General Ethical Principles and Oversight
Research should respect dignity, rights, safety, welfare, privacy, scientific validity, and fair treatment. Authors are responsible for identifying the institutional, national, disciplinary, and legal requirements applicable where the research occurred; no single country’s rules are presented as universal.
Human-participant Research
Prospective, retrospective, observational, and interventional studies involving people, medical records, clinical samples, or identifiable information must comply with applicable institutional, national, disciplinary, and legal requirements.
Authors should report institutional ethics committee or IRB/IEC approval and the approval number or reference where applicable. A legitimately granted waiver or exemption should identify the responsible body and basis where required. The Curette does not infer or supply regulatory approval.
Prospective Approval, Waivers, and Retrospective Review
Ethics approval should normally be obtained before participant enrolment, data collection, or use of regulated samples begins. A formal exemption or waiver must come from an authorized body where required, not solely from an author’s assessment. Retrospective approval may not remedy research undertaken without required review; authors must explain the circumstances and provide documentation, and publication is not assured.
Consent, Privacy, and Vulnerable Participants
Authors must address informed consent for research participation and informed consent for publication where applicable, with particular care for vulnerable participants. Patient confidentiality must be protected and unnecessary identifying information omitted.
Vulnerable Participants, Children, and Minors
Research involving people with constrained autonomy or heightened risk requires safeguards appropriate to the context. For children and minors, authors should address permission from a parent or authorized guardian and assent from the participant where applicable, while observing relevant ethics decisions and law.
Retrospective, Observational, and Interventional Research
Retrospective use of records does not automatically remove ethics, privacy, or consent obligations. Observational research should report applicable oversight and data protections. Interventional and prospective studies require particular clarity about prior approval, consent, safety monitoring, protocol, and changes made during conduct.
Case Reports and Identifiable Patients
For case reports and case series involving identifiable patients, authors must obtain appropriate consent for publication where required. Consent should cover clinical information, images, photographs, diagnostic images, pedigrees, timelines, and other potentially identifying details.
De-identification does not always remove the need for consent. Direct identifiers must not be published unless legally and ethically justified and explicitly consented where required. If consent cannot be obtained, publication must not proceed merely because names were removed when re-identification remains reasonably possible.
Potentially Identifiable Information
Potential identifiers include names, initials, hospital numbers, exact addresses, photographs, facial images, identity-linked dates, rare combinations of facts, pedigrees, genomic information, and detailed clinical timelines. Where identification is reasonably possible, appropriate publication consent should be obtained where required. Editors may request documentation or clarification.
Human Biological Material and Stored Samples
Research involving blood, tissue, pathology or surgical specimens, biopsies, DNA or RNA, genomic material, biobanks, or stored clinical samples must comply with applicable ethics approval, consent, privacy, institutional, and legal requirements. Authors should explain provenance, collection or access, relevant consent or waiver, and whether secondary use was within the permitted scope.
Clinical Trials and Protocol Transparency
Clinical trials should be registered prospectively in an appropriate recognized public registry where applicable. Authors should provide the registry name, identifier, and registration timing. Registration does not replace ethics approval, informed consent, participant-safety responsibilities, or complete results reporting.
Reports should be consistent with the registered protocol and explain material changes to outcomes, analyses, eligibility, intervention, or sample size. Applicable reporting guidance should be followed, and adverse events and limitations should not be selectively omitted.
Animal Research
Animal research must comply with applicable institutional, national, and disciplinary standards. Authors should report ethical approval or authorization where required, the relevant committee or body, an approval reference where available, and welfare considerations.
Biosafety and Regulated Materials
Work involving hazardous biological agents, regulated materials, or specialist facilities must follow applicable institutional, national, disciplinary, safety, and legal requirements and identify relevant oversight where applicable.
Dual-use and Community Risk
Research that could foreseeably enable harmful misuse or create unusual biosafety, biosecurity, ecological, or community risks requires proportionate risk assessment and oversight. Editors may seek specialist advice, limit unnecessary operational detail, or decline publication where responsible communication cannot adequately manage the risk.
Supporting Documentation and Later Concerns
Editors may request approval letters, consent forms or templates, registry records, protocols, welfare documentation, or other evidence, handled confidentially where appropriate. Ethical concerns discovered after publication may lead to investigation, correction, an Expression of Concern, retraction, or other proportionate action.
Reporting Guidelines
Authors should follow appropriate recognized reporting guidelines for the study design where applicable—for example, CONSORT for randomized trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, CARE for case reports, STARD for diagnostic accuracy studies, and ARRIVE for animal research. This does not imply organizational membership or endorsement.
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
Reports should describe transparent search methods, eligibility criteria, study selection, synthesis methods, and bias or risk-of-bias assessment. Protocol registration is encouraged where appropriate, and a suitable standard such as PRISMA should be used where applicable.