Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

The Editor-in-Chief/Editor of the Medpulse International Journal of Pathology is responsible for deciding which of the research papers/articles submitted to the journal should be published. The publishing decision is based on the recommendation of the journal's reviewers. The Editor-in-Chief /Editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief/Editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The Editor-in-Chief/Editor, Reviewers and any Editorial Staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an Editor-in-Chief/Editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Articles will be published in the Journal after peer reviewing, under the “Blind Review” process. The reviewers advise the Editor-in-Chief/Editor in making the editorial decision. The Editor-in-Chief/Editor communicates with authors, as required, and helps them in improving quality of their research paper. The reviewers don't know the author's identity and Reviewers' comments to the editors are confidential and before passing on to the author will be made anonymous. The names of the reviewers remain strictly confidential; with their identities known only to the Editor-in-Chief/Editor.

Promptness

The journal Editor-in-Chief/Editor are committed to provide timely review to the authors and if any selected referee 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-Chief/Editor and excuse him/her from the review process.

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

The editors and reviewers are required to evaluate papers based on the content. 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-in-Chief/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 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Duties of Authors

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. 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. Reviews and other articles should also be accurate and objective, and should unfailingly cite the work on which they are based.

Data Access and Retention

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

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors should ensure that submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Plagiarism in any form, including the touting of material contained in another paper (of the same authors or some other author) with cosmetic changes as a new paper; copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), and claiming results from research conducted by others are among the numerous forms of plagiarism. In all its forms plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration to another journal a previously published paper, or the one under consideration with another journal, without the written consent of the two journals involved.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written, permission from the source.

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 appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. 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.

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.

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-in-Chief/Editor or publisher and cooperate to retract or correct the paper. If the Editor-in-Chief/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 retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the Editor-in-Chief/Editor of the correctness of the original paper.