Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer and the
publisher) it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The ethics statements for our
journal are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal

Duties of the Editors-in-Chief

Fair play
Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual
orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The Editor-in-Chief and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to
anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the
publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an Editor's own research
without the explicit written consent of the author(s).
Publication decisions
The handling Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should
be published. The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board and
constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and
plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Duties of peer reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication
with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its
timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief so that alternative reviewers can
be contacted.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to
or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inacceptable. Referees should
express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that
an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant
citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the
manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for
personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of
interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors,
companies, or institutions connected to the submission.

Duties of authors

Reporting standards
Authors reporting results 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
manuscript. 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.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the
work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than
one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal
constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications
that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of a manuscript
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 coauthors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the
research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section. The corresponding author should
ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are
included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version
of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use,
the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might
be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support
for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s
obligation to promptly notify the journal’s Editor-in-Chief or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract
the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.
Publisher’s confirmation
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism the publisher, in close
collaboration with the Editors-in-Chief, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend
the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the
complete retraction of the affected work.
The Publisher and the Journal do not discriminate on the basis of age, color, religion, creed, disability, marital
status, veteran status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier status, or sexual
orientation in its publishing programs, services and activities.