Article Withdrawal Policy

Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances maintains a transparent and responsible procedure for the withdrawal of manuscripts from the editorial and publication process. The journal recognizes that authors may occasionally have legitimate reasons to withdraw a manuscript before formal publication. At the same time, withdrawal should not be used to circumvent peer review, conceal research-integrity concerns, facilitate duplicate submission, or disrupt the scholarly publishing process.

This policy applies primarily to manuscripts that have been submitted, are under editorial assessment or peer review, have been revised, or have been accepted but have not yet become part of the formal published scholarly record.

Once an article has been formally published, concerns relating to its reliability, integrity, accuracy, or ethical status are ordinarily addressed through the journal's Corrections and Retractions Policy, Retraction Policy, or other applicable post-publication procedures rather than through ordinary manuscript withdrawal.

1. Purpose of the Policy

The purpose of this policy is to establish a clear procedure for:

  • author-requested withdrawal of manuscripts;

  • editorial withdrawal of manuscripts where justified;

  • withdrawal during peer review;

  • withdrawal after acceptance but before publication;

  • withdrawal arising from ethical or research-integrity concerns;

  • prevention of duplicate or simultaneous submission;

  • protection of confidential editorial records; and

  • preservation of an accurate publication history.

The journal seeks to handle withdrawal requests fairly, promptly, and transparently while protecting the legitimate interests of authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and the scholarly record.

2. Withdrawal Before Initial Editorial Assessment

Authors may request withdrawal shortly after submission where the manuscript has not yet entered substantive editorial assessment.

The corresponding author should contact the editorial office through the journal's designated communication channel and provide:

  • manuscript title;

  • manuscript identification number, where available;

  • corresponding author's name;

  • reason for withdrawal; and

  • confirmation that the request is made with the knowledge of all authors.

The journal may confirm withdrawal once the request has been verified.

Authors should not submit the manuscript to another journal until withdrawal from Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances has been formally acknowledged.

3. Withdrawal During Editorial Screening

A manuscript may also be withdrawn while undergoing administrative, technical, scope, originality, or ethical screening.

Authors should provide a written request explaining the reason for withdrawal.

Where the manuscript has already entered substantive editorial processing, the journal may review the request before closing the submission record.

A withdrawal request does not prevent the journal from retaining confidential administrative records necessary to document the editorial history of the submission.

4. Withdrawal During Peer Review

Authors may request withdrawal while a manuscript is undergoing peer review.

Because external reviewers and editors may already have invested substantial scholarly effort, authors should provide a clear and reasonable explanation for the request.

The corresponding author should submit a written withdrawal request identifying:

  • manuscript title;

  • manuscript ID;

  • reason for withdrawal;

  • current stage of review; and

  • confirmation that all authors agree with the request.

The journal will normally discontinue further peer-review activity after the withdrawal has been confirmed.

Authors should not regard submission of a withdrawal request as immediate closure of the manuscript record. Withdrawal becomes effective when the journal confirms it.

5. Withdrawal After Revision

Where authors have submitted a revised manuscript following reviewer or editorial comments, they may still request withdrawal before final publication.

The request should explain why the manuscript is being withdrawn after revision.

The journal may retain:

  • previous manuscript versions;

  • reviewer reports;

  • editorial correspondence;

  • author responses; and

  • other confidential records

as part of its legitimate editorial documentation.

Such records remain confidential and are not treated as published material.

6. Withdrawal After Acceptance

Withdrawal after formal acceptance requires particular care because the manuscript may already have undergone peer review, editorial approval, copyediting, metadata preparation, or production processing.

Authors seeking withdrawal after acceptance should provide a written explanation and confirmation from all authors.

The journal may consider factors such as:

  • discovery of a material error;

  • unresolved authorship dispute;

  • ethical concern;

  • invalid or unreliable data;

  • legal or confidentiality issue;

  • serious methodological problem;

  • accidental duplicate submission; or

  • another substantial reason affecting the suitability of publication.

Withdrawal after acceptance should not be requested merely because authors subsequently prefer to submit the manuscript to another journal.

7. Withdrawal During Production

Where a manuscript has entered copyediting, typesetting, proof preparation, or other production stages but has not yet been formally published, withdrawal may still be considered.

At this stage, authors should explain the circumstances fully because the article may already have associated metadata, production files, or scheduled publication information.

Where the concern affects the reliability or legality of the work, withdrawal may be necessary regardless of the stage reached.

The journal should not knowingly proceed with publication of a manuscript that has become demonstrably unreliable or ethically unacceptable merely because production is advanced.

8. Withdrawal After Online Publication

Once an article has been formally published online as part of the journal's scholarly record, it is ordinarily no longer treated as an unpublished manuscript that can simply be withdrawn.

Errors or integrity concerns identified after publication should normally be addressed through:

  • correction;

  • Expression of Concern;

  • retraction; or

  • exceptional removal

as appropriate.

COPE guidance treats retraction, rather than silent withdrawal, as the appropriate mechanism when a published article can no longer be relied upon.

9. Author-Initiated Withdrawal

Authors may request withdrawal for legitimate reasons including:

  • discovery of a significant error before publication;

  • problems with underlying data;

  • ethical or consent concerns;

  • incorrect authorship;

  • unresolved contributor disputes;

  • legal restrictions;

  • confidentiality concerns;

  • accidental submission of an incorrect manuscript;

  • discovery of an undisclosed conflict of interest; or

  • another substantial issue affecting the manuscript.

The journal may request additional information where necessary to determine the appropriate handling of the submission.

10. Agreement of All Authors

A withdrawal request should ordinarily reflect the agreement of all listed authors.

The corresponding author should not withdraw a manuscript without informing the coauthors.

Where the journal has reason to believe that an authorship dispute exists, it may request written confirmation from individual authors.

If agreement cannot be established, the journal may suspend processing while the matter is clarified.

Where necessary, an unresolved authorship dispute may be referred to the relevant institution because journals are not normally positioned to adjudicate complex contribution disputes independently.

11. Withdrawal by the Journal

Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances may withdraw a manuscript from editorial consideration when substantial concerns arise before publication.

Possible reasons include:

  • confirmed duplicate submission;

  • plagiarism;

  • fabrication or falsification;

  • manipulated or unreliable data;

  • false authorship information;

  • peer-review manipulation;

  • unethical research;

  • lack of required ethics approval;

  • serious privacy or confidentiality concerns;

  • fraudulent documentation;

  • legal restrictions;

  • material copyright infringement;

  • failure to resolve serious integrity concerns; or

  • another circumstance making publication inappropriate.

Editorial withdrawal should be based on documented reasons and should not be used arbitrarily.

12. Duplicate and Simultaneous Submission

Authors must not submit substantially the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time.

If Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances learns that a manuscript is simultaneously under consideration elsewhere, the journal may suspend editorial processing and seek clarification from the authors.

If duplicate submission is confirmed, the manuscript may be withdrawn or rejected from consideration.

COPE specifically cautions against using withdrawal as a means to facilitate simultaneous submission or avoid ethical responsibilities associated with the original submission.

13. Withdrawal to Submit Elsewhere

Authors should not request withdrawal simply to transfer a manuscript to another journal after substantial editorial or peer-review work has been completed unless they have a legitimate reason.

Authors remain entitled to request withdrawal before publication, but the request should be made transparently.

The manuscript should not be submitted elsewhere until the journal has formally acknowledged withdrawal.

This helps prevent duplicate editorial processing and uncertainty regarding the manuscript's publication status.

14. Withdrawal and Research Misconduct

Where a withdrawal request is submitted after the journal has raised a credible research-integrity concern, withdrawal does not automatically terminate consideration of that concern.

The journal may continue to assess matters involving:

  • plagiarism;

  • fabricated or falsified data;

  • unethical research;

  • manipulated peer review;

  • authorship fraud;

  • serious confidentiality violations; or

  • other significant misconduct.

Where appropriate, the journal may communicate relevant concerns to the authors' institution, ethics committee, funding organization, or another responsible body.

Withdrawal should not be used as a mechanism to erase a legitimate research-integrity concern.

15. Withdrawal Following a Similarity Check

A manuscript should not be withdrawn solely to avoid consideration of significant textual overlap identified during editorial screening.

Where a similarity report raises concerns, the journal may first assess:

  • the extent of overlap;

  • the source;

  • whether attribution is present;

  • whether duplicate publication may be involved; and

  • whether the matter constitutes an honest error or possible misconduct.

Authors will ordinarily have an opportunity to respond to substantive concerns.

16. Withdrawal Because of Data Problems

Authors who discover a serious data problem before publication should notify the journal promptly.

Relevant issues may include:

  • incorrect dataset;

  • corrupted data;

  • serious analytical error;

  • loss of essential records;

  • invalid measurements;

  • inappropriate data processing;

  • incorrect patient or participant inclusion;

  • unreliable algorithmic outputs; or

  • other problems affecting the validity of the conclusions.

The journal may permit or require withdrawal where the problem cannot reasonably be corrected before publication.

17. Withdrawal Involving Digital Health Data

Because the journal publishes research involving digital health and telemonitoring, manuscripts may involve sensitive clinical, behavioral, physiological, or remote-monitoring information.

Withdrawal may be necessary where authors identify previously unrecognized concerns involving:

  • protected health information;

  • participant confidentiality;

  • re-identification risk;

  • unauthorized use of health records;

  • inappropriate transfer of patient data;

  • cybersecurity vulnerabilities;

  • invalid consent for data reuse; or

  • another significant data-governance issue.

Such concerns should be reported immediately to the editorial office.

18. Withdrawal Involving Ethics Approval

If authors discover that required ethics approval was absent, invalid, incorrectly reported, or did not cover the research described, they should notify the journal immediately.

The journal may suspend or withdraw the manuscript while the circumstances are assessed.

Retroactive ethical approval should not automatically be assumed to resolve an issue where approval was required before the research was undertaken.

19. Withdrawal Involving Informed Consent

A manuscript may require withdrawal where participant consent is materially deficient and the problem cannot be appropriately remedied.

This may include:

  • absence of required research consent;

  • lack of consent for publication of identifiable information;

  • use of participant data outside the agreed purpose;

  • publication of identifiable images without permission; or

  • other consent-related concerns.

Protection of participant rights takes priority over continuation of the publication process.

20. Withdrawal Involving Artificial Intelligence

Where authors identify material problems arising from the use of artificial intelligence or automated tools before publication, they should notify the journal.

Possible issues include:

  • fabricated AI-generated references;

  • invented data;

  • inaccurate AI-generated analysis;

  • undisclosed synthetic data;

  • manipulated images;

  • confidential patient data entered into unauthorized AI systems;

  • invalid model outputs; or

  • another AI-related problem affecting research integrity.

The journal may request clarification, revision, or withdrawal depending on the seriousness of the matter.

21. Withdrawal Because of Authorship Disputes

If an authorship dispute arises before publication, the journal may suspend processing while the matter is addressed.

Withdrawal may be considered where:

  • an author was included without consent;

  • a legitimate contributor was excluded;

  • authors cannot agree on the submitted version;

  • the corresponding author lacked authority to submit; or

  • a dispute materially affects responsibility for the work.

The journal may require institutional assistance where the dispute cannot be resolved through correspondence among the authors.

22. Withdrawal Because of Copyright or Legal Concerns

A manuscript may be withdrawn where publication would infringe copyright, confidentiality, contractual obligations, privacy rights, or other legal requirements.

Authors are responsible for obtaining necessary permissions for third-party material before publication.

Where an unresolved legal concern is identified, editorial processing may be suspended until the matter is resolved.

23. Withdrawal Requests by Only One Author

Where one author requests withdrawal but other authors disagree, the journal should not automatically close the manuscript.

The editorial office may contact all listed authors and request clarification.

Where the disagreement concerns authorship, research ownership, data rights, or institutional responsibility, the manuscript may remain suspended until a reasonable resolution is achieved.

24. Withdrawal and Reviewer Confidentiality

Withdrawal does not remove confidentiality obligations associated with peer review.

Authors must not attempt to identify or contact reviewers following withdrawal.

Reviewers must continue to protect the confidentiality of:

  • the manuscript;

  • data;

  • results;

  • methods;

  • author information available to them; and

  • editorial correspondence.

Reviewers may not use unpublished information from a withdrawn manuscript for their own research or other purposes without appropriate authorization.

25. Withdrawal and Editorial Records

The journal may retain confidential records relating to a withdrawn submission.

These may include:

  • submission metadata;

  • manuscript versions;

  • reviewer reports;

  • author responses;

  • editorial decisions;

  • correspondence;

  • integrity documentation; and

  • withdrawal confirmation.

Retention of such records helps preserve the integrity of editorial administration and does not constitute continued publication of the manuscript.

26. Public Visibility of Withdrawn Manuscripts

Manuscripts withdrawn before formal publication should not ordinarily remain publicly accessible as published journal articles.

Where a manuscript was never formally published, the journal does not need to create a public withdrawal notice unless exceptional circumstances require transparency.

Where public metadata or an advance record has already been released, an appropriate notice may be necessary to prevent readers from misunderstanding the status of the work.

27. Articles Published Ahead of Issue Assignment

Where an article has been formally published online before assignment to a volume or issue, it is considered part of the scholarly publication record.

Such an article should not ordinarily be treated as an unpublished manuscript merely because final issue assignment has not occurred.

If serious concerns arise, the journal should consider correction or retraction rather than ordinary withdrawal.

28. Article Removal Versus Withdrawal

Withdrawal should be distinguished from complete removal of published content.

Removal of a published article is an exceptional measure and may be appropriate only where continued availability creates a serious legal, privacy, security, or safety risk.

Ordinary errors or research-integrity concerns should be addressed through transparent post-publication mechanisms rather than silent deletion.

29. Withdrawal Versus Retraction

Withdrawal generally applies to manuscripts that have not yet become part of the established published scholarly record.

Retraction applies to published work that should no longer be relied upon because of a fundamental reliability or integrity problem.

COPE retraction guidance emphasizes that retracted publications should remain identifiable in the scholarly record with a clear notice explaining their status.

The journal will select the mechanism appropriate to the publication stage and nature of the issue.

30. Withdrawal Confirmation

A manuscript should be considered formally withdrawn only after the editorial office has confirmed the withdrawal.

The confirmation should identify the manuscript sufficiently to avoid ambiguity.

After formal confirmation:

  • editorial processing will cease;

  • pending review activity should be discontinued where possible; and

  • the manuscript will no longer be considered for publication by the journal unless formally resubmitted as permitted by the editor.

31. Resubmission of a Withdrawn Manuscript

A withdrawn manuscript is not automatically eligible for later resubmission.

Where authors wish to submit the work again to Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances, they should disclose the previous submission and withdrawal where relevant.

The journal may decide whether the new submission should be treated as:

  • a new manuscript;

  • a continuation of the previous record; or

  • unsuitable for renewed consideration.

32. Withdrawal Fees

The journal should not impose an undisclosed withdrawal fee.

Any financial policy affecting manuscript withdrawal must be publicly disclosed in advance and must remain separate from editorial decision-making.

Authors should consult the journal's current Article Processing Charges Policy for verified fee information.

No financial demand should be introduced retrospectively solely because an author has exercised a legitimate right to request withdrawal.

33. Withdrawal and Editorial Independence

Withdrawal decisions should be handled independently of:

  • commercial pressure;

  • author status;

  • institutional prestige;

  • nationality;

  • advertising relationships;

  • sponsorship;

  • citation expectations; or

  • potential reputational effects on the publisher.

The same published procedure should be applied consistently to comparable cases.

34. Appeals Concerning Withdrawal Decisions

Authors who believe that a withdrawal-related editorial decision was procedurally inappropriate may submit a reasoned appeal.

The appeal should identify:

  • manuscript involved;

  • decision being challenged;

  • reason for disagreement; and

  • supporting evidence.

Where practicable, the appeal should be considered by an editor who was not solely responsible for the original decision.

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the decision.

35. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are expected to:

  • submit manuscripts to only one journal at a time;

  • communicate withdrawal requests promptly;

  • provide truthful reasons for withdrawal;

  • obtain agreement from coauthors;

  • wait for formal withdrawal confirmation before submitting elsewhere;

  • disclose serious errors or ethical concerns;

  • cooperate with legitimate integrity inquiries; and

  • avoid using withdrawal to conceal misconduct.

Authors remain responsible for the integrity of the submitted work even if the manuscript is subsequently withdrawn.

36. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors should:

  • evaluate withdrawal requests fairly;

  • respond without unnecessary delay;

  • confirm manuscript status clearly;

  • protect confidential information;

  • distinguish withdrawal from retraction;

  • evaluate unresolved integrity concerns where necessary;

  • manage authorship disputes appropriately;

  • avoid conflicts of interest; and

  • preserve appropriate editorial documentation.

Editors should not obstruct a legitimate withdrawal for improper commercial or reputational reasons.

37. Responsibilities of the Publisher

The publisher should support accurate implementation of withdrawal decisions within the journal's technical and administrative systems.

Where appropriate, the publisher may assist with:

  • closing submission records;

  • preventing unintended publication;

  • correcting public metadata;

  • maintaining secure editorial records; and

  • implementing post-publication notices where a matter has progressed beyond ordinary withdrawal.

Publisher involvement should respect editorial independence.

38. Relationship With Other Journal Policies

This Article Withdrawal Policy should be read together with the journal's:

  • Publication Ethics Policy;

  • Research Misconduct Policy;

  • Plagiarism Policy;

  • Authorship Criteria;

  • Conflict of Interest Policy;

  • Research Data Sharing Policy;

  • Data Availability Policy;

  • AI Usage Policy;

  • Corrections and Retractions Policy;

  • Retraction Policy; and

  • Complaints and Appeals Policy.

Where a concern involves a more specific ethical or post-publication issue, the relevant specialized policy may govern the procedure.

Commitment to Responsible Withdrawal Practices

Digital Health & Telemonitoring Advances recognizes an author's legitimate ability to request withdrawal of an unpublished manuscript while also protecting the integrity of editorial review and the scholarly publication process.

Withdrawal requests will be considered according to the manuscript's publication stage, the reason provided, agreement among authors, and any relevant ethical or research-integrity concerns.

The journal distinguishes clearly between withdrawal of an unpublished manuscript and retraction of a published article. This distinction helps ensure that manuscripts are handled fairly before publication while published scholarly records remain transparent, traceable, and appropriately corrected when necessary.