5. Editorial assessment and peer review

Endo Sapiens Journal uses double-anonymized peer review for research, review, and clinical manuscripts. Reviewers are not told the authors’ identities, and authors are not told the reviewers’ identities. Complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed when a study, registry entry, preprint, dataset, or specialized method makes authorship apparent.

5.1 Initial editorial screening

Every submission is screened by the Editor-in-Chief, an Associate Editor, or another delegated editor before external review. The screening considers:

• Fit with the aims and scope
• Originality and potential contribution
• Scientific and methodological adequacy
• Ethics approval, consent, registration, and research-integrity requirements
• Compliance with the applicable reporting guideline
• Completeness of the submission files and declarations
• Clarity of writing, figures, and tables
• Evidence of plagiarism, redundant publication, citation manipulation, or inappropriate image alteration

A manuscript may be declined without external review when it is outside scope, methodologically inadequate, ethically deficient, incomplete, insufficiently novel, written in a form that prevents meaningful review, or unlikely to be competitive for publication. Editorial screening is not a full scientific review and does not imply that an externally reviewed manuscript will be accepted.

5.2 Selection of reviewers

Manuscripts that proceed to review are normally evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers with relevant subject or methodological expertise. The handling editor may invite additional reviewers, a statistician, a methodologist, an ethics adviser, an image-integrity specialist, or a data reviewer when the manuscript requires such assessment.

Reviewers are selected on the basis of expertise, independence, previous review quality, timeliness, and absence of conflicts. Authors may suggest reviewers or identify individuals whose involvement could create a conflict; these requests are advisory and must include a scholarly reason. The journal does not use reviewers solely because they are recommended by the authors.

5.3 Reviewer responsibilities

• Treat the manuscript, data, figures, supplementary files, and editorial correspondence as confidential.
• Declare financial, professional, institutional, competitive, personal, or intellectual conflicts and decline the review when impartiality could reasonably be questioned.
• Assess the work fairly, constructively, and within the agreed time.
• Do not use unpublished information, methods, or ideas for personal advantage.
• Do not contact the authors directly about the manuscript.
• Do not upload manuscript content to a public or unapproved artificial-intelligence system or third-party platform.
• Identify suspected misconduct or major reporting deficiencies confidentially to the editor.
• Disclose the contribution of any trainee or colleague who assisted with the review and obtain editorial permission before sharing the manuscript.

5.4 Editorial decisions

Reviewer recommendations inform the decision but do not determine it by vote. The handling editor evaluates the manuscript, the reports, the authors’ responses, the journal’s scope, and any ethical or methodological concerns. The Editor-in-Chief retains final editorial authority, except when recused under the editor-authored manuscript policy.

Decision categories normally include rejection, invitation to resubmit as a new manuscript, major revision, minor revision, and acceptance. Acceptance is not final until all scientific, ethical, editorial, and production concerns have been resolved. The journal may reverse an acceptance before publication if serious concerns arise.

5.5 Revisions

A revised manuscript must be accompanied by a point-by-point response that reproduces each editorial and reviewer comment, explains the action taken, and identifies the location of every change. When authors disagree with a comment, the response should present a clear, evidence-based explanation. The revised manuscript should show changes in the format requested in the decision letter. Extensions should be requested before the revision deadline.

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers, sent to new reviewers, assessed by the handling editor alone, or declined without another review round. A request for revision is not a commitment to accept the manuscript.

5.6 Confidentiality and editorial records

Editors and editorial staff protect the confidentiality of submitted work. Information about a manuscript is shared only with persons involved in its evaluation, production, integrity assessment, or legal review. Editorial records are retained for a period sufficient to address post-publication questions and applicable legal or institutional requirements.

5.7 Appeals and complaints

Authors may submit one appeal within 30 days of the decision. An appeal must identify a material error in the review or decision process, a misunderstood point of fact, or important evidence that was not considered. A statement that the reviewers were unfavorable, without demonstrating an error, is not sufficient. The appeal is assessed by an editor who was not the sole decision-maker whenever this is practicable. The decision on the appeal is final.

Complaints about editorial conduct, bias, confidentiality, peer review, or publication ethics should be sent to the editorial office. A complaint involving the Editor-in-Chief is referred to the publisher or an independent senior member of the journal’s governance structure. Complaints are handled separately from scientific appeals and with appropriate confidentiality.

6. Editor-authored and in-house manuscripts

Editorial position does not disqualify an author from submitting to the journal, but it creates a conflict that must be managed transparently. Manuscripts authored by the Editor-in-Chief, an Associate Editor, an Editorial Board member, an editorial-office staff member, or a close collaborator are subject to the same scientific and ethical standards as all other submissions and receive no priority or favorable treatment.

6.1 Mandatory recusal procedure

1. The editorial author must disclose the conflict at submission and must not select the handling editor or reviewers.
2. The manuscript is assigned immediately to an independent editor who has no current institutional affiliation, close personal relationship, supervisory relationship, commercial interest, or recent collaboration that could reasonably affect impartiality.
3. The editorial author is excluded from access to reviewer identities, confidential reports not released to authors, internal editorial discussions, decision recommendations, and the final decision process.
4. The independent handling editor selects at least two external reviewers and may obtain statistical, methodological, ethics, data, or image-integrity review.
5. The independent handling editor has full authority to reject, request revision, or accept the manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief cannot alter that decision.
6. When the Editor-in-Chief is an author, the publisher or a nonconflicted senior member of the journal’s governance structure appoints the independent handling editor. When no suitable internal editor exists, an external Guest Editor is appointed.
7. If an adequately independent process cannot be created, the journal will decline the manuscript without assessing its scientific merit.
8. The published article contains a disclosure stating the author’s editorial role and confirming that the author had no involvement in peer review or the publication decision.

6.2 Manuscripts from the authors’ institution or research group

A manuscript from the same institution, department, research group, or close collaborative network as an editor is assigned to a different editor without a relevant conflict. The recused editor does not recommend reviewers, participate in discussion, or view confidential decision materials. Institutional familiarity alone does not establish misconduct, but the journal will use a conservative standard when impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

6.3 Special issues and invited content

Guest-edited collections, invited reviews, editorials, and special issues are subject to the journal’s usual integrity checks and conflict-management procedures. Invitation does not guarantee acceptance. The Editor-in-Chief retains oversight of the collection unless recused, and no Guest Editor may make a decision on a manuscript authored by themselves, a close collaborator, or a person with whom a relevant conflict exists.

Publication disclosure for editorial authors

Suggested statement: “Author X serves as [editorial role] for Endo Sapiens Journal. The author was not involved in the selection of reviewers, peer review, editorial discussion, or the decision on this manuscript. The submission was handled independently by [role/title].”

7. Mandatory reporting guidelines

Complete and transparent reporting is a condition of editorial consideration. Authors must use the reporting guideline that matches the study design, upload the completed checklist, identify the manuscript page or line for each applicable item, and provide the required flow diagram. A checklist does not replace sound methods, but it allows editors, reviewers, and readers to determine whether essential information has been reported.

For endodontic study designs covered by the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology (PRIDE) initiative, authors should use the relevant PRIDE standard together with the applicable general biomedical guideline. The most current version available at the time of submission should be used.

7.1 Statistical and methodological reporting

• Define the primary outcome and distinguish prespecified from exploratory analyses.
• Provide a sample-size calculation or a transparent rationale for the available sample.
• Identify the unit of analysis and address clustering of measurements within teeth, roots, canals, sections, images, patients, or operators.
• Distinguish biological replicates from technical replicates and avoid pseudoreplication.
• Describe randomization, allocation concealment, masking, calibration, reliability, and quality-control procedures.
• Report effect sizes and confidence intervals. Provide exact P values when feasible and do not interpret statistical significance as clinical importance.
• Explain the handling of missing data, exclusions, outliers, protocol deviations, and multiple comparisons.
• State the statistical software and version and provide enough detail to reproduce the analysis.
• For equivalence or noninferiority claims, define and justify the margin before analysis.
• For AI or prediction models, report internal and external validation, calibration, discrimination, uncertainty, and subgroup performance.

8. Research integrity and publication ethics

Endo Sapiens Journal is committed to preserving an accurate, transparent, and trustworthy scientific record. The policies below apply to authors, reviewers, editors, Guest Editors, staff, and published content. The journal may request protocols, raw data, analytic code, original images, consent documents, ethics approvals, contracts, or institutional findings when concerns arise.

8.1 Authorship and contributorship

Authorship requires satisfaction of all four ICMJE criteria: a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work or to acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; participation in drafting or critical intellectual revision; approval of the final version; and agreement to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work. Every person who meets all criteria should be listed, and persons who do not meet all criteria should not be listed as authors.

• Each manuscript must include a CRediT contribution statement identifying the role of every author.
• The corresponding author ensures that all authors approve the submission, declarations, revisions, and final version and that all administrative requirements are complete.
• Honorary, guest, gift, coercive, and ghost authorship are prohibited.
• Professional writing, language editing, technical assistance, data management, or administrative help that does not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged with permission.
• Changes to authorship after submission require a written explanation and signed agreement from all listed, added, and removed authors. The journal may refer unresolved disputes to the authors’ institutions.
• For group authorship, the byline and contributor list must distinguish accountable authors from nonauthor collaborators.

8.2 Conflicts of interest, funding, and sponsor involvement

Authors must disclose financial and nonfinancial relationships that could be perceived to influence the work. Disclosure does not necessarily prevent publication; nondisclosure may. The declaration must cover the period and relationships relevant to the work and should include employment, consultancy, honoraria, speaker fees, expert testimony, patents, royalties, stock or ownership interests, advisory roles, travel support, equipment or material provision, personal relationships, academic competition, and strongly held intellectual positions when relevant.

• Name every funding source and grant number, or state explicitly that the work received no external funding.
• Describe the sponsor’s role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, approval, and the decision to submit.
• For industry-supported research, state which authors had full access to the data and who controlled publication decisions.
• Disclose free or discounted instruments, materials, software, equipment, imaging, statistical assistance, or publication support.
• Editors and reviewers must declare conflicts and recuse themselves when impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

8.3 Human participants, tissues, and data

Research involving human participants, identifiable human material, human tissues, clinical records, or identifiable data must comply with the current World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki and all applicable national, regional, and institutional requirements. Approval must be obtained before the research begins from an appropriately constituted research ethics committee or institutional review board.

The manuscript must identify the approving body, approval or protocol number, and approval date when available. If approval was waived or the work was judged exempt, the responsible body and the basis for the determination must be stated. Statements that approval was “not required” without an institutional determination are generally insufficient.

8.4 Informed consent and patient privacy

Consent to participate and consent for publication are separate requirements. Authors must state how informed consent to participate was obtained, or identify the ethics-approved waiver. Written consent for publication is required when a patient could be recognized from clinical details, photographs, facial features, radiographs, CBCT data, videos, voice recordings, timelines, unusual diagnoses, or combinations of apparently anonymous information.

• Remove names, dates of birth, record numbers, institutional numbers, and other unnecessary identifiers.
• Masking the eyes alone may not adequately anonymize a facial image.
• For minors or adults lacking decision-making capacity, obtain consent from the authorized representative and assent when appropriate.
• Authors should retain the signed publication-consent document and provide confirmation or a copy to the journal when requested. Consent forms should not be uploaded routinely unless the submission system provides a secure channel.
• If a deceased patient could be identified, obtain permission from the legally authorized representative when feasible and explain the ethical basis for publication.

8.5 Animal research

Animal studies require approval from the responsible institutional or national animal-care and use body before the work begins and must comply with applicable welfare legislation. Authors must report the approval number, species, strain, sex, age, housing, husbandry, sample-size rationale, allocation, masking, anesthesia, analgesia, monitoring, humane endpoints, exclusions, adverse events, and euthanasia method. PRIASE and ARRIVE 2.0 should be used for endodontic animal research.

The journal may decline research when the scientific objective does not justify animal use, when a suitable nonanimal alternative was available, or when welfare safeguards are inadequate.

8.6 Clinical-trial registration, protocols, and data sharing

A clinical trial is a prospective assignment of people or groups to a health-related intervention to evaluate a health outcome. Trials must be registered in a publicly accessible registry accepted by ICMJE or the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform at or before the first participant gives consent for enrollment. Ethics approval does not replace registration.

• Provide the registry name, registration number, and registration date in the abstract and Methods.
• Explain discrepancies between the registry, protocol, statistical analysis plan, and manuscript.
• Retrospective registration is accepted only in exceptional circumstances. The reason and date must be disclosed, and the editor may decline the manuscript.
• Manuscripts reporting clinical trials must include a data-sharing statement. Trials beginning enrollment under current ICMJE requirements should also include a data-sharing plan in the registry.
• Protocols and statistical analysis plans should be made available when feasible and must be supplied to editors on request.

8.7 Data, code, materials, and reproducibility

Every research manuscript must contain a Data Availability Statement. Data, analytic code, protocols, and materials needed to verify the findings should be deposited in a trusted repository when legal, ethical, privacy, consent, and intellectual-property conditions permit. Persistent identifiers should be provided.

• When open sharing is not possible, state the reason and describe a controlled-access or reasonable-request process.
• “Data available on request” should identify the responsible contact and any legitimate access conditions.
• Authors must preserve the primary data and analytic procedures for at least 10 years after publication, or longer when required by law, funder, institution, or discipline.
• The journal may request deidentified source data, code, laboratory records, original images, calibration records, or analysis files before or after publication.
• Failure to provide requested materials without a credible explanation may result in rejection, suspension of review, correction, expression of concern, retraction, or referral to an institution.
• Research using shared data must cite the dataset, respect access terms, and explain how the analysis differs from prior work.

8.8 Originality, plagiarism, text recycling, and overlapping publication

All submissions may be screened with iThenticate or another similarity-detection system. Plagiarism includes unattributed use of words, ideas, data, images, tables, methods, or results from another source. Self-plagiarism or text recycling may also be inappropriate when reused material is extensive, obscures the novelty of the work, or lacks transparent citation.

• Authors must disclose manuscripts, preprints, abstracts, datasets, or publications that overlap with the submitted work.
• Redundant publication, salami slicing, undisclosed reuse of a cohort, and submission of substantially the same work in another language are prohibited.
• Limited reuse of standard methodological wording may be acceptable when precise restatement is necessary, the source is cited when appropriate, and the reuse does not misrepresent originality.
• Previously published figures, tables, questionnaires, or substantial text require permission when the license does not already permit reuse and must be identified clearly as reproduced or adapted.
• A review article may synthesize published evidence, but it must not reproduce another review’s structure, wording, tables, or interpretation without attribution.

8.9 Fabrication, falsification, and image integrity

Fabrication, falsification, selective omission, misrepresentation of methods, and inappropriate image manipulation are prohibited. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable only when applied to the whole image and when they do not obscure, remove, create, or exaggerate information.

• Do not add, remove, move, duplicate, rotate, stretch, selectively enhance, or conceal features in research images.
• Image splicing or grouping must be scientifically justified, clearly separated, and explained in the legend.
• Microscopy images require scale bars and sufficient information about staining, magnification, acquisition, and processing.
• Original, uncropped, uncompressed source files must be retained and supplied on request.
• For gels, blots, and related images, authors may be asked for the complete original image, molecular-weight markers, replicates, and exposure information.
• Generative AI must not be used to create, replace, or modify raw research data or clinical evidence. Use of AI as an analyzed research method must be described fully in Methods.

8.10 Artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technology

Artificial-intelligence systems cannot be authors because they cannot accept accountability, approve the final work, disclose conflicts, or respond to integrity concerns. Human authors are responsible for every part of the submitted and published work, including content generated or revised with AI assistance.

• Disclose material use of generative or AI-assisted tools in the cover letter and in the manuscript section appropriate to the use.
• Writing or language assistance should be described in Acknowledgments. AI used for data collection, coding, analysis, image generation, or figure preparation must be described in Methods.
• Name the tool, developer, version or access date when relevant, and explain the task performed and the authors’ verification process.
• Authors must verify factual accuracy, calculations, references, originality, permissions, confidentiality, and absence of fabricated content.
• No confidential patient information, unpublished manuscript, peer-review report, or proprietary data may be entered into a public AI service without explicit authorization and adequate privacy safeguards.
• Reviewers and editors may use AI only when the journal has authorized the tool and confidentiality is protected. AI cannot replace expert editorial judgment.

8.11 Citation and reference integrity

• Cite sources because they are relevant and authoritative, not to satisfy an editor, reviewer, author, institution, or journal.
• Coercive citation, citation trading, citation cartels, and manipulation of journal self-citation are prohibited.
• Authors must verify every reference against the original source and confirm that each citation supports the associated statement.
• Retracted articles should not be cited as valid evidence. When a retracted work is discussed for scholarly reasons, its status must be stated.
• AI-generated reference lists must be checked item by item. Fabricated, mismatched, or nonexistent references may result in rejection.

8.12 Misconduct allegations and investigations

The journal assesses credible concerns confidentially and follows a fair process. Editors may seek an author explanation, request source material, consult independent experts, pause review or publication, notify coauthors, contact an institution or funder, and publish an appropriate notice. The journal does not determine employment or disciplinary sanctions, but it may act on the publication record before an institutional investigation is complete when readers or patients require protection.

Retaliation against a person who raises a concern in good faith is unacceptable. Deliberately false or malicious allegations may themselves constitute misconduct.

8.13 Corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and withdrawal

• A correction is published when an error affects the article’s accuracy, interpretation, attribution, or reproducibility but does not invalidate the main findings.
• An expression of concern may be issued when credible concerns are unresolved, an investigation is delayed or inconclusive, or readers need prompt notice of possible unreliability.
• A retraction may be issued when findings are unreliable because of major error or misconduct, the work is redundant or plagiarized, the research was unethical, or authorship or peer review was manipulated.
• Notices identify the affected article, explain the reason clearly, state who is retracting or correcting it, and are linked bidirectionally to the version of record.
• The original article normally remains accessible and is labeled clearly. Silent deletion or substitution is not used except when required by law, privacy, or an immediate safety concern.
• Withdrawal after acceptance is reserved for exceptional circumstances. Authors who request withdrawal must provide a reason and remain responsible for any ethical or contractual issues.

8.14 Editorial independence, special issues, and commercial content

Editorial decisions are based on validity, originality, relevance, methodological quality, ethical compliance, and value to readers. Owners, sponsors, advertisers, donors, and commercial partners may not direct the acceptance, rejection, timing, or wording of individual scientific articles.

• Special issues and supplements use the journal’s usual peer-review and integrity standards.
• Guest Editors disclose conflicts, do not handle their own work or work from close collaborators, and operate under the oversight of a nonconflicted journal editor.
• Sponsorship, equipment or material provision, and commercial involvement are disclosed on the collection page and in each relevant article.
• Advertising and sponsored content are distinguishable from editorial content and do not influence editorial decisions.

9. Preparing the manuscript

9.1 Required submission files

1. Separate title page containing identifying information

2. Anonymized main manuscript

3. Figures with complete legends

4. Editable tables with titles and footnotes

5. Completed reporting checklist and required flow diagram

6. Supporting information, protocol, data, code, or supplementary methods when applicable

7. Cover letter

8. Permissions and secure confirmation of publication consent when requested

9.2 Title page

• Full manuscript title that identifies the topic and, when useful, the study design
• Short running title
• Full names of all authors in publication order
• Highest academic or professional degrees when requested
• Complete institutional affiliations, including city and country
• Corresponding author’s postal address and email address
• ORCID iD for each author when available
• Word count and numbers of figures, tables, and supporting files
• Funding, conflicts of interest, and acknowledgments when these are not collected separately
• CRediT author-contribution statement
• Data Availability Statement and AI disclosure when applicable

Extensive author biographies, employment histories, memberships, awards, and research-interest summaries are not required during initial submission. The journal may request a brief biography after acceptance for selected invited content.

9.3 Anonymized manuscript

• Remove author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, biographies, and direct institutional identifiers.
• Remove identifying information from tracked changes, comments, file properties, figure labels, headers, footers, and supporting files.
• Cite the authors’ previous work in the normal third-person form. Do not replace necessary citations with “Author” unless instructed by the editorial office.
• Ethics approval details may be partially anonymized during review if required, but the complete information must be entered securely in the submission system and restored before acceptance.
• Do not anonymize trial registration, preprints, repositories, or data citations when doing so would make the report incomplete or misleading.

9.4 Abstract and keywords

Research, clinical, diagnostic, and systematic-review manuscripts should use a structured abstract. Headings should match the article category and normally include Background or Aim, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. Clinical trials should state the registration number. Systematic reviews should state the protocol registration when applicable. Report numerical findings, effect estimates, and uncertainty where space permits.

• Do not cite references in the abstract unless the editorial office authorizes an exception.
• Define unavoidable abbreviations and avoid abbreviations used only once.
• Do not introduce data, claims, or conclusions that are absent from the main text.
• Provide three to six specific keywords, preferably using recognized biomedical or dental indexing terms.

9.5 Main text

Section / Expected content

Introduction

Define the problem, summarize the relevant evidence, identify the gap, and state a precise aim or hypothesis.

Materials and Methods / Methods

Describe design, setting, participants or specimens, interventions, controls, outcomes, bias control, sample size, data collection, ethics, registration, and statistics in enough detail for evaluation and replication.

Results

Present participant or specimen flow, exclusions, baseline information, primary and secondary outcomes, effect estimates, uncertainty, adverse events, and sensitivity analyses without interpretation.

Discussion

State the principal findings, compare them with the best available evidence, explain plausible mechanisms, address strengths and limitations, and describe clinical or biological implications in proportion to the data.

Conclusions

Answer the study aim directly. Do not introduce new data, make recommendations unsupported by the design, or extend findings beyond the studied population or model.

Declarations

Use the fixed declaration sequence stated below and provide explicit negative statements when an item does not apply.

9.6 Required declarations

Declaration / What authors must state

Ethics approval

Name the approving body and approval/protocol number, or explain the formal exemption or waiver.

Consent to participate

State how consent was obtained or identify the approved waiver. Use “Not applicable” only when justified.

Consent for publication

Confirm written permission for identifiable clinical material, or state that no identifiable material is included.

Trial or review registration

Give registry and number, or explain why registration was not applicable or was not completed.

Funding

Name funders and grant numbers and describe sponsor role, or state that no external funding was received.

Conflicts of interest

Disclose relevant financial and nonfinancial interests, or state that none exist.

Author contributions

Provide a CRediT statement agreed by all authors.

Data availability

Provide repository details, persistent identifiers, access conditions, or a justified restriction.

Materials, code, and protocol availability

State where these can be accessed or explain legitimate restrictions.

AI use

Describe material use of generative or AI-assisted technology, or state that no such technology was used when the submission system requires a declaration.

Acknowledgments

Identify nonauthor contributors and obtain their permission to be named.

Examples of explicit negative statements

“This research received no external funding.”  “The authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this work.”  “No identifiable patient information is included; consent for publication was therefore not required.”  “No generative or AI-assisted technology was used in the preparation of this manuscript.”

10. Figures, tables, references, and supporting files

10.1 Figures and image files

• Number figures in the order cited and provide a self-contained legend for each figure.
• Use publication-ready composite figures with consistent panel labels. Retain and provide the separate original panels when requested.
• Photographs, radiographs, and color or grayscale images should normally be at least 300 dpi at final size; combination figures at least 600 dpi; line art 600-1200 dpi. Vector files are preferred for diagrams and line drawings when available.
• Acceptable formats normally include TIFF, PNG, high-quality JPEG, EPS, PDF, or SVG as permitted by the submission system.
• Use RGB color for online publication unless the production office requests another mode.
• Include scale bars for microscopy and explain arrows, symbols, staining, magnification, acquisition, and processing in the legend.
• Remove patient identifiers and verify that cropping has not concealed clinically relevant information.
• Figures reproduced or adapted from another source require attribution and permission when the source license does not authorize the intended reuse.

10.2 Tables

• Create tables with the Word table function; do not submit tables as images.
• Number tables in the order cited and provide a concise, self-contained title.
• Explain abbreviations, statistical tests, measures of variability, and symbols in footnotes.
• Avoid duplicating the same data in the text, a table, and a figure.
• Ensure that each value has a clear denominator, unit, and level of precision.

10.3 Supporting information

• Label each item clearly, such as Table S1, Figure S1, Appendix S1, Video S1, Data S1, Code S1, or Protocol S1.
• Cite every supporting item in the main manuscript.
• Remove author identifiers from files used in anonymized review.
• Do not include confidential patient information, copyrighted material without permission, or files that cannot be opened with commonly available software.
• Supporting files form part of the scholarly record and may be published substantially as supplied.

10.4 Reference style and integrity

References should follow APA 7th edition and be arranged alphabetically by the surname of the first author. In-text citations use the author-date system. Include the full article title and DOI in URL form when available. Authors are responsible for the completeness and accuracy of every reference.

10.4.1 In-text citation examples

Situation / APA 7th edition example

One author

Parenthetical: (Siqueira, 2021) | Narrative: Siqueira (2021)

Two authors

Parenthetical: (Ricucci & Siqueira, 2010) | Narrative: Ricucci and Siqueira (2010)

Three or more authors

Use et al. from the first citation: (Afkhami et al., 2024) or Afkhami et al. (2024)

Several sources together

(Afkhami et al., 2024; Ricucci & Siqueira, 2010; Siqueira, 2021)

Organization as author

First citation: (World Medical Association [WMA], 2024); later citations: (WMA, 2024)

Direct quotation

(Author, Year, p. 12). Direct quotations should be used sparingly in scientific manuscripts.

For works with three or more authors, use the first author followed by et al. in every in-text citation. In the reference list, include up to 20 authors. For 21 or more authors, list the first 19 authors, insert an ellipsis, and give the final author; do not place an ampersand before the final author in this situation.

10.4.2 Reference-list examples

Journal article: Christoffersen, J., Bjørndal, L., & Dabelsteen, S. (2026). Targeting dental pulp stem cell senescence: A potential strategy for improving regenerative endodontic procedures. Bioengineering, 13(6), 654. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering13060654

Advance online publication: Yu, X., Sun, T., Xu, M., Zhao, T., Luo, H., Zhong, Q., Liu, C., & An, Z. (2026). Age-associated niche remodeling drives dental pulp progenitor dysfunction and fibrosis. Communications Biology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-026-10632-y

Book: Ricucci, D., Siqueira, J. F., Jr., & Tay, F. (2026). Vital pulp therapy and clinical endodontics: A biological approach (Vols. 1–2). Dentoki Publishing.

Chapter in an edited book: Tan, B. L., & Norhaizan, M. E. (2021). Chronic inflammation and aging (inflammaging). In B. L. Tan & M. E. Norhaizan (Eds.), Role of antioxidants in longevity and age-related diseases (pp. 39–50). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-82859-2

Systematic review or other journal article with an article number: Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Journal Title, 12(3), Article e12345. https://doi.org/xxxxx

Webpage or organizational document: World Medical Association. (2024, October). WMA Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human participants. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki/

Thesis or dissertation: Author, A. A. (Year). Title of dissertation [Doctoral dissertation, Name of University]. Name of Repository. URL

Preprint: Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year). Title of manuscript [Preprint]. Name of Preprint Server. https://doi.org/xxxxx

Dataset: Author, A. A. (Year). Title of dataset (Version 1) [Data set]. Repository. https://doi.org/xxxxx

Conference presentation: Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year, Month Day-Day). Title of presentation [Paper presentation]. Name of Conference, City, Country.

• Prefer primary sources when they provide the evidence being discussed.
• Identify preprints, datasets, protocols, and software with the correct publication type and persistent identifier.
• Do not list personal communications as retrievable references; cite them in text only with permission.
• Do not cite submitted manuscripts as established evidence. “In press” is acceptable only after formal acceptance.
• Check whether a cited article has been corrected, retracted, or replaced.
• Use sentence case for article, chapter, book, report, and webpage titles. Italicize journal titles and volume numbers; italicize book and report titles. Do not italicize issue numbers.
• Provide retrieval dates only for content designed to change over time and not archived in a stable version.

11. Submission package and cover letter

11.1 File requirements

The total size of all uploaded files should not exceed 120 MB unless the submission system permits a larger package. The main manuscript should be submitted in Microsoft Word format. Large datasets, videos, and code should be deposited in an appropriate repository when feasible and linked from the manuscript.

11.2 Cover letter

The cover letter should be concise and should explain the manuscript’s principal contribution and fit with the journal. It must confirm:

• The manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere and has not been published in substantially the same form.
• All authors satisfy the authorship criteria, have approved the manuscript, and agree with submission.
• All relevant preprints, related manuscripts, overlapping datasets, conference reports, and prior dissemination are disclosed.
• Required ethics approval, consent, registration, and permissions have been obtained.
• Funding, commercial relationships, conflicts of interest, and material use of artificial intelligence are disclosed.
• Any manuscript authored by an editor, board member, staff member, or close collaborator is identified so that an independent process can be established.
• Any unusual circumstance that editors should know before review is explained.

11.3 Submission conduct

Authors should communicate through the corresponding author and the submission system. Duplicate submission, attempts to influence reviewer selection improperly, fabricated reviewer identities, undisclosed use of third-party submission services, or abusive communication may result in rejection and institutional notification.

12. After acceptance and the post-publication record

12.1 Copyediting and proofs

Accepted manuscripts undergo editorial and production review. Copyediting may improve clarity, consistency, references, declarations, and journal style without changing the scientific meaning. The corresponding author must review proofs promptly and is responsible for checking author names, affiliations, data, equations, figures, tables, references, and declarations.

Proofs are intended to correct production errors, not to introduce new data, add authors, change conclusions, or rewrite the article. Substantive changes require editorial approval and may require renewed review.

12.2 Version of record and licensing

The final online article is the version of record and receives a DOI. Authors retain copyright and normally publish under CC BY 4.0. Any alternative license required by a funder must be discussed with the editorial office before acceptance.

12.3 Author responsibility after publication

Authors must respond to legitimate questions about the work, cooperate with requests for data or clarification, and notify the journal promptly if they discover an error. The journal may publish correspondence, a correction, expression of concern, retraction, editorial note, or other notice needed to preserve the integrity of the record.

13. Final submission checklist

• ☐ The manuscript falls within the journal’s scope and the selected article category matches the study design.
• ☐ The title page and anonymized manuscript are separate and all file metadata has been checked.
• ☐ All authors meet ICMJE criteria and the CRediT statement is complete.
• ☐ The abstract uses the required headings and reports the principal numerical results.
• ☐ The Methods contain sufficient detail for evaluation and replication.
• ☐ The correct PRIDE and/or EQUATOR checklist is complete and uploaded.
• ☐ Any required flow diagram is included and cited as a figure.
• ☐ Ethics approval, consent to participate, consent for publication, and trial registration are reported correctly.
• ☐ Funding, sponsor role, conflicts, data availability, code/material availability, and AI use are declared explicitly.
• ☐ The statistical analysis identifies the unit of analysis, clustering, sample-size rationale, missing data, effect estimates, and uncertainty.
• ☐ Figures are publication quality, deidentified, accurately labeled, and free of inappropriate manipulation.
• ☐ Tables are editable, complete, and do not duplicate the text or figures.
• ☐ Every reference has been verified, and corrected or retracted literature has been identified.
• ☐ Related manuscripts, preprints, overlapping datasets, and prior dissemination are disclosed in the cover letter.
• ☐ Permissions have been obtained for reused material.
• ☐ All authors have reviewed and approved the exact files being submitted.

14. Policy foundations and reporting resources

The journal’s policies draw on current international standards. Authors should use the most recent version of each resource.

• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations
• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and guidance
• World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki
• EQUATOR Network reporting-guideline library
• PRIDE endodontic reporting guidelines
• CONSORT
• PRISMA
• ARRIVE
• CARE case-report guidelines
• STARD diagnostic-accuracy reporting
• STROBE observational-study reporting
• CRediT contributor roles taxonomy