Publication Ethics
Editorial Policies
Journal of Advances in Oral Health is committed to uphold the
integrity of the scientific record, Publication Ethics and Publication
Malpractice Statement. It is based on the Code of Conduct and Best Publishing
Practice in scientific publications, which includes the Recommendations for the
Conduct Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical
Journal (ICMJE) and Principal of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly
Publishing (joint statement by COPE, WAME,
and OASPSA). Journal of Advances in Oral Health
encourages its editors to follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) “Best Practice
Guidelines for Journal Editors”.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the false depiction of another person's words,
ideas, or expressions as one's own unique work. It occurs when you incorporate
someone else's ideas or work into your own without giving them due credit. This
can happen with or without the original author's permission. Journal of
Advances in Oral Health also consider “self-plagiarism” as a form of
plagiarism. An example of self-plagiarism would be when an author borrows from
his or her own previously published work without the proper citation within the
newly submitted manuscript. We provide iThenticate software to our editor and
reviewers as a part of our manuscript submission system.
Peer Review
Journal of Advances in Oral Health rely on double-blind Peer
review to assess the quality of the manuscript to be published. Independent
researchers in the relevant research areas assess submitted manuscripts for
originality, validity, and significance to help editors determine whether a
manuscript should be published in the journal. Journal follows a double-blind
review process, in which the author identities are undisclosed from the
reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. Journal follow the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on the Peer Review Process can
be found and Ethical
Guidelines for the reviewer.
Conflicts of Interest
Journal of Advances in Oral Health requires the authors sign
a disclosure form at the time of manuscript submission. Authors are expected to
disclose any conflict or financial interest impacting the outcome of the study
in which authors or any employment, consultation, ownership, honorarium, patent
application, testimony, etc. are involved. Any project funded by the industry
must pay special attention to the full declaration of funder involvement. If
there is no role, please state sponsors has no role in the design, execution,
recognition, or writing of the study. If the manuscript is accepted, the
Conflict of Interest information will be communicated in a published statement.
COPE guidelines on Conflict of
interest/Competing interests.
Retraction Policy
To prevent any exploitative behaviour, Journal of Advances in Oral Health adheres to the set rules for the retraction policy. Retractions are used to educate readers about inaccurate or deceptive material, copied content, and multiple publications of the same content, fabrication, or manipulation of the original study. For more details, please visit Retraction Policy, Erratum Policy, Corrigendum Policy.
Journal policy on In-House Manuscript Submissions
In-house manuscript submission process contains the work of
any editorial board member, are not allowed to be reviewed by that editorial
board member and all decisions regarding this manuscript are Assigned by an
independent editor. In addition, these manuscripts are reviewed by the two
external reviewers.
Patient Consent Forms
Concerned Participants should make their own decision about
whether they want to participate or continue participating in research. It
should be done through a patient consent forms process of informed patient in
which personal details are accurately informed of the purpose, methods,
benefits, risks, and alternative information to the research. Understand this
information and how it relates to their own clinical situation in research or
interests, and make a voluntary decision about where to participate or not. A
statement to the effect that such consent had been obtained must be considered
in the Material and Methods section of your manuscript. If necessary the Editors
may request a copy of consent forms.
Ethics Committee Permission
All research and studies that involve the human need to have
approval for the study from the respective Institutional Review Board (IRB) for
the human studies. These guidelines may vary from country to country and
country to specific guidelines need to be followed. The IRB number and protocol
number should be stated in the manuscript.
If World Medical Association (WMA) the Declaration of
Helsinki ethical principles for medical research are involving human subject
were followed, they should be stated in the method section of the manuscript.
Visit WMA
Declaration Policy.
Any study involving the animals for research should have
approval of the protocol from the Institutional committee on the animal sources
where the procedures followed in accordance with the ethical standards of the
responsible committee on experimentation.
We follow the latest Core Practices applicable in publishing
scholarly study for editors and journal publisher and institutions as outlined
by COPE Core Practices.
- Allegations of
misconduct
- Authorship and
contributorship
- Complaints and
appeals
- Conflicts of
interest / Competing interests
- Data and
reproducibility
- Ethical
oversight
- Intellectual
property
- Journal
management
- Peer review
processes
- Post-publication
discussions and corrections
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Editor Responsibilities
Publication Decisions: The editors are responsible for deciding on accepting,
rejecting or modification requests to the manuscript. In some instances, the
editors may require multiple rounds of reviews and modifications. The editors
communicated review results in a timely decision and were always willing to
publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and maintain the integrity of
the academic record. The editor reserves the right to edit, clarify or shorten
the manuscript as deemed necessary.
Fair Review Process: The editor's decisions to accept or reject a paper for
publication should be based only on the papers importance, originality and
clarity, and the study relevance to the journal. The editor must ensure that
each manuscript submitted to the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content
without regards to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious
belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decisions will
be based on the paper's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the
journal's scope.
Confidentiality: The editor and editorial staff always ensure that
information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept
confidential.
Disclosure and Conflicts of
Interest: The editor and members of the editorial
board of the journal shall not use unpublished material disclosed in a
submitted manuscript for his/her own research without the author’s explicit
written consent.
Relations with Authors: Editors should take all reasonable steps to ensure the
quality of the material they publish, recognising the journal and sections
within journals with different aims and standards. The guideline should be
regularly updated and should refer or link. Editors should not reverse
decisions to accept submission unless serious problems are identified with the
submission.
Authors Responsibilities
Publication guidelines: Authors must follow the submission
guidelines of the journal.
- All authors have
to contribute significantly to the research and statements of all data in
the articles are real and authentic. Authors must ensure that the work
they are submitting as theirs is entirely original. Authors must certify
that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere. Authors
will appropriately cite or quote the work and words of others. Authors
sign a declaration stating that the manuscript and the illustrations
within are original, or that he/she has taken all necessary steps to avoid
breach of copyright.
- Authors must
certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for
publication elsewhere. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal
constitutes unethical publishing practice. All authors mentioned in the
paper must have significantly contributed to the research. The author
submitting the manuscript to the journal ensures that all contributing
co-authors and no uninvolved person(s) are included in the author list.
- Authors must
notify the editors of any conflicts of interest that may be construed to
influence the manuscript. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or
corrections of mistakes at any point in time if the author(s) discovers a
significant error or inaccuracy in submitted manuscript.
Reviewers Responsibilities
Confidentiality: Reviewers must keep all manuscripts received confidential.
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be
treated as such, they must not be shown to or discussed with others and
articles should be treated confidentially.
Objectives and Standards: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism
of the author is inappropriate.
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have
conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative and other
relationships or connections with any of the authors, associated institutions
and companies with the paper(s).
Promptness: In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for
his/her to complete review of manuscript within the stipulated time he/she
should notify the editor in a timely manner and withdraw from the review
process.
Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have cited all relevant
published work referred to the paper in the endnotes and bibliography. Reviewers
will bring to the editors’ attention any substantial similarity or overlap
between the manuscript and any other published or unpublished content. Authors
should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential
services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they
have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work
involved in review.
Review evaluation: Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on content without
regard to the authors’ race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation,
disability, religious belief, citizenship, political orientation or social
class.
Publisher Responsibilities
- Publishers
should provide practical support to the editor and executive editorial
board, so they can follow the COPE Code of conduct for Journal and ensure
the autonomy of editorial decisions and protect intellectual property
copyright.
- Always be
willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies
when needed.
- Maintain the
integrity of the academic record and preclude business needs from
compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
- Committed to the
permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures
accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own
digital archives. For details on Innovative archiving policy, Please click
here: https://www.ipinnovative.com/guidelines/publication/digital-achieving/64
- Ensure that good
practice is maintained to the standards defined above.
All research manuscripts and other types are subjected to
thorough peer-review, usually by at least two external peer-reviewers. After
initial scrutiny by the journal editors for suitability in the journal, the
editor will invite appropriate independent reviewers with sufficient and
specific areas of expertise. The editor decision is made based on these
reviewer reports, which are made available to the authors upon decision. Where
the editor of the journal is an author is the submission, adequate steps are
taken to ensure blinding the editor from the submission during peer-review.
Further information about the journal's specific model of peer-review is found
on the journal’s information pages.
Penalty
Duplicate Submission: If duplicate submission was found or noticed from
other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the duplicate
submission was confirmed as an internal thing, then the following actions must
be imposed. Review process will be terminated, the reason should be sent to
reviewers, editorial board, authors and corresponding authors and all authors’
names will be marked as black listed, and these authors cannot submit any
manuscript to these journals for another three years.
Duplicate Publication: if duplicate publication is found or noticed from other
sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the duplicate
publication is confirmed as intentional, This should be reported to editors,
authors etc.