Publication Ethics

This statement provides guidance on the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publishing of articles in this journal, including authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards:
   Authors must present an accurate report of the original research conducted and an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. The manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Misleading or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts must adhere to the journal’s submission guidelines.
2. Originality and Plagiarism:
   Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works. A manuscript should not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Previous work and publications, whether by other researchers or by the authors themselves, must be appropriately acknowledged and cited. Primary literature should be cited where possible. Direct quotations from other researchers’ publications must be placed in quotation marks and properly cited.
3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications:
   Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Authors are also expected not to publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications originating from a single research project should be identified as such, and the primary publication should be cited.
4. Acknowledgment of Sources:
   Authors must acknowledge all data sources used in the research and cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of others’ work must always be given.
5. Authorship of the Paper:
   Authorship should reflect individuals' contributions to the research and writing. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who contributed less substantially or only technically should be acknowledged in the acknowledgment section. Authors must ensure that all listed co-authors have seen and approved the submitted manuscript and agreed to their inclusion.
6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
   All authors must clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works:
   If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:
   Authors must clearly identify in the manuscript if their work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editors

1. Publication Decisions:
   Based on the review reports from the editorial board, editors may accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. Validation of the work and its importance to researchers and readers should guide such decisions. Editors may be guided by the journal’s editorial board policies and constrained by legal requirements such as libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making publication decisions. Editors are responsible for everything they publish and must have policies and procedures in place to ensure the quality and integrity of the published record.
2. Manuscript Review:
   Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated for originality. Editors should organize and use peer review judiciously and fairly. Editors must describe their peer review process in the information for authors and indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. Editors should select peer reviewers with appropriate expertise and avoid those with conflicts of interest.
3. Fair Play:
   Editors must ensure that each manuscript received is evaluated intellectually without regard to the authors’ gender, gender identity, race, religion, nationality, etc. A key part of making fair and unbiased decisions is upholding editorial independence and integrity. Editors hold a powerful position in deciding what gets published and must ensure fairness in the process.
4. Confidentiality:
   Editors must ensure that information regarding submitted manuscripts remains confidential. They must critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality, including appropriate consent for research and publication if applicable.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
   Editors must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own research without written consent from the author. Editors must not be involved in decisions about manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Confidentiality:
   Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. It must not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.
2. Acknowledgment of Sources:
   Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors. Any claim that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers must promptly notify the journal if they detect any irregularities, ethical concerns about the research, or substantial similarity with other manuscripts or published articles. However, reviewers must keep such concerns confidential and not investigate further unless requested by the journal.
3. Standards of Objectivity:
   Manuscript reviews must be conducted objectively, and reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal’s instructions regarding the specific feedback required and provide constructive criticism to help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should suggest additional investigations needed to support the manuscript’s claims and strengthen or expand the work.
4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
   Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions related to the submission. In cases of double-blind review, if reviewers suspect the author’s identity, they should inform the journal if this knowledge presents a potential conflict of interest.
5. Timeliness:
   Reviewers must respond within a reasonable time frame. Reviewers should only agree to review a manuscript if they are confident they can complete it within the proposed or agreed-upon deadline. If a reviewer cannot complete the review in time, they must inform the editor promptly so that the manuscript can be assigned to another reviewer.