The International Journal of Lifestyle, Behavioural Medicine and Prevention Sciences (IJLBMPS) is committed to maintaining a rigorous, fair, transparent, and constructive peer-review process that supports the quality, integrity, and credibility of the research it publishes. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are expected to meet appropriate standards of scholarly quality, methodological rigour, ethical conduct, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Editorial Screening

All manuscripts received by the journal first undergo an initial editorial assessment. The purpose of this assessment is to determine whether the submission falls within the scope of the journal and meets the basic requirements for scholarly consideration. Editors may assess the manuscript’s originality, relevance, methodological soundness, ethical considerations, presentation, completeness, and compliance with the journal’s submission requirements.

Manuscripts that are clearly outside the scope of the journal, substantially incomplete, or unsuitable for further consideration may be declined at the editorial screening stage without being sent for external peer review. An editorial screening decision does not necessarily constitute a judgement on the overall academic value of a manuscript; rather, it determines whether the manuscript is appropriate for the journal’s review process.

Double-Anonymised Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are normally sent for double-anonymised peer review, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are not disclosed to one another during the review process.

Authors are therefore expected to prepare manuscripts in a manner that does not unnecessarily reveal their identities. Reviewers are likewise expected to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts they receive and must not attempt to identify the authors except where this is necessary for addressing a legitimate conflict-of-interest or research-integrity concern.

Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected on the basis of their subject expertise, methodological knowledge, research experience, and suitability for evaluating the manuscript. Where possible, the journal seeks reviewers whose expertise corresponds closely to the subject matter and methodology of the submission.

Editors should avoid assigning reviewers who have a personal, professional, institutional, financial, or other relationship with the authors that could reasonably compromise impartiality. Potential reviewers are expected to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting an invitation to review.

Number of Reviewers

As a general practice, manuscripts will normally be evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. The editor may seek additional reviews where reviewers provide substantially different recommendations, where specialist expertise is required, or where the editor considers additional assessment necessary to reach a fair and informed decision.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and constructively. Depending on the type of manuscript, reviewers may consider:

relevance to the journal’s scope;
originality and contribution to existing knowledge;
clarity and significance of the research question or objective;
adequacy of the theoretical or conceptual foundation;
appropriateness and rigour of the methodology;
quality and transparency of data collection and analysis;
appropriateness of statistical or other analytical procedures;
interpretation and presentation of findings;
relationship of the findings to existing literature;
clarity and coherence of the discussion and conclusions;
ethical considerations and appropriate approvals where applicable;
limitations of the study;
quality and completeness of references;
clarity of tables, figures, and supplementary materials where applicable; and
overall contribution to lifestyle medicine, behavioural medicine, prevention science, health promotion, public health, or related areas.

Reviewers should distinguish between major concerns that affect the validity or interpretation of a study and minor issues that can reasonably be addressed during revision.

Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend one of several possible outcomes, including:

Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication with no substantive changes or only minor editorial corrections.

Minor Revision: The manuscript is potentially publishable but requires limited revisions before a final decision can be made.

Major Revision: The manuscript has potential for publication but requires substantial revision, clarification, additional analysis, methodological explanation, or other significant improvements.

Reject: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal because of substantive concerns relating to quality, originality, methodology, relevance, ethical issues, or other considerations.

A reviewer’s recommendation is advisory. The final publication decision rests with the editor or designated editorial authority.

Editorial Decisions

Following peer review, the editor considers the reviewers’ assessments together with the manuscript, the authors’ responses where applicable, and the journal’s editorial standards. The editor may accept the manuscript, request revisions, reject the manuscript, or seek additional review where necessary.

The journal does not require editors to follow a reviewer’s recommendation automatically. Where reviewers disagree, the editor may consider the substantive reasoning provided by each reviewer, request clarification, obtain an additional review, or make an independent editorial judgement.

Revisions

When revisions are requested, authors should respond carefully and systematically to the reviewers’ comments. Revised manuscripts should clearly indicate the changes made and, where appropriate, provide a point-by-point response explaining how each substantive comment has been addressed.

Submission of a revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by additional reviewers when the editor considers further external assessment appropriate.

Reviewer Confidentiality

Peer-review materials are treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share manuscripts, supplementary materials, review reports, or information obtained through the review process with others without appropriate editorial permission.

Reviewers must not use unpublished information contained in a manuscript for personal research, professional advantage, financial benefit, or any other purpose unrelated to the review process.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose conflicts of interest that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, their impartiality. Individuals with significant conflicts should decline participation in the review or editorial decision.

Authors are also expected to disclose relevant conflicts of interest in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics requirements.

Research and Publication Ethics

Where applicable, manuscripts involving human participants, identifiable personal data, animals, clinical interventions, or other ethically sensitive research must provide appropriate information concerning ethical approval, informed consent, participant protection, and related requirements.

Concerns relating to plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication or falsification of data, inappropriate authorship, manipulation of the peer-review process, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other forms of research or publication misconduct may be investigated by the journal. Where necessary, editorial action may include rejection, correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other appropriate measures.

Reviewer Recognition

The journal values the contribution of peer reviewers to scholarly communication. Subject to confidentiality requirements and the journal’s policies, IJLBMPS may provide appropriate recognition of reviewers’ contributions. Reviewers may also be invited to participate in the journal’s wider scholarly community or future reviewing activities based on their expertise and performance.

Review Timelines

The journal aims to conduct peer review efficiently while recognising that reviewers are volunteers and that rigorous assessment requires adequate time. Editors will seek to minimise unnecessary delays while allowing reviewers sufficient time to provide meaningful evaluations. Authors will be informed when significant delays occur where this is known to the editorial team.

Appeals

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a significant misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, or demonstrable error may submit an appeal to the journal. Appeals should provide a clear and reasoned explanation of the grounds for reconsideration.

Appeals are considered by the editorial team in accordance with the journal’s procedures. An appeal does not guarantee that the original decision will be reversed.

Commitment to Fair and Constructive Review

IJLBMPS recognises peer review as an essential part of responsible scholarly publishing. The journal therefore seeks to maintain a review process that is independent, respectful, evidence-informed, confidential, and constructive, while ensuring that editorial decisions are based primarily on the scholarly quality, integrity, relevance, and contribution of the work.

The journal is committed to treating authors and reviewers fairly regardless of nationality, institutional affiliation, geographical location, gender, race, ethnicity, religion, or other personal characteristics. The ultimate aim of the peer-review process is not simply to determine whether a manuscript should be published, but to strengthen the quality of scholarship and ensure that published research makes a credible and meaningful contribution to knowledge and practice.

The International Journal of Lifestyle, Behavioural Medicine and Prevention Sciences (IJLBMPS) is committed to maintaining the highest reasonable standards of research integrity, publication ethics, transparency, accountability, and responsible scholarly communication. The journal recognises that the credibility of scientific and scholarly publishing depends on the integrity of authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and other individuals involved in the publication process.

IJLBMPS expects all manuscripts, authors, reviewers, editors, and published works to comply with principles of responsible research and publication. The journal will consider ethical, methodological, and integrity-related issues throughout the entire publication process, from manuscript submission and editorial assessment through peer review, revision, acceptance, production, publication, and post-publication correction or retraction.

1. Research Integrity

Authors are expected to conduct and report their research honestly, accurately, transparently, and responsibly. Research findings should be presented without fabrication, falsification, inappropriate manipulation, or deliberate misrepresentation.

Authors must not knowingly provide false or misleading information about their research, methods, participants, data, analyses, institutional affiliations, funding, ethical approvals, or other aspects of their work.

Where appropriate, authors should provide sufficient methodological information to enable readers and other researchers to understand, evaluate, and, where reasonably possible, reproduce the research.

2. Originality and Plagiarism

Manuscripts submitted to IJLBMPS must represent original scholarly work and must not contain plagiarised material.

Plagiarism includes presenting another person’s words, ideas, data, findings, images, or other intellectual contributions as one’s own without appropriate acknowledgement. Authors are expected to cite and acknowledge the sources on which their work is based.

The journal may use appropriate plagiarism or similarity-detection procedures as part of its editorial assessment. Where substantial plagiarism or other forms of unattributed appropriation are identified, the manuscript may be rejected and further action may be taken where appropriate.

Minor problems involving inadequate attribution may be addressed through revision where the editor considers this appropriate. More serious or deliberate cases may constitute publication misconduct.

3. Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Authors should not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals.

Manuscripts should not have been previously published in substantially the same form unless the authors clearly disclose the previous publication and the submission represents a legitimate secondary publication, substantially expanded work, translation, or other form of publication that is acceptable under scholarly publishing standards.

Authors must disclose relevant prior publications, conference papers, preprints, datasets, or other publicly available versions of the work where these may affect the assessment of originality.

4. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship should reflect genuine and substantial contributions to the conception, design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of the research or manuscript.

Individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions should receive appropriate authorship recognition, while individuals who have not made sufficient contributions should not be listed as authors.

All listed authors should have made a meaningful contribution to the work, approved the final version of the manuscript, and accept responsibility for their contribution to the work.

The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal and ensuring that all authors are aware of the submission and agree with the manuscript being submitted.

Changes to authorship after submission should be explained and may require agreement from all affected authors before the change is approved by the editorial team.

5. Artificial Intelligence and Other Digital Tools

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical acceptability of their manuscripts regardless of whether artificial intelligence or other digital tools were used during preparation.

AI-assisted tools may be used for appropriate purposes such as language improvement, formatting, or other legitimate scholarly support, provided that their use does not compromise the integrity of the work.

Artificial intelligence systems cannot be listed as authors because they cannot accept responsibility for the content, approve a final manuscript, disclose conflicts of interest, or fulfil other responsibilities associated with authorship.

Where the use of AI tools has materially contributed to the development, analysis, generation, or modification of scholarly content, authors should provide appropriate disclosure in accordance with the journal’s requirements.

Authors remain responsible for verifying AI-assisted content, including factual claims, references, quotations, interpretations, calculations, and citations. The use of AI does not exempt authors from responsibility for plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, copyright infringement, or other forms of misconduct.

6. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must comply with applicable ethical principles and relevant institutional, national, and international requirements.

Where ethical review is required, authors should provide information regarding approval by an appropriate research ethics committee or institutional review board. Where applicable, the manuscript should identify the approving body and relevant approval or reference information.

Authors should also explain how informed consent was obtained when required and how the privacy, confidentiality, safety, dignity, and rights of participants were protected.

Where a study does not require formal ethical approval, authors should provide an appropriate explanation where necessary.

7. Informed Consent

Authors are responsible for obtaining informed consent from research participants where required.

In studies involving potentially identifiable individuals, authors should take appropriate steps to protect participant identity and confidential information.

Where identifiable photographs, personal information, case details, or other potentially identifying material are included in a manuscript, appropriate consent should be obtained unless a recognised ethical or legal exception applies.

8. Research Involving Animals

Where research involves animals, authors are expected to comply with applicable institutional and regulatory requirements concerning animal welfare, humane treatment, and ethical research practice.

Manuscripts should provide appropriate information about ethical approval and procedures used to minimise animal suffering where applicable.

9. Data Integrity and Data Availability

Authors are responsible for ensuring that data presented in their manuscripts are accurate and have not been fabricated, falsified, selectively manipulated, or otherwise misrepresented.

Where appropriate and ethically permissible, authors should retain underlying research data and supporting materials for a reasonable period and be prepared to provide clarification or supporting information to the journal when legitimate questions concerning the research arise.

Authors should respect privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, contractual restrictions, and other legitimate limitations on data sharing.

Where datasets cannot be publicly shared because of ethical, legal, privacy, or other restrictions, authors should clearly indicate this where appropriate.

10. Conflicts of Interest

Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could influence or reasonably appear to influence their judgement.

Conflicts may include financial relationships, employment, consultancy, personal relationships, institutional affiliations, academic competition, intellectual interests, or other circumstances that could affect impartiality.

Disclosure of a conflict does not necessarily mean that a manuscript cannot be considered or published. Rather, transparent disclosure allows editors and readers to evaluate the circumstances appropriately.

11. Funding and Financial Support

Authors should disclose sources of financial or material support for the research and publication of the manuscript.

Where applicable, authors should indicate the role of the funding organisation in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Where a funder had no involvement in these activities, authors may state this where appropriate.

12. Peer-Review Integrity

IJLBMPS expects all participants in the peer-review process to act professionally, objectively, respectfully, and confidentially.

Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal, professional, financial, or competitive advantage.

Reviewers should disclose conflicts of interest and decline assignments where their impartiality could reasonably be compromised.

Editors are responsible for ensuring that editorial decisions are based on scholarly considerations and are not improperly influenced by personal relationships, institutional interests, commercial considerations, discrimination, or other inappropriate factors.

Further details are provided in the journal’s Peer Review Policy.

13. Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted to the journal are treated as confidential documents during the editorial and peer-review process.

Editors, reviewers, and other individuals who have access to unpublished manuscripts must not disclose manuscript content or use unpublished information for purposes unrelated to the review and publication process.

Exceptions may apply where disclosure is necessary to investigate suspected research or publication misconduct or where required by applicable legal or ethical obligations.

14. Conflicts Involving Editors and Reviewers

Editors and reviewers should not participate in the assessment of manuscripts where they have a significant personal, professional, institutional, financial, or academic conflict with the authors or the research.

Where an editor has a conflict of interest, responsibility for the manuscript should be transferred to an appropriately independent editor where possible.

15. Misconduct and Suspected Ethical Violations

IJLBMPS takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously.

Potential misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

fabrication of data or research findings;
falsification or inappropriate manipulation of data;
plagiarism;
duplicate or redundant publication;
inappropriate or fraudulent authorship;
undisclosed conflicts of interest;
manipulation of peer review;
unethical research involving human participants or animals;
inappropriate manipulation of images or research materials;
deliberate misrepresentation of research findings;
citation manipulation;
fraudulent or misleading statements concerning research, affiliations, funding, or ethical approval; and
other serious violations of research or publication integrity.

Where concerns arise, the journal may request explanations, supporting documentation, institutional information, original data, ethical approval documentation, or other relevant evidence.

The journal may also contact the relevant institution, research organisation, funder, or other appropriate body when necessary.

16. Investigation of Ethical Concerns

Allegations of misconduct will be assessed carefully and fairly. The journal will seek to distinguish genuine errors, misunderstandings, and honest disagreements from deliberate or serious misconduct.

Individuals accused of misconduct will be given an appropriate opportunity to respond where the circumstances permit.

Investigations may involve consultation with editors, reviewers, authors, institutional representatives, research ethics bodies, or other appropriate experts.

The journal may suspend consideration or publication of a manuscript while a serious ethical concern is being investigated.

17. Corrections and Post-Publication Changes

The journal recognises that errors can occasionally occur despite editorial, peer-review, and production processes.

When a published article contains a significant error that affects the accuracy, interpretation, or integrity of the published record, the journal may issue an appropriate correction or other editorial notice.

Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect the meaning or integrity of the article may be corrected without issuing a formal correction notice where appropriate.

Authors are encouraged to notify the journal promptly when they identify a significant error in their published work.

18. Retractions

An article may be retracted where there is compelling evidence that the published work contains serious problems affecting its reliability or integrity.

Possible reasons for retraction may include substantial fabrication or falsification, serious plagiarism, major ethical violations, fraudulent publication practices, significant undisclosed conflicts, or other circumstances that make the published findings unreliable.

Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record and should not be understood automatically as a punishment. A retracted article may remain part of the publication record with a clear retraction notice explaining the reason for the action.

19. Expressions of Concern

Where substantial concerns have arisen about a published article but an investigation has not yet reached a definitive conclusion, the journal may issue an Expression of Concern.

This mechanism allows the journal to alert readers to unresolved concerns while an appropriate investigation or clarification is underway.

20. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they believe that a significant factual misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, or other substantial issue affected the decision.

Appeals should be reasoned, specific, and supported by relevant evidence.

Complaints concerning editorial conduct, peer review, publication processes, or ethical matters will be considered by the journal and addressed through appropriate editorial procedures.

21. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions should be based on the scholarly quality, relevance, originality, methodological soundness, ethical integrity, and contribution of the manuscript.

Editorial decisions should not be determined by commercial interests, political influence, personal relationships, institutional pressure, nationality, geographical location, gender, race, religion, or other characteristics unrelated to the scholarly merits of the work.

The publisher and journal leadership will seek to protect the editorial independence of editors in making scholarly decisions.

22. Citation Ethics

Authors should cite relevant and appropriate scholarly sources that genuinely support the claims made in their manuscripts.

Citation should not be manipulated for the purpose of artificially increasing citation counts, influencing journal metrics, or providing inappropriate advantage to particular authors, journals, institutions, or publications.

Editors and reviewers should not require authors to add unnecessary citations solely to increase citations to the editor, reviewer, journal, or affiliated publications.

23. Respectful and Responsible Scholarly Communication

The journal expects authors, reviewers, editors, and other participants in the publication process to communicate professionally and respectfully.

Scholarly disagreement is recognised as an important part of academic discourse. However, criticism should focus on evidence, methods, interpretations, and scholarly arguments rather than individuals.

The journal does not tolerate discriminatory, threatening, abusive, defamatory, or harassing behaviour within the publication process.

24. Transparency and Accountability

IJLBMPS seeks to promote transparency throughout the publication process. Where appropriate, the journal will provide clear information concerning editorial policies, peer review, authorship, ethical requirements, publication decisions, corrections, retractions, and other aspects of scholarly publishing.

Authors and reviewers are expected to provide truthful and complete information relevant to the publication process.

25. Commitment to the Integrity of the Scholarly Record

The primary purpose of the journal’s publication ethics policy is to protect the integrity and reliability of the scholarly record.

IJLBMPS recognises that responsible publishing is a shared responsibility. Authors, reviewers, editors, publisher, and other participants each have a role in ensuring that published research is trustworthy, ethically conducted, appropriately reported, and accessible to the scholarly community.

The journal will therefore seek to address ethical concerns fairly, proportionately, and transparently while respecting the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved.

IJLBMPS is committed to maintaining a scholarly publishing environment in which research integrity, academic independence, transparency, respect, and responsible communication are treated as fundamental principles of the journal.

1. Introduction
The International Journal of Lifestyle, Behavioural Medicine and Prevention Sciences (IJLBMPS) welcomes high-quality scholarly contributions that advance knowledge in lifestyle medicine, behavioural medicine, prevention science, health promotion, public health, and related fields.
The journal welcomes contributions from researchers, academics, clinicians, health professionals, public health practitioners, psychologists, social scientists, students, and other qualified contributors whose work falls within the scope of the journal.
Authors are expected to submit manuscripts that demonstrate originality, scholarly rigour, methodological integrity, appropriate ethical conduct, clear academic writing, accurate referencing, and meaningful contribution to knowledge.
Submission of a manuscript to IJLBMPS indicates that the authors accept the journal’s editorial, peer-review, publication ethics, authorship, referencing, and research-integrity requirements.
2. Originality of Manuscripts
Manuscripts submitted to IJLBMPS must be original scholarly contributions.
Authors must ensure that:
• the manuscript has not been published previously in substantially the same form;
• the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal;
• all sources of information, ideas, data, arguments, figures, tables, and other intellectual contributions have been appropriately acknowledged;
• substantial portions of previously published work are not reproduced without appropriate justification and permission where required; and
• the manuscript accurately represents the research that was actually conducted.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submission does not constitute duplicate, redundant, or fragmented publication.
Where a manuscript is derived from a thesis, dissertation, conference presentation, preprint, research report, or other earlier scholarly work, this should be disclosed where relevant.
3. Academic Writing and Scholarly Quality
Authors are expected to present their work in clear, coherent, and academically appropriate language.
A manuscript should demonstrate:
• a clearly defined research problem;
• appropriate objectives or research questions;
• a sound theoretical or conceptual foundation where applicable;
• an appropriate research methodology;
• transparent presentation of findings;
• appropriate interpretation of results;
• engagement with relevant literature;
• logical discussion and conclusions; and
• clearly stated limitations where appropriate.
The journal welcomes international contributions and does not require authors to write in an unnecessarily complicated style. Clear, precise, natural academic writing is preferred over unnecessarily technical or complicated language.
Authors should ensure that manuscripts have been carefully revised before submission.
4. APA Referencing and In-Text Citations
IJLBMPS places particular importance on accurate scholarly citation and referencing.
Unless otherwise specified for a particular article type, authors should use the American Psychological Association (APA) referencing style, preferably APA 7th edition.
Authors must appropriately cite sources whenever they:
• use another researcher’s idea;
• report previously published findings;
• paraphrase another author’s argument;
• reproduce or adapt a theoretical model;
• use a measurement instrument or established framework;
• report statistics or findings obtained from another source;
• refer to established concepts that are not their own; or
• reproduce information, tables, figures, or other intellectual material.
In-text citations
Authors should use appropriate APA in-text citations throughout the manuscript.
For example:
Lifestyle behaviours are influenced by multiple social and environmental factors (Smith & Jones, 2024).
For three or more authors:
Health behaviour is shaped by interacting individual and social determinants (Mensah et al., 2023).
Where the author’s name forms part of the sentence:
Mensah et al. (2023) found that…
Authors should ensure that every significant claim based on previous scholarship is appropriately supported by relevant literature.
Reference list
Every source cited in the manuscript should appear in the reference list, and every reference listed should be cited in the manuscript.
Authors should carefully check:
• author names;
• publication year;
• article or book title;
• journal title;
• volume and issue;
• page numbers where applicable;
• DOI information;
• URLs where appropriate; and
• consistency between in-text citations and the reference list.
Authors should not add references merely to make the reference list appear more substantial.
Accuracy is more important than the number of references.
5. Quality and Relevance of Sources
Authors should prioritise credible and relevant scholarly sources.
Where appropriate, authors should make use of:
• peer-reviewed journal articles;
• scholarly books;
• authoritative reports;
• official government publications;
• recognised international organisations;
• credible datasets; and
• other reliable academic or professional sources.
Authors should avoid relying excessively on:
• unverified websites;
• anonymous sources;
• promotional material;
• unreliable online content;
• predatory publications; or
• sources that cannot be independently verified.
Authors are responsible for verifying the accuracy and relevance of every source they cite.
6. Plagiarism and Unattributed Use of Sources
IJLBMPS has zero tolerance for plagiarism.
Plagiarism occurs when an author presents another person’s words, ideas, findings, data, structure, images, or other intellectual contribution as their own without appropriate acknowledgement.
Plagiarism can occur even when the material has been slightly reworded.
Authors should therefore distinguish clearly between:
• their own original contribution;
• paraphrased material from other sources;
• direct quotations; and
• previously published material.
Appropriate citation is required whenever an author’s work, idea, evidence, argument, or intellectual contribution is used.
Paraphrasing
Paraphrasing does not simply mean changing a few words in another author’s sentence.
Authors should genuinely understand the source, express the idea in their own scholarly language, and provide an appropriate citation.
Direct quotations
Direct quotations should be used selectively and should be clearly identified and properly cited according to APA requirements.
Authors should avoid excessive quotation where the purpose of the manuscript is to demonstrate their own scholarly analysis.
Plagiarism screening
The journal may use plagiarism or similarity-detection tools during editorial assessment.
A similarity score alone does not automatically establish plagiarism. Editorial assessment will consider the nature, location, extent, and context of the similarity.
Where substantial unattributed copying or other forms of plagiarism are identified, the manuscript may be rejected and further action may be taken in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.
7. Artificial Intelligence and AI-Assisted Content
IJLBMPS recognises that artificial intelligence and other digital tools are increasingly being used in academic writing and research.
The journal does not automatically prohibit responsible use of AI tools. However, the use of AI does not transfer scholarly responsibility from the author to the technology.
Authors remain fully responsible for everything they submit.
This includes responsibility for:
• factual accuracy;
• originality;
• citations;
• references;
• interpretation of evidence;
• statistical claims;
• methodological descriptions;
• quotations;
• ethical compliance;
• copyright;
• plagiarism; and
• the overall integrity of the manuscript.
AI-generated text must not be submitted without critical review
Authors must carefully review, revise, verify, and take responsibility for any AI-assisted content incorporated into a manuscript.
AI systems can produce inaccurate information, fabricated references, incorrect interpretations, misleading claims, and language that appears authoritative but is not supported by evidence.
Authors must therefore independently verify AI-assisted material before submission.
In particular, authors should verify every AI-generated or AI-assisted:
• citation;
• reference;
• statistic;
• quotation;
• factual claim;
• interpretation;
• methodological statement; and
• attribution.
Authors are responsible for correcting or removing inaccurate AI-generated content.
AI cannot be an author
Artificial intelligence systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to IJLBMPS.
Authorship carries responsibility and accountability, and AI systems cannot accept those responsibilities.
Disclosure of substantial AI use
Where AI has been used substantially in developing, analysing, generating, translating, or substantially modifying manuscript content, authors should disclose its use in accordance with the journal’s requirements.
Routine use of basic spelling, grammar, or formatting tools does not necessarily require detailed disclosure unless the journal specifically requests it.
The journal reserves the right to request clarification regarding the use of AI where concerns arise regarding authorship, originality, accuracy, research integrity, or the authenticity of the submitted work.
8. Authors Must Revise Their Manuscripts
Authors should not treat submission as the first stage of manuscript editing.
Before submission, authors should undertake a careful revision of the manuscript to ensure that it is:
• logically organised;
• grammatically sound;
• academically appropriate;
• properly referenced;
• internally consistent;
• free from obvious factual errors;
• free from unnecessary repetition;
• properly formatted;
• appropriately supported by evidence; and
• understandable to its intended scholarly audience.
Authors are particularly encouraged to review AI-assisted or machine-assisted writing carefully. The responsibility for transforming automated output into accurate, coherent, original scholarly writing rests with the author.
9. Data and Statistical Integrity
Authors must report research findings honestly and accurately.
Authors must not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, selectively report, or intentionally misrepresent research data.
Where statistical analyses are used, authors are responsible for ensuring that:
• the selected analytical methods are appropriate;
• assumptions are considered where relevant;
• results are reported accurately;
• statistical values are internally consistent;
• tables and figures correspond with the reported results; and
• interpretations do not go beyond what the data support.
Authors should not manipulate statistical analyses simply to obtain statistically significant findings.
10. Ethical Approval and Human Participants
Research involving human participants must comply with applicable ethical requirements.
Where applicable, authors must provide information about:
• ethical approval;
• the approving institution or committee;
• informed consent;
• participant confidentiality;
• privacy and data protection; and
• other relevant ethical safeguards.
The absence of appropriate ethical approval where such approval was required may constitute grounds for rejection.
11. Authorship
Authorship should reflect genuine scholarly contribution.
All listed authors should have made a meaningful contribution to the research or manuscript and should approve the final version before submission.
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that:
• all authors are aware of the submission;
• all authors approve the submitted manuscript;
• authorship information is accurate;
• author affiliations are correct; and
• relevant conflicts of interest are disclosed.
Gift authorship, honorary authorship, ghost authorship, and inappropriate exclusion of legitimate contributors are not acceptable.
12. Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose financial, professional, personal, institutional, or other relationships that could influence or reasonably appear to influence the research or its interpretation.
A conflict of interest does not automatically prevent publication. Transparency allows editors and readers to evaluate the circumstances appropriately.
13. Funding Disclosure
Authors should disclose all significant sources of funding or material support for the research.
Where relevant, authors should explain the role of the funder in:
• study design;
• data collection;
• analysis;
• interpretation;
• manuscript preparation; and
• the decision to submit the manuscript.
14. Responsible Use of References
Authors must not manipulate citations to increase the visibility or citation counts of particular authors, journals, institutions, or publications.
Authors should cite literature because it is relevant and intellectually useful, not because it is advantageous to the author or another party.
Similarly, reviewers and editors should not require unnecessary citations solely for the purpose of increasing citations to themselves or the journal.
15. Use of Previously Published Material
Authors must disclose substantial overlap between a submitted manuscript and their own previously published work.
Reusing one’s own previously published words or material without appropriate acknowledgement may constitute self-plagiarism or redundant publication.
Where previously published material is legitimately reused, authors must provide appropriate attribution and obtain permission where required.
16. Tables, Figures, Images, and Other Materials
Authors are responsible for ensuring that tables, figures, photographs, diagrams, instruments, and other materials included in their manuscripts are either:
1. original;
2. appropriately cited and used under applicable permissions or licences; or
3. otherwise legally and ethically available for reuse.
Authors must not reproduce copyrighted material without appropriate permission where permission is required.
17. Corrections After Publication
Authors have an ongoing responsibility for the integrity of their published work.
If an author discovers a significant error after publication, the author should promptly notify the journal.
The journal may publish:
• a correction;
• an erratum;
• an editorial notice;
• an expression of concern; or
• a retraction,
depending on the seriousness and nature of the issue.
18. Author Responsibility
Ultimately, the author or authors are responsible for the manuscript they submit.
Submission to IJLBMPS confirms that the authors have taken reasonable steps to ensure that the manuscript:
• is original;
• is accurately reported;
• is appropriately referenced;
• does not contain plagiarism;
• does not contain knowingly fabricated or falsified information;
• complies with applicable ethical requirements;
• uses AI and other digital tools responsibly where applicable;
• has been adequately revised and proofread;
• accurately represents the underlying research; and
• meets the journal’s submission and publication requirements.
The use of a professional editor, language-editing service, reference manager, statistical software, or artificial intelligence tool does not remove or reduce the author’s responsibility for the final manuscript.
19. Editorial Right to Request Clarification
The journal reserves the right to request clarification, supporting documentation, original research materials, ethical approval information, authorship information, or other relevant evidence where questions arise concerning a manuscript.
Authors are expected to cooperate reasonably with such requests.
Failure to provide adequate clarification may affect the editorial decision.
20. Final Author Declaration
Before publication, authors may be required to confirm that:
We confirm that the manuscript submitted to the International Journal of Lifestyle, Behavioural Medicine and Prevention Sciences is our original scholarly work, that all sources and intellectual contributions have been appropriately acknowledged, that the research has been conducted and reported responsibly, and that the manuscript complies with the journal’s requirements concerning authorship, ethics, plagiarism, referencing, conflicts of interest, and responsible use of artificial intelligence and other digital tools. We accept responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and scholarly content of the manuscript.