Publication Ethics

Our Publication Ethics are based on the COPE Best Practices Guidelines for Journal Editors.


Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate report of the original research conducted as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present the results of their research honestly and without falsification, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation of data. A manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. False or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts must follow the journal submission guidelines.

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is completely original. Manuscripts may not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to joint publication. Relevant previous work and publications, whether by other researchers or the author's own, should be acknowledged and properly referenced. Primary literature should be cited whenever possible. Original words taken directly from other researchers' publications should be enclosed in quotation marks with appropriate citations.

Multiple, Excessive, or Concurrent Publication: Authors generally may not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Authors are also expected not to publish excessive manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified and key publications should be referenced

Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Proper recognition of the work of others should always be given.

Authorship of Papers: Authorship of research publications must accurately reflect the individual's contribution to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, conduct or interpretation of the research being reported. Other parties who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In cases where the primary contributor is listed as the author, contributors who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or publication are listed in the acknowledgments section. The author also ensures that all authors have seen and approved the submitted version of the manuscript and the inclusion of their names as co-authors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors must clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in the Published Work: If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript, then the author must immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Human or Animal Hazards and Subjects: Authors must clearly identify in the manuscript if their work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use.


Publication Decision: Based on the editorial board's review report, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. Validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors can consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors must be responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors must organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review process in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers being considered for publication by selecting those with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Fair Play: The editor must ensure that every manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to the sex, gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. of the author. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and impartial decisions is to uphold the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors have a strong position in making decisions about publication, so it is very important that this process is carried out as fairly and impartially as possible.

Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding the manuscript submitted by the author is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, approval for publication if necessary.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The Journal Editor will not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his or her own research without written permission from the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions regarding papers that have a conflict of interest.


Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts sent by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. The document may not be shown or discussed with others except with the permission of the editor.

Source Acknowledgment: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been reported previously should be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should immediately notify the journal if they discover any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of their work, are aware of substantial similarities between the manuscript and concurrent submissions of the manuscript to other journals or published articles, or suspect possible violations. either during research or writing and submitting the manuscript; However, reviewers should keep their concerns confidential and not investigate further personally unless the journal requests further information or suggestions.

Objectivity Standard: Review of submitted manuscripts must be carried out objectively and reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's instructions regarding the specific feedback required of them and, unless there is a compelling reason not to. Reviewers must be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the author improve the manuscript. Reviewers should clarify which additional investigative suggestions are essential to support the claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which would simply strengthen or expand that research.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts that have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper. In the case of double-blind reviews, if they suspect the identity of the authors, notify the journal if this knowledge creates a potential conflict of interest.

Accuracy: Reviewers must respond within a reasonable time. Reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are reasonably confident that they can return the review within the proposed or mutually agreed time period, and promptly notify the journal if they require an extension. In the event that the reviewer feels it is impossible to complete the review of the manuscript within the specified time, then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.