Open Access Policy
Urology Research and Practice is an open access publication. 

Starting on January 2022, all content published in the journal is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 International License which allows third parties to read, copy and redistribute the material in any format and adapt the material for any purpose immediately upon publication by giving the appropriate credit to the original work. 

The content published before January 2022 was licensed under a traditional copyright, but the archive is still available for free access.

All published content is available online, free of charge at https://urologyresearchandpractice.org/EN.

Authors retain unrestricted copyrights and publishing rights in Urology Research and Practice.

When using previously published content, including figures, tables, or any other material in both print and electronic formats, authors must obtain permission from the copyright holder. Legal, financial and criminal liabilities in this regard belong to the author(s). 

Copyright Policy
A Copyright Agreement and Acknowledgement of Authorship form should be submitted with all manuscripts. By signing this form, authors agree that the article, if accepted for publication by the Urology Research and Practice, will be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 International License which allows third parties to read, copy and redistribute the material in any format and adapt the material for any purpose immediately upon publication by giving the appropriate credit to the original work.  
 
When using previously published content, including figures, tables, or any other material in both print and electronic formats, authors must obtain permission from the copyright holder. Legal, financial and criminal liabilities in this regard belong to the author(s). 

Authors retain unrestricted copyrights and publishing rights in Urology Research and Practice. 

Self-Archiving Policy
Authors retain the right to self-archive their work on their institutional or personal websites, as well as in open access repositories, after publication. It is expected that authors appropriately acknowledge the original publication and include the DOI number when sharing their articles. Additionally, authors are requested to provide a link from the deposited version to the URL of the publisher's website. This requirement is intended to safeguard the integrity and authenticity of the scientific record, with the online published version on the publisher's website clearly identified as the definitive version of record.

Publication Fee Policy
Urology Research and Practice is funded by the Turkish Association of Urology.
Authors are not required to pay any fees during the evaluation and publication process.

Advertising Policy 
Urology Research and Practice accepts digital advertisements on its website. These ads must be approved by the journal's Editorial Board and management must be clearly labeled as advertisements. Advertisers have no influence on editorial decisions or advertising policies. 

Those interested in advertising in the journal should contact the Editorial Office.

Peer Review Process
Manuscripts submitted to Urology Research and Practice will go through a double anonymized peer-review process where both authors and reviewers are anonymous to each other.  Each submission will be reviewed by at least two external, independent peer reviewers who are experts in their fields in order to ensure an unbiased evaluation process. 

Submissions will first go through a technical evaluation process during which the editorial office staff will ensure that the manuscript was prepared and submitted in accordance with the journal’s guidelines. Submissions that do not conform to the journal’s guidelines will be returned to the submitting authors with technical correction requests. 

Submissions that conform to the journal’s guidelines will be assigned to the Editor in Chief who will assess each submission’s suitability to the journal in terms of scope and quality. Submissions that are not suitable for the journal can be rejected at this stage. 

For papers that are suitable for the journal, the Editor in Chief will work with Associate Editors who will recruit reviewers for the manuscript. Once assigned, Associate Editors can decide to reject a manuscript, continue with the peer review process, or request revisions before further peer-review. 

Associate editors will submit their recommendations that are based on reports submitted by the reviewers to the Editor in Chief. Revised manuscripts will be reassessed by the Associate Editors who will aim to work with the original reviewers to make a new recommendation.

The Editor in Chief is the final authority in the decision-making process for all submissions.

In the event of delays, authors will be informed of the reason for the delay and given the opportunity to withdraw their manuscript.

Once the peer-review process is completed, the authors will receive anonymous peer-review reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript. Peer-review reports will not be posted publicly in any medium. The submitted material is considered confidential and must not be used in any way until after its publication. If it is suspected that a reviewer has appropriated an author’s ideas or data, the Editorial Board will handle the matter in accordance with the relevant COPE’s guideline.

Authors can recommend peer-reviewers during submission. The handling editor is the sole authority to decide whether or not recommended peer-reviewers will be invited to evaluate the manuscript. 

Peer reviewers are required to adhere to the principles of COPE's Ethical Guidelines for Peer-reviewers and  These guidelines provide a framework for reviewers to follow in order to ensure the integrity and fairness of the peer review process. The Editorial Board follows COPE’s relevant flowchart to minimize peer review manipulation. If there is suspicion of peer review manipulation after publication, the Editorial Board will follow the appropriate flowchart of COPE.

Potential peer reviewers should inform the Editor of any possible conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation to review a manuscript. Informing the editor of any potential conflicts of interest allows them to make an informed decision about whether or not to invite the potential reviewer to participate in the review process. It also helps to ensure the integrity and transparency of the review process.

Communications between Editors and peer reviewers contain confidential information that should not be shared with third parties.

To ensure an equitable peer-review process, the Urology Research and Practice will recruit external editors for manuscripts submitted by the Journal’s editorial board members. External editors will be selected based on academic qualifications and peer-review experience. We uphold the confidentiality of external editors and reviewers to preserve impartiality. Reviewers and external editors are asked to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, promoting transparency and a reliable evaluation process.

If an article's peer review is an exception to the journal’s usual policy, the type of the review it received will be displayed on the article to ensure the transparency and accountability of the review process.

Revisions
Submitting authors of manuscripts that require a “minor revision” or a “major revision” will receive the decision letter from the Editor in Chief. The decision letter will include the suggestions of the reviewers and editors along with a deadline to submit the revised and updated version of the manuscript. 

When submitting a revised version of a paper, authors must submit a detailed “Response to the reviewers” that states point by point how each issue raised by the reviewers has been covered and where it can be found (each reviewer’s comment, followed by the author’s reply and line numbers where the changes have been made) as well as an annotated copy of the main document. 

Revised manuscripts must be submitted within the time frame specified in the decision letter. If the revised version of the manuscript is not submitted within the allocated time, the revision option may be canceled. If the submitting author(s) believe that additional time is required, they should request an extension before the initial period is over.

AUTHORSHIP
All individuals listed as an author should meet the authorship criteria recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE recommends that authorship is based on the following four criteria:
 
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
 
In addition to being accountable for the parts of the work they have done, authors should also be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work to ensure that the contributions of all authors are accurately and appropriately acknowledged. Authors may use CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to provide information about individual contributions at the time of submission. It is expected that all authors agreed upon their individual contributions as shared by the corresponding author. The authors’ contribution statement will be published with the final article and should accurately reflect contributions to the work.

Furthermore, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors. This means that they should trust that their co-authors have conducted the research in an ethical and responsible manner, and that the data and results presented in the manuscript are accurate and reliable.
 
Individuals who do not meet all four of the authorship criteria should not be included as authors on the manuscript. However, they can still be acknowledged on the title page of the manuscript for their contributions to the research in order to recognize the contributions of these individuals and to provide transparency about who was involved in the research.
 
If the editorial board suspects a case of ghost, honorary or gift authorship, the submission will be suspended and the relevant COPE flowchart and COPE Policy on authorship and contributorship will be followed.

The Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Manuscript Preparation
Urology Research and Practice diligently follows the guidelines outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) with regards to the utilization of AI and AI-assisted technology in manuscript preparation. Authorship encompasses a range of tasks that can only be performed by humans, and authors are accountable for ensuring the article's originality and possessing the requisite qualifications for authorship. While AI can be employed for language corrections during the article writing process (and this should be explicitly stated in the article), it cannot be included as an author, as it is essential to maintain the originality and quality of the article.

 
Change of Authorship
Any requests for changes to authorship, such as the removal or addition of authors, or changes in the order of authors, should be submitted to the editorial office with a letter stating the reasons for the change. The letter must be signed by all authors, including any who have been removed.

The journal’s Editorial Board will handle all requests for changes to authorship in a consistent and transparent manner, following the relevant COPE flowchart guidelines. These procedures are in place to protect the integrity of the research and the reputation of all involved authors. 
 
Declaration of Interests
Urology Research and Practice requires the ICMJE Disclosure Form to be filled in and submitted by all contributing authors of each manuscript in order to be informed about potential conflicts of interest of authors. 

Urology Research and Practice also requires and encourages individuals involved in the peer review process of submitted manuscripts to disclose any existing or potential competing interests that might lead to potential bias.

The Editorial Board will handle cases of potential competing interests of editors, authors, or reviewers within the scope of relevant COPE flowcharts and ICMJE recommendations.

Financial Disclosure
Urology Research and Practice requires authors to disclose any financial support they received to conduct their research. This information should be included in the funding statement, which should be provided when the manuscript is submitted to the journal. 

The funding statement should include the name of any granting agencies, the grant numbers, and a description of each funder's role in the research. If the funder had no role in the research, this should be stated in the funding statement as well. This information is important for readers to understand the potential biases and conflicts of interest that may exist in the research. 

Post-Publication Correction Requests and Retractions
All post-publication correction requests are subject to editorial review. The editorial board will review the request and determine whether the correction is necessary and appropriate. The decision to publish a correction will be based on the nature of the error, its potential impact on the article, and the availability of supporting evidence. The editorial board may also consult with the authors, reviewers, and other experts as needed to make its decision. If the correction request is approved, the article will be corrected in the journal's archive. 

The Editorial Board reviews cases following journal policies, ICMJE and COPE guidelines. 
 
If misconduct allegations are made by whistleblowers directly, the Editorial Board will follow the relevant COPE’s flowchart. The journal will act in accordance with the COPE's flowchart on how to respond to whistleblowers when concerns are raised about a published article on a social media site.
  
In some cases, an ombudsperson may be assigned to resolve claims that cannot be resolved internally.

To investigate potential ethical misconduct, the editorial board may share information with other editors-in-chief to conduct investigations more efficiently and effectively. If communication with the editor-in-chief is necessary, the editorial board will follow the relevant COPE's recommendations. 

If necessary, the journal may also contact institutions to inform them of suspected misconduct by researchers and provide evidence to support these concerns, following COPE guidelines in the process.

In the event of ethical misconduct concerns, the editors will investigate the case according to COPE guidelines. If the investigation verifies the concern, the editors may issue a retraction notice. The retraction notice will be published in the journal and the article's record will be updated to reflect the retraction. The article will remain in the archives of the journal, but it will be clearly marked as retracted. The article's record will also be updated in the relevant indexes to reflect the retraction. 

Withdrawal Requests
Withdrawal requests for an article are reviewed by the editorial board of the journal. To request the withdrawal of an article, the authors must send a letter signed by all authors stating their request and the reasons for withdrawal to the journal editor. The editorial board will then review the request and make a decision based on the reasons provided by the authors. If the request is approved, the article will be withdrawn from the journal and the authors will be notified of the decision. It is important to note that authors should not submit their work to another journal for evaluation until the withdrawal request has been approved. This is to avoid any potential conflicts of interest or duplication of publication.
 
 
Appeals and Complaint
The editorial board of the journal is responsible for addressing appeals and complaints in accordance with the guidelines and recommendations of the COPE. If an author has an appeal or complaint, they should contact the editorial office directly to discuss their concerns. The editorial board will review the case and make a decision based on COPE guidelines. 

The editor-in-chief has the final authority in the decision-making process for all appeals and complaints. In some cases, an ombudsperson may be assigned to resolve claims that cannot be resolved internally. It is important to note that the journal follows a fair and transparent process for handling appeals and complaints, with the goal of preserving the integrity of the scientific record. 

Preprint Policy
Urology Research and Practice does not consider preprints as prior publication, which means that authors are allowed to present and discuss their findings on a non-commercial preprint server before submitting their work to the journal. 

However, authors must provide the journal with the preprint server deposition of their article, along with its DOI, during the initial submission process. 

If the article is accepted and published in the journal, it is the responsibility of the authors to update the archived preprint and link it to the published version of the article. This helps to ensure that readers can easily access the most up-to-date and accurate information.

Permission Policy
As of the January 2022 issue, the journal's content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 International License. 

Under this license, users are allowed to share, adapt, reproduce and distribute the journal's content for any purposes, provided that they give appropriate credit to the original author and the journal.

Turkish Association of Urology is the copyright holder of content published before January 2022.

Data Sharing Policy
As of 1 January 2019, a data sharing statement is required for the registration of clinical trials. Authors are required to provide a data sharing statement for articles that report the results of a clinical trial. The data sharing statement should indicate the items below according to the ICMJE data sharing policy:

• Whether individual deidentified participant data will be shared
• What data in particular will be made available
• Whether additional, related documents will also be provided
• When the data will become accessible and for how long it will remain available
• The criteria for accessing the data, including who will have access, the purpose of the analysis, and the mechanism for obtaining the data
 
Authors are recommended to check the ICMJE data sharing examples at
http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html
 
While submitting a clinical trial to Urology Research and Practice,
• Authors are required to make registration to a publicly accessible registry according to ICMJE recommendations and the instructions above.
• The name of the registry and the registration number should be provided in the Title Page during the initial submission.
• Data sharing statement should also be stated in the Title Page even if the authors do not plan to share it. 
 
Clinical trial and data sharing policy of the journal will be valid for the articles submitted from April 2023.

Disclaimer
The statements or opinions expressed in the manuscripts published in the journal reflect the views of the author(s) and not the views of the editors, editorial board, and/or publisher. The editors, editorial board, and publisher are not responsible for the content of the manuscripts and do not necessarily endorse the views expressed in them. It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that their work is accurate and well-researched, and the views expressed in their manuscripts are their own. The editors, editorial board, and publisher simply provide a platform for the authors to share their work with the scientific community.