Editorial Policy and Ethical Guidelines

At forming our editorial policy the journal is basing on the recommendations of international organizations on the ethics of scientific publications:

• Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors;
• Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers;
• Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing;
• COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers;
• Guidelines for retracting articles;
• International standards for editors and authors and others, which are developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE);
• The European Association of Science Editors (EASE) Guidelines and Recommendations.

1. To act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
2. To handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.
3. To adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature, in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Society where appropriate. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved.

1. To contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner
2. To maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author. To not retain or copy the manuscript.
3. To alert the editor to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.
4. To be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and to alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript.
5. To follow in his work to Singapore Statement on Research Integrity.

1. To maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. Where appropriate and where allowed by employer, funding body and others who might have an interest, to deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location, for sharing and further use by others.
2. To confirm/assert that the manuscript as submitted is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, to acknowledge and cite those sources. Additionally, to provide the editor with a copy of any submitted manuscript that might contain overlapping or closely related content.
3. To confirm that all the work in the submitted manuscript is original and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources. To obtain permission to reproduce any content from other sources.
4. To be ensure that any studies involving human or animal subjects conform to national, local and institutional laws and requirements and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate. Authors should obtain express permission from human subjects and respect their privacy.
5. To declare any potential conflicts of interest (e.g. where the author has a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process).
6. To notify promptly the journal editor or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified. To cooperate with the editor and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.
7. To take full responsibility for any plagiarism of text, image or other type of graphics.

1. Manuscripts should be reviewed with due respect for authors' confidentiality. In submitting their manuscripts for review, authors entrust editors with the results of their scientific work and creative effort, on which their reputation and career may depend. Authors' rights may be violated by disclosure of the confidential details of the review of their manuscript. In addition, the editor should respect reviewer rights to confidentiality. It may need to be breached only in order to prevent fraud and deception.
2. Editors must not disclose information about manuscripts (including their receipt, content, status in the reviewing process, criticism by reviewers, or outcome of the reviewing process) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. This includes requests to use the materials for legal proceedings.
3. Editors should notify their reviewers that manuscripts sent for review are confidential communications and the private property of the authors. Therefore, reviewers and members of the editorial staff must respect the authors' rights by not publicly discussing the authors' work before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must be prohibited from making copies of the manuscript and sharing it with any other party, except with the permission of the editor.
4. Reviewer comments should not be published or otherwise made public without permission of reviewer, authors and the editor.
5. The Journal policy is to blind authors to reviewer identity. If reviewer comments sent to authors are not signed, the reviewer identity must not be revealed to authors or anyone else without the reviewers’ expressed written permission.
6. Peer reviewers' comments should not be published without permission of the reviewer and authors. At the same time, reviewers' comments should be sent to other persons reviewing the same manuscript, which helps reviewers learn from the review process. Reviewers also may be notified of the editor's decision to accept or reject a manuscript.
7. Patients have a right to privacy that should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information, including patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication.

Public trust in the peer-review process and the credibility of published articles depends in part on how well conflict of interest is handled during writing, peer review, and editorial decision making. Conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author’s institution), reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) his or her actions. Such relationships are also known as “dual commitments”, “competing interests”, or “competing loyalties”. These relationships vary from being negligible to having great potential for influencing judgment. Not all relationships represent true conflict of interest. On the other hand, the potential for conflict of interest can exist regardless of whether an individual believes that the relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, and paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the Journal, the authors, and of science itself. However, conflicts can occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion.

1. All participants in the peer-review and publication process must disclose all relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest.
2. When authors submit a manuscript, whether an article or a letter, they are responsible for disclosing all financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly whether potential conflicts do or do not exist. Authors should do it in cover letter to the manuscript.