PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT (PEMS)
Research scholars in respect to research and its subsequst publications are necessary to agree upon standards legal and ethical guidelines.Mastery and proficiency on the subject will help a medical writer in dealing with issues of scientific misconduct which might be challenging both in legal as well as ethical aspects in their experiments, studies and publications.‘IJHRMLP ethical statements’ are based on‘Committee of Publication Ethics’, (COPE)
1. ETHICAL EXPECTATIONS
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. Editor to handle all 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 at any point of time.
Complain on an ethical or conflict nature:To adopt and follow a reasonable procedures, in accordance with the policies and procedures of the IJHRMLP. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any of the complaints. All complaints shall be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved and published. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.
To contribute in all the decision-making procedures, and to assist accordingly to improve the quality of the papers to be published by reviewing the manuscript as per the guidelibnes of IJHRMLP, in a timely manner.
Reviewers to maintain the confidentiality of facts supplied by the editor or author. Reviewers are not to retain the copy the manuscript of the paper he or she reviewed.
Reviewers to alert the editor to any of the published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.
Reviewers 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.
The authors shall have to respect the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) classifications on author. IJHRMLP follow the ICMJE recommendations with the following four criteria for the authorship.
1.Author must substantially contributes to the conception, designing of the work, acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data related to the study.
2.Not only drafting of the work, but also revising it judgmentally for drawingscholarly content.
3.Have to approve the final version of the paper for publication and
4.Agreement to the accountability of all related aspects of the study in regards to integrity and accuracy of the topic investigated thereof and resolved.
Auhors should maintain accurate records of all data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request as and when required. 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.
Author needs to confirm that the manuscript has not submitted nor under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere on submission to IJHRMLP portal. 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.
All the author have 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 are required and to be submitted.
Authors should ensure that the studies involving human or animal subjects as research participant has the national/local/human institutional ethical clearance (HIEC)which ever applicable and required (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on Use of Laboratory Animals, EU Directive on Use of Animals) and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate. Authors should obtain informed consent from human subjects and respect their privacy and autonomy. In case of research papers on clinical drug test (CDT) the authors have to produce all the relevant paper documents as per ICMR guidelines, HIEC, Medical Council Regulation 2002 and others international ethical regulations.
Author to declare 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).
Also to notify on time the journal editor/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 as and when required.
Publisher or Society Responsibilities
Both IJHRMLP and the NECHURDon behalf of which it publishes shall ensure that good practices is maintained to the standards outlined above. More detailed ethical procedures will be set out and brought to the attention of journal editors and editorial boards.
As IJHRMLP is a society-owned journal, NECHURD will provide assurance that it will subscribe to the principles outlined above, or to substantially similar principles, either adopting these formally or producing their own for the attention of their editors and editorial boards.
2. PROCEDURES FOR DEALING WITH UNETHICAL BEHAVIOUR
Identification of Scientific Misconduct
Scientific Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.
Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.
An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who should consult with or seek advice from the fellow editors and publisher, if appropriate.
Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know for establishing the fact.
Minor misconduct might be dealt with the author without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given sufficient time and opportunity to respond to any allegations against his publications.
In case of a serious scientific misconduct the employers of the alleged accusedto be informed. The editor, in consultation with the publisher or Society as appropriate, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of the other experts.Any of the following penalties as mentioned in Table1 may be given in single or in conjunction.
Table 1 Panalties in increasing order of severity
Educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misinterpretation or misapplication of acceptable standards.
A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the scientific misconduct with a warning of future behaviour of this kind.
Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct of the author.
Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct of the author.
A formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency or employer.
Formal withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer's department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
Imposition of a formal restriction on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
Reporting the incident and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.