Research Ethics Policy

1. General Principles of Research Ethics

All research submitted to BEMO must be conducted responsibly, transparently, and in accordance with recognized standards of scientific integrity.

The journal upholds the following principles:

• Respect for the rights, dignity, safety, and welfare of research participants.
• Responsible and humane treatment of animals used in research.
• Protection of personal, confidential, and sensitive information.
• Scientific honesty in data collection, mathematical modelling, analysis, and reporting.
• Appropriate institutional ethical oversight when required.
• Transparency regarding ethical approval, informed consent, and applicable exemptions.
• Compliance with relevant legal and institutional requirements.

2. Research Ethics Committee Approval

Research involving human participants, identifiable human data, clinical information, human biological materials, or experimental animals must obtain approval from an appropriate Research Ethics Committee (REC), Institutional Review Board (IRB), or equivalent authorized body when required by applicable regulations and institutional policies.

Where ethical approval is required, it should ordinarily be obtained before the relevant research activities begin. Retrospective approval must not be represented as prospective approval.

The manuscript must disclose:

1. The name of the approving ethics committee or institutional review board.
2. The institutional affiliation of the approving body.
3. The ethics approval or reference number, where issued.
4. The date of approval, where applicable.
5. Any relevant conditions or restrictions attached to the approval.

BEMO does not require researchers to obtain approval from an ethics committee affiliated with the journal or its publisher. Approval must come from a competent body appropriate to the research and its regulatory context.

3. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must respect internationally recognized ethical principles, including those reflected in the Declaration of Helsinki where applicable.

Authors must ensure that:

• Participation is voluntary and based on appropriate informed consent, unless a valid waiver has been granted.
• Participants receive sufficient information about the research and its potential risks.
• Privacy, confidentiality, and data protection requirements are respected.
• Additional safeguards are implemented for vulnerable populations where relevant.
• Any required institutional approval is obtained and appropriately documented.

For research involving patient-level information, clinical datasets, epidemiological observations, or other human-derived data, authors must explain the ethical basis for data access and use.

4. Informed Consent

Informed consent must be obtained when required by the nature of the research and applicable ethical or legal requirements.

Consent procedures should appropriately address:

• Participation in research activities.
• Collection, analysis, and permitted reuse of personal information.
• Publication of potentially identifiable information, images, or case details.
• Additional consent or authorization requirements for vulnerable participants.

When informed consent has been waived by an authorized ethics committee, or is not legally or ethically required, authors must provide an appropriate explanation.

Consent to participate in research does not automatically constitute consent to publish identifiable personal information.

5. Privacy, Confidentiality, and Data Protection

Authors must protect personal and sensitive information in accordance with applicable data protection laws, ethical approvals, institutional agreements, and relevant data-use restrictions.

For research involving health records, patient datasets, individual-level epidemiological data, or other sensitive information:

• Data access must be authorized.
• Identifiable information must not be disclosed without an appropriate lawful and ethical basis.
• De-identification or anonymization should be applied where appropriate.
• Data sharing must respect consent, contractual restrictions, and legal requirements.
• Authors must not assume that publicly accessible data are automatically exempt from all ethical obligations.

Where data cannot be made publicly available because of privacy or confidentiality restrictions, authors should explain the limitation and, where possible, describe a lawful process for requesting access.

6. Animal Research Ethics

Studies involving experimental animals must comply with applicable animal welfare legislation, institutional requirements, and relevant ethical guidelines.

Where required, approval must be obtained from an authorized animal ethics committee before conducting the research.

Authors should describe:

• The approving animal ethics committee and approval reference, where applicable.
• The animal species and relevant experimental procedures.
• Measures taken to minimize pain, distress, and unnecessary animal use.
• Relevant application of the Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement (3Rs) principles.

Mathematical models of animal populations, ecological interactions, or predator-prey systems that do not involve animal experimentation do not automatically require animal ethics committee approval.

7. Mathematical Modelling and Computational Research

BEMO recognizes that mathematical and computational studies differ substantially in their ethical oversight requirements.

7.1 Pure Mathematical and Theoretical Studies

Research based exclusively on mathematical theory, analytical derivations, differential equations, stability analysis, bifurcation theory, optimization, or other theoretical methods generally does not require research ethics committee approval when no regulated human or animal research activities are involved.

7.2 Simulation-Based Research

Computational simulations using hypothetical, synthetic, or independently generated numerical data generally do not require ethics committee approval, provided that the research does not involve restricted personal information, regulated animal experimentation, or other activities requiring ethical oversight.

7.3 Biological and Epidemiological Modelling

Models involving disease transmission, population dynamics, ecological systems, or biological interactions may use publicly available, aggregated, anonymized, or individual-level datasets.

The need for ethical approval depends on the data source, identifiability, access conditions, institutional requirements, and applicable regulations, rather than solely on whether the research is described as mathematical modelling.

7.4 Environmental Modelling

Environmental modelling based on publicly available observations, simulations, or non-sensitive environmental datasets generally does not require human research ethics approval.

However, fieldwork, biological sampling, protected species research, access to protected areas, or regulated environmental activities may require permits, institutional authorization, or other ethical and legal approvals.

8. Secondary Data and Publicly Available Datasets

Research based on previously collected data must comply with the conditions governing access and reuse.

Authors should identify the source of the data and explain whether the data are publicly available, aggregated, de-identified, restricted, or individually identifiable.

Ethics approval may not be required for certain secondary-data studies, but this must not be assumed solely because the data were collected previously or are accessible online.

Where an exemption or waiver has been formally determined by an authorized body, authors should report that determination when applicable.

9. Ethics Approval and Exemption Statements

Authors must include an appropriate research ethics statement in their manuscripts. The statement should reflect the actual ethical status of the study.

Authors must not claim formal ethics committee exemption unless such a determination was actually made by an authorized body. A statement that ethics approval was not required is distinct from a formally granted exemption.

10. Editorial Verification of Ethical Compliance

The editorial team may request additional information or supporting documentation to assess compliance with ethical requirements.

Such documentation may include:

• Research ethics approval letters or reference numbers.
• Institutional exemption or waiver documentation.
• Descriptions of informed consent procedures.
• Data access permissions or relevant agreements.
• Animal research approvals or fieldwork permits.
• Clarification regarding the use of secondary, synthetic, or publicly available datasets.

Editors may consult independent experts or request institutional clarification when ethical concerns cannot be resolved from the manuscript and accompanying documentation.

11. Ethical Non-Compliance and Research Misconduct

Failure to comply with applicable ethical requirements may result in requests for clarification, manuscript revision, rejection, or appropriate post-publication action.

Where serious ethical concerns arise, the journal may refer the matter to the relevant institution or competent authority and apply its Allegations of Research Misconduct Policy and Correction and Retraction Policy.

Authors should be provided an appropriate opportunity to respond to substantive allegations before editorial conclusions are reached.

12. Responsibilities of Authors and Editors

Authors are responsible for determining the ethical requirements applicable to their research, obtaining necessary approvals, accurately reporting the ethical status of the study, and maintaining supporting documentation.

Editors are responsible for assessing the adequacy of ethical disclosures, requesting clarification when necessary, managing ethical concerns impartially, and protecting the integrity of the publication process.

Ethics approval does not guarantee manuscript acceptance, and editorial review does not replace institutional or regulatory ethical oversight.