:: Publication Ethics ::

The Journal of Indian System of Medicine (Joinsysmed) follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

Apart from the points included below, one should always refer to the documents listed above for full details.

Responsibility of Editors:

• Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication is based only on the paper’s importance, originality, clarity and the study’s relevance to the journal.

• Studies that challenge previous work published in the journal will be given an especially sympathetic hearing and Studies reporting negative results is excluded.

• All original studies will be sent to peer review before publication, taking into full account possible bias due to related or conflicting interests.

• Editors treats all submitted papers as confidential.

• When a published paper is subsequently found to contain major flaws, editors are ready to accept responsibility for correcting the record prominently and promptly.

Responsibility of Reviewers:

• Unbiased, independent, critical assessment is an intrinsic part of all scholarly work, including the scientific process.

• Peer reviewers of Joinsysmed adheres to critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals by experts who are not part of the editorial staff.

• Peer reviewers also help editors decide which manuscripts are suitable for the journals and helps authors and editors to improve the quality of reporting.

• Being a peer-reviewed journal, most of its published research articles for outside review. The number and kinds of manuscripts sent for review, the number of reviewers, the reviewing procedures, and the use made of the reviewers’ opinions may vary.

• Peer reviewers should mandatorily declare any conflict of interest in the article sent for review • Their review emits opinions that are justifiable and without bias

Responsibility of Authors :

• Authors should follow publishers’ requirements that work is not submitted to more than one publication for consideration at the same time.

•Authors should inform the editor if they withdraw their work from review, or choose not to respond to reviewer comments after receiving a conditional acceptance.

• Authors should respond to reviewers’ comments in a professional and timely manner.

• Authors should respect publishers’ requests for press embargos and should not generally allow their findings to be reported in the press if they have been accepted for publication (but not yet published) in a scholarly publication.  Authors and their institutions should liaise and cooperate with publishers to coordinate media activity (e.g. press releases and press conferences) around publication. Press releases should accurately reflect the work and should not include statements that go further than the research findings

 • All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, supply of equipment or materials, and other support (such as specialist statistical or writing assistance) should be disclosed.

•Authors should disclose the role of the research funder(s) or sponsor (if any) in the research design, execution, analysis, interpretation and reporting.

• Authors should disclose relevant financial and non-financial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to affect the interpretation of their findings or which editors, reviewers or readers might reasonably wish to know. This includes any relationship to the journal, for example if editors publish their own research in their own journal. In addition, authors should follow journal and institutional requirements for disclosing competing interests.

 • For experiments involving human subjects, the committee approving the experiments should be identified and the research conducted according to the principles expressed in the Declaration of Helsinki).

• The Authors should confirm that informed consent was obtained from all subjects.

• Appropriate approval, licensing or registration should be obtained before the research begins and details should be provided in the report (e.g. Institutional Review Board, Research Ethics Committee approval, national licensing authorities for the use of animals)

• Treatment must confirm to accepted international standards.

• Manuscript must document that the study was approved by an ethical review board before it was done.

 •Note: Research on humans tends to be broadly defined, for example to include survey research.

 

Plagiarism Policy:

• Plagiarism ranges from the unreferenced use of others’ published and unpublished ideas to submission under “new” authorship of a complete paper, sometimes in a different language. It may occur at any stage of planning, research, writing, or publication; it applies to print and electronic versions.

 • All sources should be disclosed through appropriate citation or quotation conventions, and if a large amount of other people’s written or illustrative material is to be used, permission must be sought (COPE 2001).

Self-Plagiarism:

• Author is not allowed to re-use previously published material when rights have been assigned to the publisher (as they are in most cases)

 • Many journals are not interested in reproducing previously published material because it consumes valuable space.

• Use without permission is a violation of copyright How to avoid self-plagiarism

• Short quotes from a previously published article should be set off in quotation marks and original version cited

• Permission must be requested when large sections are reproduced • Methods and literature reviews should be paraphrased

Scientific Misconduct and other Ethical Concerns related to authors :

• “Scientific misconduct means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting or reporting research”

• Duplicate publication/submission of research findings; failure to inform the editor of related papers that the author has under consideration or “in press”

 • Unrevealed conflicts of interest that could affect the interpretation of the findings

 • Misrepresentation of research findings - use of selective or fraudulent data to support a hypothesis or claim