Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) supports transparency, openness, responsible data sharing, and reproducibility in scholarly research. Authors are expected to provide sufficient information about the data, materials, methods, and analytical procedures underlying their findings so that readers can understand, evaluate, and, where appropriate, verify or replicate the research.

Authors are encouraged to make research data and supporting materials available whenever this is ethically, legally, contractually, and practically possible. CJSS recognizes that some research data, particularly data involving human participants, confidential records, sensitive information, or third-party restrictions, cannot be made publicly available. Legitimate restrictions on data sharing will not disadvantage authors, provided that the restrictions are clearly explained.

This policy applies to research data, documentation, instruments, analytical code, and other materials supporting submitted and published articles. The processing of personal information collected through the journal website and editorial system is governed separately by the journal’s Privacy Statement.

Contents

1. Scope and Principles

CJSS supports responsible research data management and encourages authors to follow the FAIR Data Principles , under which research data and associated metadata should, where possible, be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable.

FAIR data do not necessarily have to be openly accessible without restriction. Data may remain subject to controlled access, confidentiality, ethical approval, informed consent, legal requirements, intellectual property rights, or contractual conditions. Where access is restricted, authors should provide clear information about the applicable conditions.

CJSS encourages data sharing to:

Support the verification of published findings;

Promote methodological transparency;

Facilitate replication and secondary research;

Improve the discoverability and reuse of research outputs;

Reduce unnecessary duplication of data collection; and

Strengthen confidence in the scholarly record.

Back to Contents ↑

2. Definition of Research Data

For the purposes of this policy, research data include digital or non-digital materials collected, observed, generated, created, or analysed to support the findings presented in a manuscript.

Depending on the nature of the study, research data and related materials may include:

Quantitative datasets;

Survey responses and coded survey data;

Interview or focus-group transcripts;

Field notes and observation records;

Administrative, historical, archival, or institutional records;

Images, audio recordings, or video materials;

Statistical outputs and analytical files;

Software code and computational workflows;

Questionnaires, scales, and research instruments;

Coding frameworks, codebooks, and classification schemes;

Documentation and metadata describing the data; and

Other materials necessary to understand or verify the research.

Not all materials can or should be made publicly available. Authors must assess data-sharing possibilities in accordance with ethical, legal, confidentiality, consent, licensing, and contractual obligations.

Back to Contents ↑

3. Data Availability Statement

All submitted manuscripts must include a clear Data Availability Statement. The statement should describe whether and how the data and supporting materials underlying the study can be accessed.

The Data Availability Statement must indicate, as applicable:

The repository, supplementary file, archive, institutional source, or other location where the data are available;

The DOI, persistent URL, accession number, or other identifier associated with the data;

The conditions under which access may be granted;

Whether the data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request;

Whether the data were obtained from a third party and are subject to restrictions;

The ethical, legal, confidentiality, privacy, contractual, intellectual property, or informed-consent reason preventing public access;

Whether all relevant data are contained within the article and its supplementary materials; or

Whether no new data were created or analysed as part of the study.

A statement that data are unavailable should include a meaningful explanation. Authors should not disclose confidential, sensitive, or legally protected information when explaining a restriction.

The final Data Availability Statement will normally be published as part of the accepted article.

Back to Contents ↑

4. Open Research Data and Data Sharing

Authors are encouraged to make the data underlying their findings available to the scholarly community whenever this is ethically, legally, and practically possible.

Research data may be shared through one or more of the following methods:

Deposit in a trusted institutional, disciplinary, or general-purpose repository;

Publication as supplementary files accompanying the article;

Inclusion within the article where the volume and nature of the data make this appropriate;

Controlled access through an authorized data archive or institutional service; or

Provision by the corresponding author upon reasonable request, where repository deposit is not appropriate.

Data should be shared in formats that allow other researchers to understand and, where permitted, reuse them. Authors should provide sufficient documentation, metadata, variable definitions, codebooks, methodological explanations, and access conditions to support appropriate interpretation.

Public data sharing is encouraged but is not mandatory where legitimate restrictions apply. Authors will not be required to make data openly available where doing so would violate legal obligations, research ethics, participant confidentiality, informed consent, contractual terms, security requirements, or intellectual property rights.

Back to Contents ↑

5. Repositories and Persistent Identifiers

Authors are encouraged to deposit research data in an appropriate and trusted repository that supports long-term access, provides clear terms of use, and assigns a persistent identifier.

Authors may use:

A recognized discipline-specific repository;

An institutional research data repository;

A national or international data archive; or

A trusted general-purpose repository.

Where no appropriate discipline-specific or institutional repository is available, authors may consider established general-purpose services such as:

Zenodo;

Figshare;

Harvard Dataverse ;

Open Science Framework (OSF) ; or

Another appropriate institutional or trusted repository.

CJSS does not require authors to use a particular repository. Authors are responsible for selecting a repository appropriate to the discipline, data type, sensitivity of the material, access requirements, and applicable institutional or funder policies.

The repository identifier, such as a DOI, stable URL, accession number, or record number, must be included in the Data Availability Statement whenever deposited data are available.

Authors should avoid relying solely on personal websites, temporary file-sharing platforms, or links that do not support stable, long-term access.

Back to Contents ↑

6. Dataset Citation

Where a dataset has been deposited in a repository and has a citable identifier, authors should cite the dataset in the manuscript and include the full dataset reference in the reference list.

A dataset reference should include, where available:

Creator or author;

Year of publication or deposit;

Dataset title;

Repository or data archive;

Version number, where relevant; and

DOI, persistent URL, or accession number.

Dataset citations should be prepared consistently with the journal’s reference style and should allow readers to locate the exact version of the data supporting the article.

Authors must appropriately acknowledge and cite data created by other researchers, organizations, government bodies, archives, or third-party providers.

Back to Contents ↑

7. Supporting Research Materials

Where relevant, authors are encouraged to make available the materials necessary to understand, verify, reproduce, or build upon the reported research.

Supporting materials may include:

Questionnaires and survey instruments;

Interview or focus-group protocols;

Observation schedules;

Codebooks and variable definitions;

Qualitative coding frameworks;

Statistical analysis scripts;

Software code and computational notebooks;

Search strategies used in systematic or scoping reviews;

Data-cleaning and transformation procedures;

Research protocols or analysis plans;

Supplementary tables and figures; and

Documentation explaining how files should be interpreted.

Supporting materials must not contain personal, confidential, copyrighted, or legally restricted information unless the author has the necessary authorization to share them.

Back to Contents ↑

8. Reproducibility and Methodological Transparency

Authors should describe their research methods and analytical procedures in sufficient detail to allow readers and reviewers to assess the validity, reliability, and limitations of the study.

Manuscripts should include, where applicable:

A clear description of the research design;

The research setting and relevant context;

Sampling methods and participant-selection procedures;

Inclusion and exclusion criteria;

Data sources and data-collection procedures;

Definitions of variables, concepts, or analytical categories;

Data preparation, cleaning, and transformation procedures;

Statistical or qualitative analysis methods;

Software, tools, packages, and version numbers used;

Model specifications and analytical assumptions;

Procedures used to assess reliability, validity, or robustness;

Changes or deviations from a registered protocol, research plan, or intended methodology; and

Limitations affecting interpretation or reproducibility.

CJSS recognizes that exact replication may not be possible or appropriate for every type of social science research. Reproducibility requirements should therefore be interpreted in relation to the study design, methodology, disciplinary conventions, ethical obligations, and nature of the data.

Back to Contents ↑

9. Qualitative and Sensitive Research Data

CJSS recognizes that qualitative research frequently involves contextual, personal, culturally sensitive, confidential, or potentially identifiable information that cannot responsibly be shared in full.

Authors of qualitative studies should provide sufficient methodological transparency to allow readers to assess the credibility, dependability, and interpretation of the research. This may include:

Description of participant recruitment and selection;

Explanation of the research setting and context;

Description of interviews, observations, or other data collection;

Explanation of transcription and translation procedures;

Description of coding and thematic analysis;

Information about researcher reflexivity, where relevant;

Explanation of how interpretations were developed; and

Description of measures used to protect participants.

Authors should not deposit identifiable interview transcripts, recordings, field notes, or other sensitive materials in a public repository unless participants have provided appropriate informed consent and all ethical, legal, and institutional requirements have been satisfied.

Where full data cannot be shared, authors may consider sharing anonymized, aggregated, redacted, or non-disclosive materials, provided that this is ethically and legally appropriate.

Back to Contents ↑

10. Ethical, Legal, and Contractual Restrictions

Data sharing must comply with applicable ethical, legal, institutional, and professional requirements.

Authors must ensure that the sharing of research data does not violate:

Personal data protection and privacy requirements;

Participant confidentiality or anonymity;

Terms of informed consent;

Conditions imposed by an ethics committee, institutional review board, or other approving body;

National or international law;

Contractual or funder restrictions;

Intellectual property or copyright;

Database licences or third-party terms of use;

Commercial confidentiality;

Cultural or community-based data governance requirements; or

Security or public-interest restrictions.

Research involving human participants should obtain appropriate ethical approval or exemption where required. Consent procedures should address the collection, retention, publication, sharing, and possible reuse of research data where applicable.

Where data cannot be shared publicly, authors must explain the restriction in the Data Availability Statement and, where possible, describe a lawful and ethical process through which qualified researchers may request access.

Authors must not provide restricted data to editors, reviewers, or third parties if such disclosure would breach legal, ethical, contractual, or confidentiality obligations.

Back to Contents ↑

11. Data Licensing and Reuse

Authors who deposit data in a repository are encouraged to select an appropriate licence or terms of reuse that clearly describe how the data may be accessed, cited, reused, adapted, or redistributed.

The licence applied to a published CJSS article does not automatically determine the licence governing an associated dataset. Authors must ensure that they have the legal authority to apply the selected data licence.

Where data are subject to third-party ownership, database rights, community governance requirements, or other restrictions, authors must accurately identify the applicable terms and must not assign a licence inconsistent with those rights.

Reusers of research data are expected to provide appropriate attribution, cite the original dataset, comply with repository terms, and respect all applicable ethical and legal restrictions.

Back to Contents ↑

12. Editorial and Peer Review Assessment

The editorial team and peer reviewers may assess the adequacy of the Data Availability Statement and the transparency of the methods, data sources, analytical procedures, and supporting materials during editorial screening and peer review.

Authors may be requested to:

Clarify where and how data can be accessed;

Correct an inaccurate or incomplete Data Availability Statement;

Provide repository identifiers or stable links;

Explain restrictions on data access;

Provide additional methodological information;

Supply relevant supporting documentation;

Provide analysis code or other research materials;

Clarify the provenance or ownership of data; or

Provide confidential access to underlying materials where this is legally and ethically permissible.

Requests for data or supporting materials do not override ethical, legal, privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, contractual, or informed-consent restrictions.

Failure to provide adequate information may result in a request for revision. Where the reliability, provenance, or verifiability of the research cannot be adequately assessed, the matter may affect the editorial decision.

Data sharing status alone will not determine whether a manuscript is accepted. Editorial decisions will consider the nature of the research, the legitimacy of any restrictions, methodological transparency, ethical compliance, and the overall scholarly quality of the submission.

Back to Contents ↑

13. Confidential Access for Editorial Assessment

Where data cannot be made public but access is necessary to assess the reliability or integrity of a manuscript, the journal may ask whether the authors can provide restricted or confidential access to an editor, designated reviewer, or qualified adviser.

Any such arrangement must:

Be legally and ethically permitted;

Comply with informed-consent and confidentiality requirements;

Be limited to the minimum information necessary;

Protect participant and third-party rights;

Use an appropriate secure method of access; and

Be subject to any confidentiality agreement or access conditions required by the data provider.

CJSS will not require authors to transfer sensitive or restricted data through insecure communication channels.

Back to Contents ↑

14. Post-Publication Transparency

The Data Availability Statement will normally be included in the published article. Repository links and persistent identifiers should remain active and should identify the data version supporting the publication.

Authors should inform CJSS if:

The location of deposited data changes;

A repository link or identifier becomes inactive;

The accessibility conditions governing the data change;

A material error is identified in a deposited dataset;

A dataset is corrected, replaced, or withdrawn; or

A published Data Availability Statement is found to be inaccurate or incomplete.

If concerns arise after publication regarding data integrity, availability, fabrication, falsification, manipulation, analytical reproducibility, or the accuracy of the Data Availability Statement, CJSS may:

Request clarification from the authors;

Request access to relevant supporting materials;

Consult reviewers, experts, institutions, or data providers;

Publish a correction or clarification;

Publish an expression of concern;

Retract the article where necessary; or

Take another appropriate action under the journal’s Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement.

Any editorial action will be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the concern and will follow the journal’s established publication ethics procedures.

Back to Contents ↑

Peer Review and Editorial Process

The Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) operates a rigorous, fair, and transparent double-anonymized peer review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scholarly value of all published articles. Manuscript submission, peer review, editorial decisions, and author communication are managed through the journal's online editorial system.

Peer Review

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine their suitability for the journal's aims, scope, and basic submission requirements.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent for double-anonymized peer review by at least two independent experts in the relevant field.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

originality;

scientific quality and methodological soundness;

significance and contribution to the field;

relevance to the journal's scope;

clarity of presentation;

quality of writing and organization.

The journal may conduct one or more rounds of peer review when necessary.

Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions are based on reviewer reports, editorial assessment, and the journal's publication standards.

Possible editorial decisions include:

Accept

Minor Revisions

Major Revisions

Reject with Invitation to Resubmit

Reject

Submission of a revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance for publication.

The final publication decision rests with the Handling Editor or Editor-in-Chief, as appropriate.

Appeals

Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, explaining the reasons for the appeal and providing supporting evidence.

The Editor-in-Chief may consult the Handling Editor, additional reviewers, or members of the Editorial Board before reaching a final decision. Decisions on appeals are final.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest during the submission process. Conflict of interest declarations form part of the published article where applicable.

Editors and reviewers must also disclose any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Publication Ethics

The journal considers manuscripts for publication only if they:

are original works;

have not been published previously;

are not under consideration by another journal;

comply with applicable copyright laws;

do not contain plagiarism or other forms of research misconduct.

The same research findings must not be published in more than one primary publication without appropriate justification and full disclosure.

Editorial Independence

To preserve editorial independence and public confidence:

Editors-in-Chief, Managing Editors, Handling Editors, and Editorial Board members may submit manuscripts to the journal, but they must not participate in any stage of the editorial assessment or decision-making process for their own submissions.

Such manuscripts are handled independently by another qualified editor with no conflict of interest and undergo the same peer review process as all other submissions.

The journal limits the proportion of articles authored or co-authored by members of the editorial team to prevent editorial endogeneity and ensure transparency, impartiality, and trust in the editorial process.

Back to Contents ↑

15. Author Responsibilities

Authors must certify that the submitted manuscript is their original work.

Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published and is not under consideration by another journal.

Authors are required to agree that, upon acceptance, their article will be published as Open Access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License.

Authors must prepare manuscripts in clear, grammatically correct English and in accordance with the journal's Author Guidelines.

All listed authors must have made substantial scholarly contributions to the research and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Authors must participate fully and cooperatively in the peer review process and submit revised manuscripts within the deadlines specified by the journal. Manuscripts not revised within 90 days after a revision decision may be rejected and must be submitted as new manuscripts if resubmission is desired.

Authors must disclose any use of artificial intelligence (AI) or AI-assisted technologies during manuscript preparation at the time of submission.

Authors must disclose all actual or potential conflicts of interest. The corresponding author is responsible for submitting this declaration on behalf of all co-authors.

Authors must acknowledge all sources of funding and any other financial or non-financial support, including editorial or language assistance, in the manuscript.

Authors must properly identify and cite all sources, datasets, and third-party materials used in the preparation of the manuscript.

Authors must obtain all required ethical approvals and informed consent where applicable and protect confidential, personal, sensitive, culturally restricted, or legally protected information.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the Data Availability Statement is accurate, complete, and consistent with the actual accessibility of the research data.

Authors must ensure they have the legal right to deposit, publish, license, or share research data and supporting materials, use appropriate repositories where possible, provide sufficient metadata, identify any restrictions on data access, and preserve research data in accordance with institutional or disciplinary requirements.

Authors must respond to reasonable editorial requests regarding research data, methods, and reproducibility.

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, selectively omit, or otherwise misrepresent research data or results.

Authors are obliged to promptly notify the Editors of any significant errors discovered in their published work and cooperate in issuing corrections, corrigenda, or retractions where necessary.

Back to Contents ↑

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the scholarly quality, integrity, and credibility of the Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS). The journal operates a double-anonymized peer review process, and reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts fairly, objectively, confidentially, and within the agreed timeframe.

Back to Contents ↑

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

Accept review invitations only when they have the appropriate subject expertise and can complete the review within the requested deadline.

Promptly notify the Editors if they are unable to complete the review or if they identify any potential conflict of interest.

Treat all manuscripts and associated editorial correspondence as strictly confidential documents and not disclose or discuss them with others without prior permission from the Editors.

Evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and solely on their scholarly merit, regardless of the authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, religion, political beliefs, or other personal characteristics.

Provide constructive, respectful, and evidence-based comments that help authors improve their work.

Begin the review with a brief summary of the manuscript to demonstrate understanding of its objectives and scope.

Assess whether the manuscript:

presents original and significant research;

fits the aims and scope of the journal;

has a clear research question, methodology, analysis, and conclusions;

is logically organized and scientifically sound;

adequately engages with relevant literature;

contains accurate, appropriate, and sufficient references;

presents results that support the conclusions drawn.

Comment on the clarity of presentation and indicate when substantial language editing is recommended, while recognizing that reviewers are not expected to perform copyediting or linguistic editing.

Identify important published work that has not been cited where appropriate.

Alert the Editors to any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, image manipulation, ethical concerns, or substantial similarity between the submitted manuscript and other published or unpublished work known to the reviewer.

Make recommendations independently and avoid allowing personal opinions or competitive interests to influence their assessment.

Participate in subsequent rounds of peer review when requested by the Editors.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must decline invitations to review manuscripts if they have any conflict of interest arising from:

collaborative or competitive relationships;

personal relationships;

financial interests;

institutional affiliations; or

any other circumstances that could compromise impartiality.

Any potential conflict should be disclosed to the Editors immediately.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review are confidential.

Reviewers must not:

share manuscripts with others without editorial permission;

use unpublished information for personal research or advantage;

disclose the content or outcome of the review process.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

To protect the confidentiality of unpublished research, reviewers must not:

upload manuscripts or any part of them to generative AI or large language model tools;

upload confidential editorial correspondence, reviewer reports, or editorial decision letters to AI systems;

use generative AI tools to produce or substantially draft peer review reports.

If reviewers suspect undisclosed or inappropriate use of AI by authors, they should report their concerns confidentially to the Editors.

Editorial Decisions

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. Final decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection are made by the Editors.

Where reviews differ substantially or conflicting recommendations are received, the Editors may:

seek an additional independent review;

consult members of the Editorial Board; or

make a decision based on their editorial judgment.

Back to Contents ↑

Editor Responsibilities

The Editors of the Caucasus Journal of Social Sciences (CJSS) are responsible for maintaining the scientific quality, editorial independence, integrity, and ethical standards of the journal. Editorial decisions are based solely on the scholarly merit of submitted manuscripts and are made independently of commercial or personal interests.

Editorial Responsibilities

Editors are expected to:

Evaluate manuscripts fairly, objectively, and solely on the basis of their originality, scientific quality, methodological rigor, clarity, significance, and relevance to the aims and scope of the journal.

Make editorial decisions free from discrimination based on authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, ethnicity, gender, religion, political beliefs, or other personal characteristics.

Ensure that every manuscript undergoes an appropriate, fair, and unbiased double-anonymized peer review process.

Select reviewers with appropriate expertise while avoiding conflicts of interest.

Base publication decisions on reviewer reports, editorial judgment, and the journal's editorial policies.

Focus on the scholarly quality and overall presentation of manuscripts rather than providing detailed copyediting or language editing. Minor typographical or stylistic corrections may be made during the editorial process when appropriate.

Ensure that published articles comply with internationally accepted standards of research ethics and publication integrity.

Safeguard the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record by issuing corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary.

Protect the confidentiality of manuscripts, peer review reports, and editorial communications throughout the editorial process.

Preserve reviewer anonymity unless reviewers explicitly choose to reveal their identities.

Consider all allegations of research misconduct, plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, or unethical research practices in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement and relevant COPE guidance.

Take appropriate action when evidence of misconduct exists while ensuring that authors are treated fairly and given an opportunity to respond.

Promote transparency, consistency, and fairness throughout the editorial process.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors must avoid situations that could compromise their impartiality.

Editors must:

disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest;

recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict exists;

ensure that manuscripts submitted by members of the Editorial Board or editorial staff are handled independently by another qualified editor with no conflict of interest.

Editors-in-Chief, Managing Editors, and Handling Editors must not oversee the editorial process or make publication decisions for manuscripts on which they are authors or co-authors.

To maintain editorial independence and public confidence, the journal limits the publication of articles authored or co-authored by members of the editorial team and applies additional safeguards to ensure an independent peer review and editorial decision-making process.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

To protect the confidentiality and integrity of the editorial process, Editors must not:

upload unpublished manuscripts or any part of them to generative AI or large language model tools;

upload confidential editorial correspondence, reviewer reports, or editorial decision letters to AI systems;

use generative AI tools to make editorial evaluations or publication decisions.

Editors remain fully responsible for all editorial judgments and decisions.

Where there is evidence or reasonable suspicion of inappropriate AI use by authors, Editors should investigate the matter in accordance with the journal's ethical policies and, where appropriate, take corrective action.

Back to Contents ↑

16. Examples of Data Availability Statements

Data available in a public repository

The data supporting the findings of this study are available in [repository name] at [DOI, persistent URL, or accession number].

Data and code available in a repository

The dataset and analytical code supporting this study are available in [repository name] at [DOI or persistent URL].

Data included in the article or supplementary materials

The data supporting the findings of this study are included in the article and its supplementary materials.

Data available upon reasonable request

The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Restricted data available under specified conditions

The data supporting the findings of this study are not publicly available because they contain confidential or sensitive information. Access may be granted to qualified researchers upon reasonable request and subject to ethical approval, a data-use agreement, and the applicable confidentiality requirements.

Data restricted because of participant privacy

The data are not publicly available because public disclosure could compromise participant privacy and confidentiality. Requests for access may be considered by [responsible institution or data controller] subject to applicable ethical and legal requirements.

Third-party data

The data used in this study were obtained from [name of third-party source]. Restrictions apply to their availability. The data may be requested directly from the original provider in accordance with its terms and conditions.

Publicly available secondary data

This study analysed publicly available data obtained from [database, archive, or institution] at [DOI or persistent URL].

No new data created or analysed

No new data were created or analysed in this study. Data sharing is therefore not applicable.

Data cannot be shared

The data supporting the findings of this study cannot be shared because of [state the ethical, legal, contractual, confidentiality, copyright, or other restriction].

Qualitative data not publicly available

The qualitative data supporting this study are not publicly available because the interview transcripts contain information that could compromise participant confidentiality. Anonymized extracts relevant to the findings are included in the article.

Back to Contents ↑