Quality & Research Integrity

Boundaries we do not cross, and reviews we do not skip

IXPath's credibility rests on a set of hard boundaries, transparent review stages and a traceable complaint process.

01

Hard Boundaries

What we never do

  • Guarantee journal acceptance or publication of any manuscript.
  • Sell, gift or assign authorship positions independent of documented contribution.
  • Provide academic ghostwriting of work a student or researcher is required to author themselves.
  • Manipulate, fabricate or falsify data, results or references.
Credibility is not a feature we sell. It is the limit on what we agree to do.
IXPath research integrity charter
02

Data & Confidentiality

How we handle sensitive material

Never submit sensitive data through public forms

Do not upload patient-identifiable health information or confidential research datasets to any public web form, including on this site. Sensitive material is exchanged only through agreed secure channels after a project is scoped.

Confidentiality principles

  • De-identification is required before any dataset transfer.
  • Access is limited to assigned reviewers on a need-to-know basis.
  • Materials are retained only as long as necessary for the engagement.
03

Conflicts & AI

Disclosure and human oversight

Conflict-of-interest disclosure

Reviewers, methodologists and editors disclose relevant conflicts before joining a project. Where a conflict cannot be managed, the individual is reassigned.

Human review of AI-assisted work

AI tools may assist drafting or language, but every output is checked by a qualified human reviewer before delivery. AI is never used to generate data, results or references.

04

Review Process

A multi-stage quality review

  1. 01

    Scoping review

    Feasibility and methodology sanity-check before work begins.

  2. 02

    Methodological review

    A qualified reviewer checks design and analysis choices.

  3. 03

    Statistical/technical check

    Independent check of calculations and reproducibility.

  4. 04

    Editorial review

    Language, structure and reporting-guideline compliance.

  5. 05

    Final sign-off

    Senior reviewer confirms readiness before delivery.

05

Complaints

How complaints are tracked

Every complaint submitted through our contact form receives a unique tracking reference so you can follow its status.

CMP-2026-0142Sample reference
06

Our Commitments

Our Commitments

We will disclose AI assistance where journals or institutions require it.
We will never imply that payment secures authorship or acceptance.
We will route every complaint to a named reviewer with a tracking reference.
We will decline requests that require fabricated data or reviewer manipulation.
08

FAQ

Common questions