Publication Ethics

Duties of Authors
Reporting Standards
Authors of articles must present accurate data from their research along with an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be represented accurately within the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Misleading or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles must also be accurate and objective, whilst editorial 'opinion' pieces must be clearly identified as such.

Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide raw data in connection with a manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), where practicable. In any event, authors should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable period after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure they have written entirely original works. Where authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from presenting another's paper as the author's own, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's work (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Generally, an author should not 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. As a rule, an author should not submit a previously published paper for consideration in another journal. Publication of certain types of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided specific conditions are met. The authors and editors of the concerned journals must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation as the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

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, such as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Information obtained during confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

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 others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that no inappropriate co-authors are included, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and have been approved by the appropriate institutional committee(s). Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors must 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. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the author's obligation to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Duties of Editors
The research editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by relevant legal requirements in force concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. The research editor evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

The editor 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. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Duties of Reviewers
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. 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's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.