Editorial Policies and Publication Ethics

Every Community Knowledge Publication (CKP) on ScienceReach goes through a defined, multi-stage review before it is published, and is held to the same standards of integrity afterward. No CKP is published without completing this process. This is what distinguishes a CKP from self-published work or grey literature.

The peer-review process, step by step

1. Submission. The author submits a completed draft that follows the CKP format and the author guidelines.
2. Editorial screening. The ScienceReach editorial team checks the draft against the standard: scope, structure, sourcing, citation accuracy, plain-language clarity, and ethics. Drafts that are out of scope or not yet ready are returned with guidance.
3. Editorial preparation. The editorial team prepares a clean, consistent draft so that reviewers can focus on substance rather than formatting.
4. Community review (participatory). As part of authoring, the author shares the draft with the community organization featured in it, so that the people closest to the work can check it for accuracy and fair representation and suggest corrections. This participatory step, drawn from community-engaged and participatory research, is a defining feature of a CKP: the community whose knowledge is represented has a say before publication. The authors connect with the organizations directly.
5. Independent reviewer recommendation. The prepared draft is assigned to a reviewer, who assesses it against a consistent rubric and returns a recommendation, ready to publish, minor revisions, major revisions, or not ready, with comments. CKPs submitted through the standalone CKP Publishing Service receive double-blind review by an external reviewer.
6. Editorial decision. The editor weighs the reviewer's recommendation and the community feedback, and decides: publish, request revision, or decline.
7. Revision. The author addresses the required changes, and the editor confirms them.
8. Publication. The CKP is published open-access on ScienceReach with a stable link and a citation block, and remains subject to the corrections process below.

Taken together, these stages, editorial screening, participatory community review, independent reviewer recommendation, and a final editorial decision, are what make a CKP a reviewed publication rather than a self-published document.

What review checks

At each stage, the CKP is assessed against a consistent standard:

• Evidence and accuracy. Claims are grounded in cited, dated, credible sources, and figures can be traced back to where they came from.
• Sourcing. Sources are diverse and appropriate, and citations match the reference list.
• Clarity and accessibility. The CKP is written in plain language for a community and practitioner audience, without losing necessary nuance.
• Structure and completeness. The publication follows the CKP format and covers the issue, the affected community, and the programs responding to it.
• Ethics and representation. Communities are represented fairly and respectfully, consents and permissions are in place, and the work meets the publication ethics standards below.

The standard is rigour and clarity, not the author's credentials or institutional affiliation.

Decisions are real

Submission does not guarantee publication. A CKP may be accepted, returned for revision, or declined. ScienceReach retains final editorial control and is not obligated to publish any submission. This is what keeps the venue credible for authors, readers, and the communities whose knowledge is published.

Editorial independence

Editorial decisions belong to the editorial team and are made on the merits of the work alone. The same standard and the same review apply to every CKP, whether it comes through the internship or the publishing service, and whoever supported, sponsored, or partnered on it. Sponsors, partners, and funders do not decide what is published or whether a CKP is accepted. The Editor holds the final decision, and that independence is what lets readers trust what they find on ScienceReach.

Publication ethics

ScienceReach publishes community knowledge for the public record, so the integrity of that record matters. Every author and every CKP is held to the standards below.

Authorship and credit. Everyone listed as an author has contributed to the work and has approved the publication, and no one who meets that standard is left off. Authors are named on the published CKP, and that attribution stays with the work as part of the permanent record. A community organization that makes a substantive contribution can be credited as a co-author, named in the byline and the acknowledgements. Generative AI tools are never credited as authors.

Originality. A CKP must be the author's own work and must not have been published elsewhere. We do not accept plagiarism, fabricated data, or falsified results. Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of their content, and for holding the permissions needed for any third-party material they include, such as figures, images, quotations, and data.

Disclosure of AI use. Authors disclose any use of generative AI tools in preparing a CKP. In our programs, AI tools may be used to help locate and organize sources, but the author writes the publication, and every source is independently verified before it is cited.

Conflicts of interest and funding. Authors disclose conflicts of interest and any sources of funding relevant to the work, so readers can weigh the publication with that context in view.

Consent and respectful representation. Where a CKP involves personal information or other material that requires consent, the author confirms that the necessary consents and approvals are in place. Communities are represented fairly and without stigmatizing language.

Corrections and retraction

If an error, inaccuracy, infringement, or ethical concern comes to light in a published CKP, we act on it. Depending on what is needed, ScienceReach may correct the publication, append an editorial note or a notice of concern, replace it with a corrected version, or, where warranted, retract it. Authors are asked to cooperate in good faith with any correction or review. To report a concern about a published CKP, email info@sciencereach.ca.

Our privacy practices are described on the Privacy page.