Publication Ethics

1. Introduction

1.1 Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

1.1 Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences and its Publisher European University follow principles of the integrity of publications in scientific journals, according and taking into account the recommendations of all international communities that are at the forefront of scientific literature publishing.

The Journal, with the help of comprehensive, objective and honest review, tends to select for publication only those materials related to scientific research of the highest quality, establishing standards of ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication (authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and the scientific community of the Journal),

1.2. The Publisher of the Journal does not only support scientific communications and invests in this process, but is also responsible for compliance with all current recommendations in the published work.

1.3 The Publisher undertakes to supervise scientific materials.

1.3. All publications are licensed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1. Fair play

The Editor evaluates submitted manuscripts for their intellectual content (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the Journal’s scope without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation.

2.2. Confidentiality

Editors and the Editorial Board will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone except authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and the Publisher, as appropriate.

2.3. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

2.3.1. Editors and the Editorial Board members will not use unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript without the Author’s explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas from a submitted manuscript must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

2.3.2. Editors will recuse themselves from considering a manuscript in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript. In such cases, editors ask for help of co-editors, editorial assistants or cooperate with the editorial staff rather than review the manuscript in question by themselves and make publication decisions.

2.4. Publication decisions

The Editor-in-Chief is personally and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted should be accepted and published, working in cooperation with the Editorial Board. The validity of the manuscript in question and its scientific value must always be the basis for publication decisions. The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the Editorial Board and constrained by such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

The Editor-in-Chief may also confer with other editors and reviewers in making this decision.

2.5. Publication supervision

The Editor-in-Chief who has provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions in the paper to be published are wrong should inform the Publisher about making a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or another note, as may be relevant.

2.6. Involvement and cooperation in investigation

The Editor-in-Chief in conjunction with the Publisher is to respond appropriately to ethical concerns related to reviewing manuscripts or published papers. Among measures that can be taken are communication with the Author of the manuscript the reasoning of a corresponding complaint or claim, as well as contacting relevant organizations and research centers.

3. Duties of Reviewers

3.1. Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer-review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through corresponding communication with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer-review is an essential component in formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor. The Editorial Board of the Journal shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2. Promptness

Every invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors of to decline the invitation to review.

3.3. Confidentiality

Any manuscripts suggested for review are confidential documents and should be treated as such. They must not be shown to or discuss with others except as authorized by the Editor.

3.4. Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should form their observations clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the

3.5. Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has been not cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

3.6.1. Reviewers should not consider manuscript in which they have conflicts of interests resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript. They should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

3.6.2. Unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research. Information or ideas obtained through the review process must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1. Manuscript requirements

4.1.1. Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, followed by an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

4.1.2. Review and research papers should be accurate and objective, while an editorial opinion should be clearly identified as such.

4.3. Originality and plagiarism

4.3.1. Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works. If they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms: from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical publication behavior and is unacceptable.

4.4. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

4.4.1. Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.5. Acknowledgement of sources

Authors must acknowledge the work of others and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence or discussion with third party, must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

5. Adoptions and plagiarism

The Editorial Board considering the paper may run the manuscript through the Antiplagiat system. In case of identifying numerous borrowings, the Editorial Board will act in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines

6. Policy of submitting preprints and postprints

As a part of the submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submitted manuscript was not previously published. After a manuscript has been published in Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences, we suggest that the link to the article on Journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Prior to acceptance and publication, the authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

This section was prepared in accordance with materials of Elsevier, as well as materials of the Committee on Publication Ethics, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and Association of Science Editors and Publishers.

 

Policy on Conflicts of Interest

For Authors
Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences requires authors to declare all conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, independent of relevance to the particular manuscript. All authors must submit a conflicts of interest statement. If there is no conflict of interest to declare, include this section with the statement “The authors have no conflict of interest to report”. Conflicts of interest are herein defined as factors or relationships that could be seen to compromise (or impact) the impartiality of the authors of an article.

For Referees
Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences requests that referees with conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, declare them when submitting their report and recuse themselves when there is a conflict that may impact a fair and impartial review.

Examples
Financial conflicts of interest:
These can include any financial relationship between the authors and any organization that may have a financial interest in their research or financial interests on the part of the authors themselves. This can include, but is not limited to, employment, stocks or shares, patents, research funding, travel or other expenses, lecture fees, or goods or services. Authors should disclose any such relationships: past 2 years, present or anticipated along with any role these organizations may have had in the design, execution or presentation of the study. These can also include financial interests on the part of the authors themselves, such as stocks or shares, patents, or other forms of financial gain.

Non-financial conflicts of interest:
These can include any relationship between the authors and any person or organization that could reasonably be seen to compromise (or impact) the impartiality of the authors of an article. This can include, but is not limited to benefits to relatives, close friends or associates, or organizations that the author has an unpaid relationship with (such as consulting or advisory roles, or providing administrative assistance).

Peer Review Process and Process for Appeals
Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences operates a rigorous, timely, blinded peer review process (with an option for double-blinded) by experts in the field. Manuscripts submitted to Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences will be assessed for suitability for publication in the journal by the Editors-in-Chief. Manuscripts that are deemed unsuitable may be rejected without peer review by the Editors-in-Chief and/or the Associate Editors and the author will be informed as soon as possible. Manuscripts that are deemed suitable for peer review are forwarded to an Associate Editor with expertise in that area who then recruits appropriate referees (a minimum of two, and usually three or more) for confidential review (identity of referees not revealed to authors). Referee reports are then assessed by the Associate Editor, who makes a decision which is then subject to approval of the Editors-in-Chief. Once approved this decision is then conveyed to the author along with the referee’s reports, but not revealing the identity of the referees.

The initial decision will be one of the following: rejection, acceptance without revision, or potentially acceptable after minor or major revisions. Revised manuscripts will then be appraised by the Associate Editor, who may seek the opinion of referees (prior or new) before making a decision, which again is subject to approval of the Editors-in-Chief. Once approved this decision is then conveyed to the author along with the referee’s reports. Once accepted manuscripts are normally published online without delay as pre-press (Epub Ahead Of Print, with the date of publication indicated) and appear in the next available print issue.

The Editors-in-Chief has ultimate responsibility for what is published in the journal. Authors may appeal decisions by contacting the Editors-in-Chief. Authors will be informed the result of their appeal.

Policy on Ethics

Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences is committed to the highest ethical standards and best practices in publishing and follows the code of conduct for Committee on Publication. Any possible conflict of interest, financial or otherwise, related to the submitted work must be clearly indicated in the manuscript.

Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences affirms that misconduct, in the form of fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism, jeopardizes the success of the entire scientific endeavor. However, the primary responsibility for considering and resolving allegations of scientific misconduct must be pursued within the individual academic communities and institutions where the scientific work is carried out. Every author of articles or abstracts submitted for publication assumes full responsibility, within the limits of his or her professional competence, for the accuracy of the report. In the case of multiple-authored papers, each author should have made a significant intellectual or practical contribution to the scientific work. Authors submit articles with the understanding that reports must not have been submitted elsewhere.

Questions raised about the conduct of experiments or their presentation will be evaluated preliminarily by the Editors-in-Chief and, if appropriate, in consultation with the Associate Editor handling the review of the manuscript. If deemed appropriate, the matter will be referred to the institution where the scientific work in question was performed. The Journal expects that the matter would be reviewed in accordance with institutional procedures for handling allegations of misconduct. At all stages, every effort should be made to ensure that the process is fair and just, both for those who are accused of misconduct and for those who have raised the issue of scientific misconduct.

In the event that a published article or abstract is to be retracted, a statement of retraction will be published in the Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences.

Policy on Use of Animals

Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences supports the appropriate and responsible use of animals as experimental subjects. The U.S. Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (PHS Policy) and the National Institutes of Health Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (NIH Guide) should guide all animal research. Compliance with these guidelines as well as protocol approval by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee must be stated in the cover letter and specified in the Methods section of the article. We recommend following the ARRIVE reporting guidelines when documenting animal studies (PLoS Bio 8(6), e1000412, 2010). https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412

Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW) PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 2015 (revised March 2015). (http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/olaw.htm)

Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG (2010) Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research, PLoS Biol 8(6): https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1000412

Policy on Use of Human Subjects and Informed Consent

Studies involving human subjects must conform with the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects (United States Office of Science and Technology Policy) and in the Declaration of Helsinki and be approved by a local Institutional Review Board. Compliance with the former and approval by the latter must be stated in the cover letter as well as informed written consent from all human subjects involved in the study, and indicated in the Materials and methods section of the article.

Should the study be exempt from ethics approval, authors need to clearly state the reasons in the declaration statement and in the manuscript. In order to protect subject anonymity, identifying information should not be included in the manuscript unless such information is absolutely necessary for scientific purposes AND explicit approval has been granted by the subjects.

Declaration of Helsinki. (Adopted in 1964 by the 18th World Medical Assembly in Helsinki, Finland, and revised by the 29th World Medical Assembly in Tokyo in 1975.) In: The Main Issue in Bioethics Revised Edition. Andrew C. Varga, ed. New York: Paulist Press, 1984.

Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects; Notices and Rules. Federal Register. Vol. 56. No. 117 (June 18, 1991), pp 28002-28007.

Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) Human Subject Protections (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/)