Policy and ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal "Current Health Sciences Journal" is a reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the peer reviewer, the journal editor and the publisher. Our ethics and malpractice statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of authors

Authorship of the paper

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 co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Assumption of responsibility

Authors are required to sign and submit: Cover Letter, Copyright Statement, Statement of Authorship/Conflict of Interest, and Submission Checklist at the time of submission. This applies to all manuscripts

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, without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. 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. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works should be clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

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. Data, text, figures or ideas originated by other researchers should be properly acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

The authors must guarantee: (1) that the article has not been published elsewhere; (2) it is not being considered for publication elsewhere; and (3) that it has been submitted with the full knowledge and approval of the institution or organization given as the affiliation of the authors. Submission of multi-authored manuscripts implies the consent of each of the authors.

If data from the article is used, partially or entirely, in other research articles, or the data and results represent only part of a bigger research project described in multiple publications, these must be clearly presented to the editor.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them.

When reporting experiments on human subjects, the authors will indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional or regional) and with the Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2008. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed. Do not use patients' names, initials or institution name in the article text and illustrative materials.

When reporting experiments on animals, the authors will mention the agreement of the institution or a National Research Council's guide, or any national law on the care and use of laboratory animals for scientific purposes, in accordance to Directive 2010/63/EU, revising Directive 86/609/EEC. A statement describing explicitly the ethical background to the studies being reported should be included in all manuscripts in the Materials and Methods section. The authors further attest that all efforts were made to minimize the number of animals used and their suffering and that no other methods besides using animals were available.

If the ethical standard governing the reported research is different from those guidelines indicated above, the authors must provide information in the submission cover letter about which guidelines and oversight procedures were followed.

The Editors reserve the right to return manuscripts in which there is any question as to the appropriate and ethical use of human or animal subjects.

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 interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

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 editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly.

Duties of the reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Reviewers assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Any selected expert who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor in order to re-assign the review to another referee.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with 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 paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Reviewers and editors are required to declare any and all potential conflicts 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.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Duties of the editors

Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Editors should recuse themselves (should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering 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.

Response to ethical issues

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher.

Open Access Policy

"Current Health Sciences Journal" is an Open Access journal accessible for free on the internet.

For printed version information please visit the „Subscription” section on the website.