Unleashing Research Potential
2020 Stock available for all ADR Medical, Nursing, Engineering, Pharmacy and Arts Journals. Please drop an email at subscription@adrpublications.in.

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Advanced Research Publications is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. We are committed to ensuring freedom of expressions. Editorial Board has the final say in matters related to all aspects of publication and  advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue does not  influence editorial decisions. Conformance to standards of ethical behaviour is therefore expected of all parties involved: editors, authors, reviewers and the publisher. Following guidelines have been developed on the basis of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Publisher Policy Regarding Patient Consent and Ethical Clearance/Human Rights                                                                                       The Journal does not publish research on animal subjects. Patient identity should not be disclosed without prior consent of patient. All research on human subjects should follow institutional/regional ethical standards as well as the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (Available at: http://www.wma.net/e/policy/17-c_e.html).

If patient identity is revealed anywhere in the article, it should be stated in text that patient consent has been obtained. It has been made mandatory for clinical trials from India to be registered with “Clinical Trials Registry – India” (http://ctri.nic.in/)  since 2009. It is a free and online public record system for registration of clinical trials conducted in India. 

All research on human subjects should follow institutional/regional ethical standards as well as the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (Available at: http://www.wma.net/e/policy/17-c_e.html).

Author should submit a scanned copy of Ethical Clearance Certificate by local/institutional ethics committeeInformation regarding ethical approval should be provided in Methodology section.

 Corrections and Retractions

If a correction is needed, the Journal would follow these minimum standards as per ICMJE Recommendations:

·         A correction notice would be published as soon as possible detailing changes from and citing the original publication on an electronic or numbered print page that is included in an electronic or a print Table of Contents to ensure proper indexing.

·         A new article version would be posted with details of the changes from the original version and the date(s) on which the changes were made.

·         All prior versions of the article would be archived. This archive would be either directly accessible to readers.

·         Previous electronic versions would have a prominent note that there are more recent versions of the article.

·         The citation should be to the most recent version.

 When scientific misconduct is alleged, the editor is the sole decision-making authority regarding publication of expression of concern and retraction of the article based on COPE Flowcharts.

Plagiarism Policy
Using another’s expression of an idea or work without permission and/or proper attribution is considered plagiarism. Plagiarism including self-plagiarism is an offence and all manuscripts are checked for plagiarism using automated plagiarism checker at the submission stage. The journal shows zero-tolerance to plagiarism.

Editors should be responsible for everything published in their journals. Their responsibilities include:

Fair play: Editor’s should take decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication based only on the paper’s importance, originality, clarity, and the study’s relevance to the scope of the journal.

Confidentiality: Editors will protect all information related to manuscript and discuss only with corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, if appropriate, to maintain confidentiality.

Conflict of interest: Editor should decline to edit a manuscript in which they might have personal, financial, political, academic interest. In such cases, they should ask another member of editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Editorial decision: All manuscripts should undergo peer review by at least two reviewers. All decisions must be taken on the basis of validity, significance, reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism at the time.

Investigations: Editors should follow the procedure set out in the COPE flowchart when complaints are raised. They should consider appeals of authors against editorial decisions also.

Authors should follow the ethical codes of publications. Their duties include:

Originality and plagiarism: Authors must ensure that the manuscript is their original contribution and has not previously been published elsewhere. Authors must not use any words/figures/tables from other works without appropriate citation and permission.

Multiple submissions: Sending manuscript for publication to more than one publication will be considered unethical behaviour and breach of copyright.

Authorship: All authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are included on the manuscript, and all co-authors have approved and agreed upon the final manuscript submission.

Conflict of interest: Authors must declare all sources of funds and conflicts of interest.

Fundamental errors: Authors are obliged to notify about errors at any point immediately if a significant error is discovered in manuscript submitted for publication. They should cooperate with editors in the procedure of retraction or correction.

Reviewers have an important role in publication. They should:

Confidentiality: Reviewers should treat any manuscript submitted to them as confidential document, keep all information obtained through peer review confidential and not use for personal advantage.

Assistance in improvement: Reviewers should provide objective comments and formulate observations clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper.

Prompt response: Reviewers should report promptly if they feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript.

Conflict of interest: Reviewers should not consider 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 papers.

Acknowledgment of sources: Reviewers should provide citation of relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't Hesitate to Ask.

Request a Quote