experience. One area of active investment is the responsible use of artificial intelligence in supporting, not replacing, editorial judgement.

Any improvement of this kind is made responsibly and with transparency, so that authors and reviewers benefit directly, while data misuse and misrepresentation are safeguarded against at every stage.

AI Policy

JQBio maintains a minimal AI policy and acts in accordance with the expectations of our scientific community. Our approach is deliberately conservative: AI is used to support process and infrastructure, never to make or substitute editorial judgement.

Proprietary, privacy-preserving development

Where AI tooling is developed to support editorial workflows, we invest in the proprietary development of these systems in-house, including the use of randomised decoy inputs designed to protect submitted data during model development and testing. This approach reduces the exposure of genuine manuscript content, author data, and reviewer commentary to third-party systems.

What AI does not do

It is a definitive statement of JQBio policy that AI tooling used in our editorial process does not action raw data or verbatim content from manuscripts, reviews, or correspondence. AI is not used to generate review decisions, review text, or scientific judgements on our editors' or reviewers' behalf.

Our policies expect authors and reviewers to be transparent about any use of AI tools in the preparation of manuscripts or reviews, and to act in accordance with these rules and with JQBio's broader research and publication integrity standards.

Assistive tools

Separate from this AI policy, JQBio supports the use of spell checkers and other assistive tools — including assistive AI tools — where authors and reviewers require help with language, accessibility, or clarity. This assistive use is distinct from the input of large content into general-purpose LLMs, which is governed by the AI policy above.

Content Management & Transparency

To support transparency across the publication process, JQBio has invested in the development of its own content management system. The system is designed to be tamper-proof, with audit-ready controls and dedicated quality-control gates at each stage of submission, review, and publication — giving editors, authors, and reviewers confidence in the integrity of the process from submission through to publication.

Community, Readership, and Researcher Development

JQBio's editors work to maximise the reach and impact of published research, but our priority extends beyond readership metrics: we aim to represent and serve our community of authors, researchers, and reviewers — supporting not only the development of research, but the development of researchers.

Early career and student representation

To that end, our editorial team is structured to include a dedicated Student and Early Career Advisory Board, ensuring that the perspectives, needs, and development of researchers at every career stage are represented in editorial decision-making and policy.

Data Security, Privacy, and Science Communication

JQBio acts in accordance with the expectations of the scientific community, following best practice for data security, data privacy, data integrity, and responsible science communication throughout the editorial and publication lifecycle.