Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

Duties of the Publisher

Recognizing and appreciating the invaluable efforts of editors and reviewers, the publisher extends its gratitude for their dedicated contributions in enhancing the quality of manuscripts and upholding the integrity of scholarly articles. With a steadfast commitment to ethical publishing practices, the publisher has implemented a comprehensive publication ethics and malpractice statement, closely aligned with the esteemed ethical standards set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) [1-3].

Duties of Editors

• The editor holds sole responsibility for determining the suitability of submitted articles for publication in the journal. In some cases, the editor may consult with other editors, such as associate editors and members of the editorial board, as well as reviewers, when making these decisions.
• Editorial decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication are based on several factors, including the paper's alignment with the journal's scope, its originality, quality, and relevance.
• The editor is committed to ensuring that the peer review process is conducted impartially, without bias, and within a reasonable timeframe. To maintain the integrity of the process, the editor adheres to best practices in selecting peer reviewers, avoiding potential conflicts of interest, and preventing fraudulent reviewer selection.
• Each article undergoes a thorough review by a minimum of two external and independent experts with expertise in the relevant field. Submissions from editors or editorial board members are subject to unbiased peer review, with the editor refraining from involvement in decisions regarding their own work. Any such submission is handled independently.
• Cases of suspected misconduct, disputes over authorship, or concerns about a reviewer's conduct are addressed following the guidance provided in the COPE flowchart (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts).
• The editor ensures that reviewers' comments are shared with authors in their entirety, except in cases where offensive or libelous remarks are present.
• The editor evaluates manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, without consideration of factors such as race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• Together with the publisher, the editor establishes a transparent mechanism for authors to appeal editorial decisions.
• Confidentiality is rigorously maintained, with the editor safeguarding all submitted materials and communications with reviewers.
• The editor promptly discloses any potential editorial conflicts of interest to the publisher in writing.

Duties of Reviewers

• Peer review plays a crucial role in assisting the editor in making informed editorial decisions.
• Reviewers who have been selected and find themselves inadequately qualified to assess the manuscript or unable to conduct a timely review should decline participation in the review process.
• All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents, and reviewers are obliged to treat them as such. Reviewers must not disclose the review or any information about the paper to unauthorized individuals, nor should they directly contact the authors without prior consent from the editor.
• Involvement of additional individuals in the review process requires prior permission from the journal, as outlined in https://cope.onl/case-reviewer.
• Reviewers must maintain impartiality throughout the review process, regardless of the authors' nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender, or any other personal characteristics, as well as the origins of the manuscript or any commercial considerations.
• Reviewers are prohibited from using unpublished materials obtained from a submitted manuscript in their own research without obtaining express written consent from the author. Additionally, any privileged information or ideas acquired through peer review must be kept confidential and not exploited for personal gain.
• Reviewers have a responsibility to bring potential ethical concerns in the paper to the editor's attention, including substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and other published works of which the reviewer has knowledge.
• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited in the manuscript.
• Reviewers should seek guidance from the Editor before agreeing to review a paper when they have potential conflicts of interest.
• Any suggestions made by a reviewer for an author to cite the reviewer's work should be grounded in genuine scientific merit and not driven by a desire to increase the reviewer's citation count or enhance the visibility of their own work.
• Whenever possible, reviewers are encouraged to accommodate requests from the journal to review revisions.

Duties of Authors

• Authors are expected to present original research that highlights the significance of their work.
• Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and that their papers provide sufficient detail to allow others to replicate their research. When utilizing the work of others, proper citation and quoting practices should be followed, and permissions should be obtained where necessary. Adequate acknowledgment of the contributions of others must always be provided through relevant and genuine references.
• Unethical behavior, such as making fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements, is unacceptable.
• Plagiarism is considered unethical and is not tolerated. To assess originality, submitted articles will be screened using the text-similarity detection service Turnitin.
• Authors should refrain from submitting manuscripts describing essentially the same research to multiple primary journals concurrently, as this is unethical and unacceptable practice. Publishing a paper that has been previously published should generally only occur in the form of an abstract, with the primary reference cited in the secondary publication.
• Authorship should be reserved for individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All substantial contributors should be listed as co-authors, and their specific contributions should be described.
• The corresponding author bears the responsibility of ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that each co-author has reviewed and approved the final version of the paper, as well as agreed to its submission for publication.
• Authors collectively take responsibility for the work, and each author is individually accountable for addressing any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work.
• Any sources of financial support for the research and article preparation must be disclosed.
• Authors have the right to request the withdrawal of their name from a paper if it has been included against their wishes.

Conflicts of Interests

• Authors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may arise from their research or publication.
• Conflicts of interest may include financial interests, such as funding or employment, or non-financial interests, such as personal relationships or affiliations.
• Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest in a separate section of the manuscript, titled "Conflicts of Interest."
• If a conflict of interest is discovered after publication, the journal may issue a correction or retraction.

Post-Publication Corrections

• If an error is discovered in a published article, the authors should notify the journal as soon as possible.
• The journal will publish a correction or erratum to correct the error.
• If the error is significant enough to affect the conclusions of the article, the journal may consider retracting the article.

Retractions

• If an article is found to contain serious errors or misconduct, the journal may retract the article.
• Retractions will be accompanied by an explanation of the reason for the retraction.
• The journal will notify the authors and any relevant institutions of the retraction.
• The retracted article will remain available online, but will be clearly marked as retracted.

References