Majalah Anestesia & Critical Care (MACC) is committed to maintaining transparency, accountability, and integrity in scholarly publishing. The journal follows the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning authorship, contributorship, and the management of authorship disputes. COPE emphasizes that authorship requires a substantial contribution to the work and accountability for the work and its published form. See COPE, Authorship.

MACC considers an individual eligible for authorship when that individual has made a substantial intellectual or scholarly contribution to the submitted work and accepts responsibility for the integrity of the work and its published presentation. Each proposed author must be able to explain their contribution and take responsibility for the relevant aspects of the manuscript. These requirements reflect COPE's core principles of substantial contribution and accountability. See COPE, Authorship and COPE, Develop Guidelines for Authors.

In evaluating authorship, MACC considers the nature and significance of each individual's intellectual contribution to the research or manuscript. Relevant contributions may include developing the research question, designing the study, acquiring or analysing data, interpreting findings, and developing the intellectual content of the manuscript. The journal assesses these activities in context rather than treating routine assistance or participation alone as sufficient grounds for authorship. COPE advises journals to define authorship clearly and distinguish authors from individuals whose contributions warrant acknowledgement. See COPE, Authorship and COPE, Develop Guidelines for Authors.

All listed authors must take responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and ethical presentation of the work. Authors must ensure that the manuscript accurately represents the research conducted, that the reported findings have an appropriate evidential basis, and that the work does not infringe the legal rights of other individuals. Authors must also comply with applicable research ethics requirements and disclose relevant information required by the journal. COPE identifies accountability for the work and its published form as a minimum requirement for authorship. See COPE, Authorship.

Every author must review and approve the final version of the manuscript before publication. Each author must agree to the submitted author list and accept responsibility for their contribution. The corresponding author must ensure that all listed authors have approved the submission and that the contribution statement accurately represents their respective roles. This approval requirement is an operational policy adopted by MACC to support COPE's principles of transparency, accountability, and agreement among authors. See COPE, Handling Changes to Authorship Lists and COPE, Develop Guidelines for Authors.

MACC requires authors to provide a clear and accurate statement describing each author's contribution to the manuscript. The statement should identify the specific activities performed by each author and reflect the actual work undertaken. Where appropriate, authors may use the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) to describe contributions consistently. COPE encourages transparency about who contributed to a work and in what capacity and recommends awareness of contributor-role standards such as CRediT. See COPE, How to Recognise Potential Authorship Problems and COPE, Develop Guidelines for Authors.

Individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet the journal's authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately rather than included as authors. Such contributions may include technical assistance, administrative support, language editing, or other forms of assistance that do not constitute substantial intellectual contributions. Authors must obtain permission from acknowledged individuals before naming them in the manuscript. COPE distinguishes authorship from acknowledgement and recommends that journals explain how non-author contributions should be recognised. See COPE, Authorship and COPE, Develop Guidelines for Authors.

MACC does not permit ghost authorship, guest authorship, or gift authorship. Ghost authorship occurs when an individual who qualifies for authorship is omitted from the author list. Guest authorship involves listing an individual who has not meaningfully contributed to the work, often to enhance the apparent credibility of the manuscript. Gift authorship involves granting authorship to an individual who has not made a qualifying contribution, for example, as a favour or in recognition of status. COPE identifies these practices as potential authorship problems and recommends clear journal policies and procedures for addressing them. See COPE, How to Recognise Potential Authorship Problems.

Authors must not include individuals on the author list solely because of their seniority, institutional position, supervisory role, financial support, or general association with the research project. Similarly, authors must not omit individuals who have made qualifying contributions merely because of disagreements, institutional boundaries, or other non-scholarly considerations. The journal may request clarification of individual contributions if the author list or contribution statement raises concerns. COPE advises editors to scrutinise author lists and identify cases in which an author may have been improperly included or omitted. See COPE, How to Recognise Potential Authorship Problems and COPE, Handling Changes to Authorship Lists.

The corresponding author serves as the primary contact between the author group and MACC throughout submission, peer review, revision, and publication. The corresponding author must provide complete and accurate submission information, confirm that all authors have approved the manuscript and author list, submit the author contribution statement, and coordinate responses to editorial queries. The corresponding author must also communicate proposed authorship changes to the editorial office and obtain the required agreement from all authors. These responsibilities implement COPE's recommendations that journals define corresponding author responsibilities, document contributions, and establish clear procedures for authorship changes. See COPE, Develop Guidelines for Authors and COPE, Handling Changes to Authorship Lists.

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after initial submission must include a clear written explanation and supporting documentation. MACC requires written agreement from all authors affected by the proposed change and confirmation from all authors that the revised author list is accurate. The editorial office may request additional evidence before considering the request. COPE states that authorship changes should have clear and well-documented reasons, that all authors should agree to the changes, and that editors should verify that all listed authors meet the relevant criteria and that no qualifying contributors have been omitted. See COPE, Handling Changes to Authorship Lists.

MACC will assess authorship-change requests on a case-by-case basis and may suspend editorial processing while a material dispute remains unresolved. The journal will generally refer unresolved disputes about authorship entitlement to the relevant institution or institutions for investigation rather than attempting to determine institutional or employment-related facts independently. The journal will consider the outcome and relevant evidence when deciding how to proceed with the manuscript. This procedure follows COPE's recommendation that journals generally avoid resolving authorship disputes themselves and refer such disputes to the authors' institutions. See COPE, Handling Changes to Authorship Lists and COPE, How to Handle Authorship Disputes: A Guide for New Researchers.

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools, including generative AI systems and large language models, cannot be listed as authors of manuscripts submitted to MACC. Such tools cannot accept legal responsibility for a publication, manage conflicts of interest, or fulfil the accountability requirements of authorship. This policy follows COPE's position that AI tools cannot meet authorship requirements because they cannot take responsibility for submitted work. See COPE, Authorship and AI Tools.

Authors who use AI tools to generate or revise manuscript text, produce images or graphical elements, or collect or analyse data must disclose the use of those tools transparently. The disclosure should identify the tool and explain how the authors used it. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of all manuscript content, including content generated with AI assistance. COPE explicitly requires transparency about AI use in research publications and states that human authors retain responsibility for the submitted work. See COPE, Authorship and AI Tools.

MACC may request further information or supporting documentation when the author list, contribution statement, or authorship declaration raises reasonable concerns. The journal may investigate suspected inappropriate authorship, seek clarification from the authors, and refer unresolved disputes to the relevant institutions. Editorial decisions will take account of the available evidence and the journal's publication ethics policies. COPE recommends that journals maintain clear procedures for managing potential authorship problems and scrutinise author lists when concerns arise. See COPE, How to Recognise Potential Authorship Problems and COPE, Handling Changes to Authorship Lists.

If the journal establishes that a manuscript contains inappropriate authorship or materially inaccurate contribution declarations, MACC may reject the manuscript or take further action in accordance with its publication ethics policies. If an authorship concern arises after publication, the journal will assess the available evidence and consider appropriate corrective action to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. COPE provides guidance on recognising authorship problems and handling authorship concerns before and after publication. See COPE, How to Recognise Potential Authorship Problems and COPE, Authorship.

By submitting a manuscript to MACC, the corresponding author confirms that the submitted author list accurately reflects the contributions to the work, that all listed authors have approved the manuscript and its submission, and that no qualifying contributor has been improperly omitted. All authors must agree to the author contribution statement and comply with this authorship policy. The journal may request an authorship declaration or other documentation when necessary to verify compliance. This declaration implements COPE's recommendations for transparent authorship policies, contribution statements, and documented agreement concerning changes to author lists. See COPE, Authorship, COPE, Develop Guidelines for Authors, and COPE, Handling Changes to Authorship Lists.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authorship. COPE Discussion Document, last reviewed 2 September 2019.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Handling Changes to Authorship Lists. COPE Position, published 20 August 2024.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). How to Recognise Potential Authorship Problems. COPE Flowchart and Infographic, last reviewed 26 April 2023.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authorship and AI Tools. COPE Position, published 13 February 2023.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Develop Guidelines for Authors. COPE Ethics Toolkit for a Successful Editorial Office.

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). How to Handle Authorship Disputes: A Guide for New Researchers. COPE Guideline.

Majalah Anestesia & Critical Care (MACC). Journal Policies. Official journal policy page.