Publication Ethics


Reporting standards

Authors of original research report should contain detail and enugh references to permit others to replicate the work. Inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified. This statements is based on COPE Best Practice Guidelines or Journal Editors.

Data access and retention

Authors may should provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review,  provide public access to such data, and prepare to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication if practicable.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (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

An author should not publish the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. If an author want do publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. guidelines, translations) in more than one journal, the authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should give proper acknowledgment of the work of others.  Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Authors should get written permission from the source when  using Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties.

Authorship of the paper

The manuscript at least have author and co author. Co-authors are who have made significant contributions. 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.  Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript, should be disclosed by all authors  in their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project  and potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

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 when an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work. It is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper if the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error.



Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and may also assist the author in improving the paper.


Any selected referee should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process if unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible


Any manuscripts must not be shown to or discussed with others but must be treated as confidential documents.

Standards of objectivity

Referees should conduct objectively when express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Reviewers should to make sure that ny statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also concern with 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

The reviewers should not use privileged information or ideas obtained  through peer review for personal advantage. It must be kept confidential. 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.