Adherence to Journal Policies
To prepare the manuscript, authors must adhere to the journal's author guidelines.
If the same is not followed, the deviations will be noted at the editorial or peer review stage
and should be fixed during the revisions.
If there is a violation, the manuscript can be rejected by the reviewers or editors.
Reporting Standards
Authors of original studies should give a comprehensive summary of the work done and the outcomes,
followed by a dispassionate appraisal of the study's relevance. The manuscript should include enough
specifics and citations to allow other authors to duplicate the work. In contrast to editorial "opinion"
or perspective pieces, review articles should be truthful, impartial, and complete.
False or deliberately inaccurate statements are inappropriate and represent unethical behaviour.
Data Access and Retention
The study's raw data may be requested from the authors along with the publication for editorial review, and if asked,
authors should be ready to make the data available to the public. In any case, authors should make sure that such data
are accessible to other qualified professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably through an
institutional or subject-based data repository or another data centre), if participant confidentiality can be
maintained and that legal restrictions on the release of proprietary data are not in place.
Plagiarism & Originality
Authors must make sure that all the manuscript they write and submit are wholly original, and
if they do borrow someone else's ideas or words, they must properly credit them. Additionally,
publications that had a significant impact on the description of the work reported in the manuscript
should be referenced. Plagiarism can take many different forms, such as "passing off" another
author's paper as the author's own, copying or paraphrasing significant portions of another
paper without giving due credit, or claiming the findings of other people's study.
Plagiarism is forbidden in all forms and constitutes unethical publication behaviour.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission/publication
It is not advisable to publish papers reporting essentially the same study in more than one journal or principal publication.
As a result, authors shouldn't submit a work that has previously been accepted by or published in another publication.
It is unacceptable and immoral to submit a work concurrently to more than one journal. If certain requirements are met,
it may be justified to publish some papers (such as clinical guidelines and translations) in more than one journal.
The secondary publishing, which must represent the same information and interpretation of the source document, requires
the approval of the authors and editors of the relevant journals. The secondary publication must include a reference to the initial source.
Authorship of the manuscript
Only those people who can publicly take the responsibility for the content and who meet the following authorship criteria
should be recognised as authors in the manuscript: (i)drafted the manuscript or critically revised it for important
intellectual content; (ii) saw and approved the final version of the paper; and (iii) agreed to its submission for publication.
All authors who made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data collection, analysis, or
interpretation of the study must be listed. All people who contributed significantly to the work described in the
article but did not meet the requirements for authorship (e.g., technical support, writing and editing aid, general support)
should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after receiving their written consent. The corresponding author
should make sure that the author list contains only appropriate co-authors (as defined above) and excludes any inappropriate co-authors.
They should also confirm that all co-authors have seen the final draft of the manuscript, approved it, and agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Any conflicts of interest that could be interpreted as influencing the results or their interpretation in the manuscript should
be disclosed by the authors as soon as feasible (usually by completing a disclosure form at the time of submission and including
a statement in the manuscript). Financial and non-financial potential conflicts of interest, such as honoraria, educational grants
or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership or other equity
interests, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing agreements, are a few examples of potential conflicts of interest
that should be disclosed. Disclose all funding sources for the project including grant number or other reference number if any.
Acknowledgment of sources
Authors must make sure that they have appropriately recognised the work of others and must list any sources that had a
significant impact on how the reported work was defined. Without the source's written consent, information collected informally
(via communication, email, or discussions with third parties) cannot be utilised or reported. Authors must have written consent
of the author(s) whose work has been used while developing the manuscript while performing confidential services, such as
reviewing grant applications or manuscripts.
Ethical policies - Vulnerable Population
The following ethics policies should be considered for studies involving vulnerable populations (children)
Hazards and human or animal subjects
The authors must make it evident in the manuscript whether the work uses any chemicals, techniques, or tools that have any risks
built into their use. The article should contain a statement to the effect that all procedures were carried out in accordance
with applicable laws and institutional rules and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them if the work
involves the use of animals or human volunteers. For experiments involving human subjects, authors must also declare in the
manuscript that informed consent was obtained. Human participants' private rights must always be respected.
Peer review and compliance to author instructions of the journal
Authors must completely collaborate with editors and engage in the peer-review process by swiftly responding to requests for more
information, clarifications, and documentation of ethics approval, patient consent, and copyright clearances.
If it is determined that "revisions are essential," authors must promptly, methodically, and point-by-point
react to the reviewers' remarks before editing and resubmitting their work to the journal by the specified deadline.
Before submitting their papers, authors should prepare them according to their guidelines, and if they have any questions,
they should consult the most recent issue. They should only get in touch with the journal editorial office for clarification
if the question keeps coming up.
Fundamental errors in published works
It is the responsibility of authors to swiftly tell the journal's editors or publisher of any material errors or inaccuracies
in their own published work and work with them to either withdraw the manuscript or correct it in an erratum.
The authors must promptly fix or retract the manuscript or offer proof to the journal editors that it is accurate
if the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a serious error or inaccuracy.
