Publication Ethics

  

 

Publication Ethics

 

 

 
 
  
  

  Ethics summary

Authors should observe high standards with respect to publication ethics as set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Falsification or fabrication of data, plagiarism, including duplicate publication of the authors' own work without proper citation, and misappropriation of the work are all unacceptable practices. Any cases of ethical misconduct are treated very seriously and will be dealt with in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

 
  

  Conflict-of-Interest Statement

 

At the point of submission, each author should reveal any financial interests or connections, direct or indirect, or other situations that might raise the question of bias in the work reported or the conclusions, implications, or opinions stated –  including pertinent commercial or other sources of funding for the individual author(s) or the associated department(s) or organization(s), personal relationships, or direct academic competition. When considering whether you should declare a conflicting interest or connection, please consider the conflict of interest test: Is there any arrangement that would embarrass you or any of your co-authors if it was to emerge after publication and you had not declared it?

If the manuscript is published, relevant Conflicts of Interest information will be communicated in a statement in the published paper.

 

 

  Authorship

 

All authors listed in the manuscript should have contributed significantly to the experimental design, its implementation, or analysis and interpretation of the data. All authors should have been involved in the writing of the manuscript at the draft and any revision stages, and have read and approved the final version. Anyone who made major contributions to the writing of the manuscript should be listed as an author (e.g. "ghostwriting" is prohibited by the Journal). Any other individuals who made less substantive contributions to the experiment or the writing of the manuscript should be listed in the acknowledgment section. Any change in authorship (including author order) after the initial manuscript submission must be approved in writing by all authors.

  

   Regulation for Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 

  Section A: Publication and authorship 

    1. All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper. Deputy Editors and Editor-in-Chief are selecting reviewers.

    2. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, originality, readability, statistical validity and language.

    3. The possible decisions include acceptance, minor revisions, major revision or rejection.

    4. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.

    5. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.

    6. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

    7. No research can be included in more than one publication, whether within the same journal or in another journal.

 

   Section B: Authors' responsibilities 

    1. Authors must certify that their manuscript is their original work.

    2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere, or even submitted and been in reviewed in another journal.

    3. Authors must participate in the peer review process and follow the comments.

    4. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

    5. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research. Level of their contribution also must be defined in the “Authors’ Contributions” section of the article.

    6. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.

    7. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.

    8. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.

    9. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

    10. Authors must state that informed consent was obtained from all human adult participants and from the parents or legal guardians of minors. Include the name of the appropriate institutional review board that approved the project.

    11. Authors are recommended to conform to the Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines for reporting animal studies.              
    12. The authors should follow WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and clearly state this in their manuscripts.

  

   Section C: Peer review/responsibility for the reviewers 

    1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.

    2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author. No self-knowledge of the author(s) must affect their comments and decision.

    3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in 500 to 1000 words.

    4. Reviewers may identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

    5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor-in-Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

    6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

  

   Section D: Editorial responsibilities 

    1. Editors (Deputy Editors or Editor-in-Chief) have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.

    2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.

    3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.

    4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.

    5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.

    6. Editors should have a clear picture of a research's funding sources.

    7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication's scope.

    8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.

    9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers

    10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to international accepted ethical guidelines.

    11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.

    12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.

    13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.

    14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.

    15. Editors must not change their decision after submitting a decision (especially after reject or accept) unless they have a serious reason.

   Section E: Publishing Ethics Issues

    1. All editorial members, reviewers and authors must confirm and obey rules defined by ICMJE.

    2. Corresponding author is the main owner of the article so she/he can withdraw the article when it is incomplete (before entering the review process or when a revision is asked for).
    3. Authors cannot make major changes in the article after acceptance without a serious reason.
    4. All editorial members and authors must will to publish any kind of corrections honestly and completely.