PUBLICATION ETHICS OF IJHRMLP

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT (PEMS)
Research scholars, in respect of research and its subsequent publications, are required to agree upon standards and legal and ethical guidelines. Mastery and proficiency in the subject will help a medical writer address issues of scientific misconduct, which can be challenging in both legal and ethical respects in their experiments, studies, and publications. ‘IJHRMLP ethical statements’ are based on the ‘Committee of Publication Ethics’ (COPE).

1. ETHICAL EXPECTATIONS

Editors' responsibilities
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 reasonable procedures in accordance with the policies and guidelines of IJHRMLP. Authors shall be given a fair and reasonable opportunity to respond to any ethical or conflict-related complaints. All complaints will be investigated thoroughly, irrespective of when the original publication was approved or published. Documentation related to such complaints must be properly maintained and retained.

Reviewers' responsibilities
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 are 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.

Authors' responsibilities
The authors shall have to respect the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) classifications on authors. IJHRMLP follow the ICMJE recommendations with the following four criteria for authorship.
1. The author must substantially contribute to the conception, design, acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data related to the study.
2. Not only drafting of the work, but also revising it judgmentally for drawing scholarly 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 regarding the integrity and accuracy of the topic investigated thereof and resolved.

Authors should maintain accurate records of all data associated with their submitted manuscript, and supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request as and when required. Where appropriate and allowed by the employer, funding body, and others with an interest, deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location for sharing and further use by others.

The author needs to confirm that the manuscript has not been submitted, is not under consideration, or has not been accepted for publication elsewhere on submission to the IJHRMLP portal. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, 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 authors have to confirm that all the work in the submitted manuscript is original and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources. Permission to reproduce any content from other sources is required and must be submitted.

Authors should ensure that the studies involving human or animal subjects as research participants have the national/local/human institutional ethical clearance (HIEC), whichever is 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 other international ethical regulations.

The author is 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 their 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 AHRME, on behalf of which it publishes, shall ensure that good practices are maintained in accordance with 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, AHRME will ensure that it subscribes to the principles outlined above, or to substantially similar principles, either by formally adopting them or by developing its own for the attention of its 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 for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated consistently until a final decision or conclusion is reached.

Investigation
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 breaches
The author may deal with minor misconduct without the need to consult further. In any event, the author should be given sufficient time and opportunity to respond to any allegations against his publications.

Serious breaches
In the event of serious scientific misconduct, the employers of the alleged offender are to be informed. The editor, in consultation with the publisher or Society as appropriate, should decide whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of other experts. Any of the following penalties, as mentioned in Table 1, may be given singly or in conjunction.

Table 1: Penalties in increasing order of severity