Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

The Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement supports the combined efforts by authors, members of the editorial board and the scientific committee, and reviewers to produce a responsible scientific publication. This statement is based on ethical principles that generally follow the lines established by the Committe on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. AUTHOR(S)' RESPONSIBILITIES

1. As authors of a manuscript submitted for publication, you are responsible for ensuring the highest standards of academic integrity, ethical conduct, and adherence to the publication’s international standards for authors developed by COPE during the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity in Singapore in 2010. These are:

   1. Originality and Integrity of Research

   • Original Research: Manuscripts must present original, unpublished research. The data and findings should be based on rigorous methods, and the results must be discussed objectively. Authors are responsible for ensuring that no part of the manuscript has been published elsewhere or is under consideration for publication in any other journal.
   • Data Integrity: Authors must ensure that the data and results reported are truthful, accurate, and have not been fabricated, falsified, or manipulated. Any changes or updates to the data after submission must be properly documented and explained.

   2. Avoiding Scientific Misconduct

   • Plagiarism and Redundant Publication: Plagiarism, in any form, is strictly prohibited. Authors must ensure that the work is free from plagiarism, including self-plagiarism or redundant publication. All sources, ideas, and data that are not original should be appropriately cited.
   • Fabrication or Falsification: Authors must refrain from fabricating or falsifying data, findings, or methods. Misleading data, whether intentional or unintentional, constitutes scientific misconduct and will result in immediate rejection and potential retraction of the manuscript.

   3. Clear and Honest Presentation of Results

   • Transparent Reporting: Authors are responsible for presenting their results clearly, honestly, and comprehensively. They must describe their research methods and results in a way that allows others to replicate or validate the findings.
   • Objective Discussion: Authors must provide an unbiased and objective discussion of their findings, including acknowledging any limitations or uncertainties in the research. Claims must be substantiated by data and evidence.

   4. Authorship Attribution and Acknowledgment

   • Significant Contribution: Authorship should be based on significant intellectual contributions to the conception, design, execution, and interpretation of the research. All authors must have contributed substantially to the work and be listed in the manuscript based on their respective contributions.
   • Authorship Order: The order of authors should reflect the relative contributions of each author, as agreed upon by all authors. In cases of equal contribution, the order should reflect this, and this should be stated clearly in the manuscript.
   • Acknowledgment: Individuals who do not meet the criteria for authorship but who have contributed to the research should be acknowledged in the manuscript. This includes technical support, provision of materials, or other forms of assistance.

   5. Conflicts of Interest

   • Disclosure of Conflicts: Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial relationships that could influence the research, its interpretation, or the decision to publish. This includes, but is not limited to, personal, academic, or financial relationships with organizations or individuals that might be seen to affect the manuscript.
   • Relationships with Editors: If authors have any direct or indirect conflict of interest with editors, editorial board members, or reviewers, this must be declared upon submission. Transparency regarding such relationships ensures the impartiality of the review and editorial process.

   6. Ethical Conduct and Compliance

   • Adherence to Ethical Standards: Authors must conduct their research in accordance with the ethical guidelines and relevant laws, ensuring that the rights and welfare of participants are respected, and any ethical approval required (e.g., from ethics committees, IRBs) is obtained.
   • Human and Animal Rights: If the research involves human or animal subjects, authors must ensure that the study has been conducted in full compliance with ethical standards concerning the use of human participants and animals. Informed consent must be obtained from participants, and any animal research must meet the ethical guidelines for animal welfare.

   7. Corrections, Retractions, and Amendments

   • Error Reporting: If authors discover a serious error or inaccuracy in their published work, they are obligated to notify the journal promptly to correct, retract, or publish a clarification. Authors must cooperate with the journal in the process of investigation and resolution.
   • Retractions: In cases of significant misconduct or errors that cannot be corrected, authors must work with the journal to issue a retraction or withdrawal of the paper, ensuring that the scientific record remains accurate and trustworthy.

   8. Participation in Peer Review Process

   • Peer Review Contribution: Authors are expected to actively engage in the peer review process by responding to reviewers’ comments in a timely and constructive manner. This includes providing requested revisions, additional data, or clarifications as needed to enhance the quality and integrity of the manuscript.
   • Compliance with Publication Standards: Authors must follow the journal’s publication policies and guidelines, including proper formatting, submission deadlines, and adherence to the specific requirements of the publication.

   9. Correct Attribution of Sources

   • Accurate Citations: Authors must ensure that all sources of information, including prior research, data, and other resources, are properly cited. This includes citing any previously published work that has directly influenced or supported the manuscript.
   • Permissions: Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to use copyrighted material (e.g., images, data, and text) that they do not own. This ensures that intellectual property rights are respected.

   10. Commitment to High-Quality Science

   • Scientific Excellence: Authors must strive to contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their field. Research should address relevant questions, employ sound methods, and be designed to produce meaningful and reproducible results.
   • Multidisciplinary Approach: Authors are encouraged to adopt a multidisciplinary approach, drawing from diverse perspectives and methodologies, to enhance the breadth and impact of their research.

2.EDITORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES

The Editorial Board will be impartial when handling submitted manuscripts proposed for publication and must respect the intellectual independence of the authors, who must be given the right of reply if they receive a negative review.

• Members of the Editorial Board are obliged to maintain confidentiality about the submitted manuscripts and its contents until they have been accepted for publication. Only then, their title and authorship may be communicated.
• Furthermore, no member of the Editorial Board may use data, lines of reasoning or interpretations in unpublished works for their own research, except with the author’s own written consent.

2.1. PUBLICATION DECISION

All contributions will be initially assessed by the journal’s Editorial Board. The Editorial Board is solely and independently responsible for selecting, processing, and deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal meet the editorial goals and could thus be published. Each paper considered suitable is sent to two independent peer reviewers who are experts in their field and able to assess the specific qualities of the work.

• The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding whether or not the paper is accepted or rejected.. The decision to publish a paper will always be measured in accordance to its importance to researchers, practitioners, and potential readers. Editors should make unbiased decisions independent from commercial considerations.
• Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts should withdraw from editorial decisions if they have conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential problems concerning articles under consideration. The responsibility of the final decision regarding publication will be attributed to an editor who does not have any conflicts of interest.

2.2. PEER REVIEW

• Each article submitted is the responsibility of one member of the Editorial Board or of the international scientific committee, who undertakes to have it evaluated by two peers who are experts in the field and who evaluate it anonymously.
• Reviewed articles are treated confidentially by editorial board members, members of the international scientific committee, and reviewers.
• The Editorial Board will assess and acknowledge the input of all those involved in the review of the manuscript submitted to the journal. It will also encourage academic authorities to acknowledge peer review activities as part of the scientific process, and should decline reviewers whose submit reports that are of poor quality, improper, disrespectful or that are delivered after the agreed deadline.

2.3. IDENTIFYING AND PREVENTING MISCONDUCT

In no case shall a journal and members of the Editorial Board and international scientific committee encourage misconduct of any kind or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

• Members of the Editorial Board and international scientific committee shall try to prevent misconduct by informing authors and reviewers about the ethical conduct required of them.
• Members of the Editorial Board, scientific committee, and reviewers are asked to be aware of all types of misconduct in order to identify papers where research misconduct of any kind has or seems to have occurred and deal with the allegations accordingly.
• In case of misconduct, the journal editor is responsible for resolving the issue. He or she can work in conjunction with the other co-editor, members of the Editorial Board and scientific committee, peer reviewers, and experts in the field.
• The issue will be documented accordingly. All factual questions should be documented: who, what, when, where, why. All relevant documents should be kept, in particular the article(s) concerned.
• The journal editor shall contact the author or publication involved, either the author submitting or another publication or author. The author is thus given the opportunity to respond to or comment on the complaint, allegation, or dispute.
• In the event that misconduct has or seems to have occurred, or in the case of needed corrections, the Editorial Board deals with the different cases by following the appropriate COPE recommendations.
• Great care will be taken to distinguish cases of honest human error from deliberate intent to cheat.

The editorial board will consider retracting a publication in case of misconduct, issuing an expression of concern in case of inconclusive proof of misconduct; or issuing a request for the correction of a misleading segment.

3.REVIEWERS’ RESPONSIBILITIES

All reviewers must know and keep in mind the Editorial policy and Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement. The journal requires potential reviewers to have scientific expertise or significant work experience in a relevant field. They must have recently conducted research and/or work and have recognized expertise by their peers. Potential reviewers should provide personal and professional information that is accurate and that gives a fair representation of their expertise.

• All reviewers must likewise withdraw if they know they are unqualified to evaluate a manuscript, if they feel their evaluation of the material will not be objective, or if they understand themselves to be in a conflict of interest.
• Reviewed articles are treated confidentially by reviewers and members of the Editorial Board and international scientific committee.
• Reviewers should point out relevant published work which has not yet been cited in the reviewed material. If necessary, the editor may issue a correction request to this effect.
• Reviewers are asked to identify papers where research misconduct has or seems to have occurred and inform the Editorial Board, which will deal with each case accordingly.

3.1.CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Members of the Editorial Board and reviewers shall withdraw in any case of conflict of interest with an author or authors, or with the content of a manuscript to be evaluated.

The journal shall avoid all conflict of interest between authors, reviewers, and members of the Editorial Board and scientific committee.

The editors and reviewers should withdraw from making decisions if:

• There is a direct-reporting relationship between an author and a reviewer.
• There is recent, significant professional collaboration between reviewers and authors.
• An editor or reviewer is a collaborator on the project that is being submitted.
• The editor or reviewer has a financial interest in a company or competing company with a financial interest in the submission.
• The editor or reviewer believes that he or she cannot be objective, whether due to personal reasons or  a financial interest .