Pulication Ethics

1. Publication Decisions: The Editorial Board of the journal is responsible for deciding to accept or reject the manuscripts or can send it for modifications.
2. Review of Manuscript: The Editor-in-Chief ensures that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editors who may make use of appropriate means and examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript. After the manuscript passes this test, it is forwarded to at least two reviewers for blind peer review, and will make a recommendation to publish the manuscript in its present form or to modify or to reject it. The review period will be no more than 30 days.
3. Fair Review: The Editorial Board ensure that each manuscript received is evaluated on its intellectual content without regard to authors’ sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. If a manuscript competes with the research of an editor such that the editor feels s/he could not handle the paper objectively, or whose handling could be perceived as biased, the editor should decline responsibility for that manuscript. If in doubt, the editor is encouraged to consult with the editor-in-chief regarding the appropriate course of action.
4. Confidentiality: The Editorial Board must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The Editorial Board can not use unpublished materials, disclosed in submitted manuscript. Editors should disclose to the Editor-in-Chief any conflicts of interest, financial or non-financial, resulting from direct competitive, collaborative (within the past five years), or other relationships with any of the authors or organizations with interests in the paper, and avoid cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective evaluation. If in doubt, the editor is encouraged to consult with the Editor-in-Chief regarding the appropriate course of action.

 
OBLIGATIONS OF REVIEWERS

1. Confidentiality: Manuscript reviewers, the editor and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information.
2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers of manuscripts must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any similarity or overlap between the considered manuscripts, or with any other published paper, which is in personal knowledge of reviewer, must be immediately brought to the editor’s notice.
3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments.
4. Promptness: If a reviewer believes it is not possible for him/her to review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.
5. Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should disclose to the editor conflicts of interest, financial or non-financial, resulting from direct competitive, collaborative (within the past five years), or other relationships with any of the authors or organizations with interests in the paper, and avoid cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective evaluation. If in doubt, the reviewer is encouraged to consult with the editor regarding the appropriate course of action.

 
OBLIGATIONS OF AUTHORS

1. Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
2. Originality: Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original.
3. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publications: Authors should not concurrently submit the same manuscript for publishing to other journals. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.
5. Authorship Criteria: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
6. Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper, and must provide it for editorial review, upon request of the editor.
7. Disclosure of Financial Support: All sources of financial support, if any, should be disclosed.
8. Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.
9. Conflict of Interest: Authors should list in a separate Disclosures section any additional conflicts of interest, financial or nonfinancial, dealing with the subject matter of the manuscript that editors, reviewers or readers might reasonably expect to know or might otherwise affect the interpretation of the findings.