Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice

The publication ethics are binding to all parties mentioned below. The Editorial Board does not tolerate plagiarism or other unethical behaviour. No manuscript that does not meet the standards will be accepted for publication.

1. Publication and authorship

No plagiarism and no fraudulent data will be tolerated by the Journal.
The articles must conform to the rules of reports of scientific work. They must include a list of references used and acknowledgement of any financial support.
Only original articles will be published. If any part of the article has been published elsewhere, it must be fully acknowledged.
See below for more detail.

2. Authors' responsibilities

Authors must ensure that they have written an entirely original manuscript. All co-authors of the manuscript must significantly contribute to the reported research.
If authors use previously published materials, they must cite them appropriately. They must present all sources used while working on their manuscripts (list of references, financial support acknowledgement). Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, the authors must acknowledge and cite those sources. They must obtain permission to reproduce any content from other sources.
Authors must ensure that the manuscript has not been published elsewhere or is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere.
Authors must maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. They must confirm that all data in the manuscript are real and authentic.
Authors must notify immediately the journal editor if a significant error in their publication is identified and cooperate with the editor to publish an erratum or addendum or to retract the paper if necessary.
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process if they are asked by the journal editor and if the reviewed manuscript is in their area of expertise.
Using generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process should only be used to improve readability and language of the work. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control and authors should carefully review and edit the result.
Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies. Declaring the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors and contributors. Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as a co-author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans.
The authors are responsible for ensuring that the work is original, that the named authors meet the conditions of authorship and that the work does not infringe the rights of third parties.
Authors must notify the Editorial Board if they are aware of any conflicts of interest (see part 5 for more detail).

3. Peer review / responsibility for the reviewers

Reviewers shall contribute to the decision-making process and assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner.
Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author and must not retain or copy the manuscript.
Reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited and alert the editor to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.
Reviewers should be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for the manuscript.

4. Editorial responsibilities

Editors should strive to ensure that peer review is fair, unbiased and timely.
Editors must act in a balanced, objective and fair way, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
They must not have any conflict of interest with respect to articles they are responsible for (see part 5 for more detail).
Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article on the objective ground, that is, on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the journal.
Editors must ensure that all published reports and reviews of research have been reviewed by suitably qualified reviewers
Editors must handle submissions in such a way that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.
Editors must adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature. They must give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.
Editors must preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Editors promote publication of correction or retraction when errors are found.

5. Conflicts of interest and their declaration

Editors must not have any conflict of interest with respect to articles they are responsible for. It includes conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the articles.
Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to the publisher.
If competing interests are revealed after publication, the editor require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections. If necessary, other appropriate action should be taken.
The editor must not be participating in decisions on articles which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest.
All authors should disclose in their manuscripts any financial, personal relationships or other substantive conflict of interest with other individuals or organizations that could be considered to inappropriately influence their work.
All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest are as follows: employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, grants or other funding.

6. Publishing ethics issues

The Editorial Board ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards outlined above. They guard the content of the journal against any plagiarism or fraudulent data.
They strive to maintain the integrity of the academic record.
They always put intellectual and ethical standards above any business needs.
They are always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
If the work involves the use of animals or humans participating in experiments, authors should ensure that the manuscript includes a statement that all procedures have been performed in accordance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and have been approved by the appropriate institutional committee(s). The privacy rights of human subjects should always be respected. Authors should include in the manuscript a declaration that informed consent was obtained where human subjects were involved in experiments. 

How to deal with unethical behaviour

Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone, who is to provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision is reached. Evidence should be gathered while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.
Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)

Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behaviour.
Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.
Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.
A formal letter to the head of the author’s or reviewer’s department or funding agency.
Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer’s department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
The imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.

Sources of this document

Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)