Post-Publication Amendments

(Corrections, Retractions, Withdrawals, and Expressions of Concern)

EnNRJ is committed to upholding the integrity, accuracy, and permanence of the published scholarly record. In accordance with COPE standards, and NISO Recommended Practice (CREC), any necessary modifications to a published article will be made transparently, permanently, and will be officially linked to the original publication.

1. Corrections

Articles may be corrected if errors affect the interpretation of data, metadata, or governance disclosures, but do not invalidate the overall scientific conclusions. Corrections are issued for:

• Significant content errors or misstatements that affect the interpretation of presented data.
• Omissions of funder support, non-author contributor acknowledgments, ethics approval declarations, or potential conflicts of interest.
• Incorrect article metadata (e.g., author names, title, or affiliations) affecting indexing and discoverability.

Note: Minor copyediting or typesetting errors that do not alter the meaning or scientific interpretation of the text will generally not be corrected post-publication.

2. Retractions

In line with COPE Retraction Guidelines, an article may be retracted if the reported findings are deemed fundamentally unreliable or if severe misconduct has occurred. Retractions are applied when:

• There is a major error (due to honest error, miscalculation, or data fabrication/falsification) that invalidates the article's conclusions.
• Unattributed redundant publication (duplicate publication) has occurred without proper cross-referencing or justification.
• Ethical violations are confirmed, including plagiarism, unauthorized authorship manipulation, or reporting on unethical research.
• Evidence reveals systematic manipulation of the peer-review or publishing process.

3. Article Withdrawals (Removals)

Removal or deletion of a published Version of Record is extremely rare and strongly discouraged in accordance with international archiving standards. Full removal is considered only under exceptional circumstances, including:

• Cases where removal is necessary to protect the privacy of research subjects.
• Errors that pose a direct, significant risk to health or safety if followed by the public.
• Defamatory material or severe violations of legal rights, copyright, or confidentiality.
• For unedited Accepted Articles, a withdrawal notice will replace the file while preserving basic bibliographic metadata for transparency.

4. Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued by the Editor-in-Chief when serious concerns or allegations are raised regarding a published paper, but conclusive evidence is not yet available to justify a retraction. This notice may be published if:

• An institutional or formal investigation into the manuscript proves inconclusive, but strong indicators of invalidity remain.
• A complex investigation is ongoing and a final decision will not be reached in a timely manner.

All post-publication amendments are permanent, publicly accessible, and assigned a unique DOI linked directly to the original Version of Record to preserve the audit trail of the scientific record.

Complaints and Appeals

EnNRJ maintains transparent procedures for authors, reviewers, and other stakeholders to submit formal complaints or appeal editorial decisions.

Complaints may pertain to:

• Editorial decisions or procedures.
• Peer-review handling and timelines.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
• Allegations of publication ethics violations.
• Authorship or contributorship disputes.
• Plagiarism or data integrity concerns.
• Professional conduct of editors or reviewers.
• Other operational aspects of journal management.

Formal complaints must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief or the designated editorial office contact. EnNRJ commits to investigating all complaints fairly, objectively, promptly, and confidentially.

Appeals against manuscript rejections must include a detailed rebuttal, clear justifications, and new or supporting scholarly evidence. Re-evaluations will not be considered without substantive technical or academic justification.