Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

As a peer reviewed medicine journal, it is our goal to advance scientific knowledge and understanding. We adhere to the guideline and ethical standards from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding all aspects of publication ethics and cases of research and publication misconduct to ensure that all publications represent accurate and original work and that our peer review process is structured without bias. We have outlined a set of ethical principles that must be followed by all authors, reviewers, and editors.

Authors submitting articles to the Maaen Journal for Medical Sciences affirm that manuscript contents are original. Each manuscript newly submitted to the Maaen Journal for Medical Sciences will be checked regarding plagiarism using Turnitin. The decision on whether a manuscript should be rejected because of plagiarism rests with the handling editor. Manuscripts with no more than 20% plagiarism rate will be accepted.

For case studies the corresponding author must confirm that all experiments were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations. The manuscript must include a statement identifying the institutional and/or licensing committee approving the experiments, including any relevant details. Manuscripts that reveal a lack of proper ethical consideration for human subjects or experimental animals will not be accepted for publication.

The MAJMS adapts the COPE guidelines to satisfy the high-quality standards of ethics for authors, editors, and reviewers:

Duties of Authors

  • Author(s) should affirm that the material has not been previously published and that they have not transferred elsewhere any rights to the article.
  • Author(s) should ensure the originality of the work and that they have properly cited others work in accordance with the reference format.
  • Author(s) should not engage in plagiarism or in self-plagiarism.
  • Author(s) must certify that the research process is in accordance with the ethical standards of the Helsinki Declaration and the domestic and foreign committees that preside over the human experiment. If any doubts are raised whether the research proceeded in accordance with the declaration, the author(s) should explain it. In the case of experimenting on animals, the authors must comply with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 and associated guidelines ,EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments or the National Institutes of Health guide for the care and use of Laboratory animals (NIH Publications No. 8023, revised 1978) and certify that they followed the domestic and foreign guidelines related to experimentation on animals in a laboratory.
  • Author(s) should suggest no personal information that might make the identity of the patient recognizable in any form of description, photograph or pedigree. When photographs of the patient were essential and indispensable as scientific information, the author(s) have received consent in written form and have clearly stated as much.
  • Author(s) should provide the editor with the data and details of the work if there are suspicions of data falsification or fabrication. Fraudulent data shall not be tolerated. Any manuscript with suspected fabricated or falsified data will not be accepted. A retraction will be made for any publication which is found to have included fabricated or falsified data.
  • Author(s) should clarify everything that may cause a conflict of interests such as work, research expenses, consultant expenses, and intellectual property.
  • Authors must follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
  • Author(s) at any point of time, if discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in submitted manuscript then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor.
  • Author(s) 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.
  • 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. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
  • Author(s) must agree not to pursue publication of their manuscript in additional journals once accepted for publication.

Duties of Editors

  • An editor must evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without considering the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. Editors should decline any assignment when there is a potential for conflict of interest.
  • Editors must ensure the document sent to the reviewers does not contain information on the author, and vice versa.
  • Editors’ decisions should be provided to the authors accompanied by the reviewers’ comments unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks.
  • Editors should respect requests from authors that an individual should not review the submission if such requests are well reasoned and practicable.
  • Editors and all staff members should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
  • Editors will be guided by the COPE flowcharts if there is suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.
  • Editors should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept. They must not have conflict of interest with the authors, funder or reviewer of the manuscript.
  • Editors should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors and to constantly improve the journal.
  • Editors should maintain the integrity of the academic record and preclude business needs from compromising intellectual standards.
  • Editors should always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
  • Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  • Editors or editorial staff must not use unpublished content in a submitted manuscript in their own personal research without written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

  • Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
  • Reviewers assist in the editorial decision process and as such should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  • Reviewers should complete their reviews within a specified timeframe. In the even that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.
  • Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s personal research without written permission of the author. Information contained in an unpublished manuscript will remain confidential and must not be used by the reviewer for personal gain.
  • Reviewers should not review 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.
  • Reviewers should identify published work in manuscripts that has not been cited by the author. Reviewers should also notify the Editors of significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published or unpublished material.