Журнал стоматологических исследований и практики

Публикация этики и злоупотребление служебным положением

Этическое одобрение и согласие

Редакторы Journal of Dental Research and Practice  могут обращаться за советом по представленным статьям не только к техническим рецензентам, но и по любому аспекту статьи, вызывающему озабоченность. К ним могут относиться, например, этические вопросы или вопросы доступа к данным или материалам. Очень редко опасения могут также относиться к последствиям публикации статьи для общества, включая угрозы безопасности. В таких обстоятельствах совет обычно запрашивается одновременно с процессом технической экспертной оценки. Как и во всех решениях о публикации, окончательное решение о публикации является обязанностью редактора соответствующего журнала.
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) is a leading independent institution providing guidance for the report of biomedical research and health related topics in medical journals.

The threat posed by bioweapons raises the unusual need to assess the balance of risk and benefit in publication. Editors are not necessarily well qualified to make such judgements unassisted, and so we reserve the right to take expert advice in cases where we believe that concerns may arise. We recognize the widespread view that openness in science helps to alert society to potential threats and to defend against them, and we anticipate that only very rarely (if at all) will the risks be perceived as outweighing the benefits of publishing a paper that has otherwise been deemed appropriate for the Portfolio of journal. Nevertheless, we think it appropriate to consider such risks and to have a formal policy for dealing with them if need arises.

Authors of any paper describing agents or technologies whose misuse may pose a risk must complete the dual use research of concern section. This provides an opportunity not only to highlight potential hazards, but also to explain the precautions that have been taken and the benefits of publishing the research. The Reporting Summary is made available to editors, reviewers and expert advisors during manuscript assessment, and is published with all accepted manuscripts.

We have established an editorial monitoring group to oversee the consideration of papers with biosecurity concerns. The monitoring group includes the Editor-in-Chief of the journal; the Head of Editorial Policy is responsible for maintaining a network of advisors on biosecurity issues.

Duties of Editors

The Executive Editor or/and Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science, is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published in current volume of the journal. He may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the nature of the authors or the host institution including race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

The editor 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.

When genuine errors in published work are pointed out by readers, authors, or members of editorial board, which do not render the work invalid, a correction (or erratum) will be published as soon as possible. The online version of the paper may be corrected with a date of correction and a link to the printed erratum. If the error renders the work or substantial parts of it invalid, the process of retraction can be initiated. In such case, the retraction communication with explanations as to the reason for retraction will be published as soon as possible. Consequently, the message about retraction will be indicated on article page and in pdf version of retracted article.

If serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work, editor will initially contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns. If that response is unsatisfactory, Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science will take this to the institutional level.

Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science will respond to all allegations or suspicions of research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or other editors. Cases of possible plagiarism or duplicate/redundant publication will be assessed by the journal. In other cases, Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science may request an investigation by the institution or other appropriate bodies (after seeking an explanation from the authors first and if that explanation is unsatisfactory).

Retracted papers will be retained online, and they will be prominently marked as a retraction in all online versions, including the PDF, for the benefit of future readers.

Duties of Reviewers

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the 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 its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself 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 authorized 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.

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 resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Editor will take reviewer misconduct seriously and pursue any allegation of breach of confidentiality, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage. Allegations of serious reviewer misconduct, such as plagiarism, will be taken to the institutional level.

Duties of Authors

Авторы отчетов об оригинальных исследованиях должны представить точный отчет о выполненной работе, а также объективное обсуждение ее значимости. Исходные данные должны быть точно представлены в документе. Документ должен содержать достаточно деталей и ссылок, чтобы позволить другим повторить работу. Мошеннические или заведомо неточные заявления представляют собой неэтичное поведение и неприемлемы.

Авторы должны убедиться, что представленная работа является оригинальной и не была опубликована где-либо еще на каком-либо языке, а также, если авторы использовали работу и/или слова других лиц, что они были должным образом процитированы или процитированы.

Необходимо соблюдать применимые законы и соглашения об авторском праве. Материалы, защищенные авторским правом (например, таблицы, рисунки или обширные цитаты), должны воспроизводиться только с соответствующего разрешения и подтверждения.

Как правило, автору не следует публиковать рукописи, описывающие по существу одно и то же исследование, более чем в одном журнале или первичной публикации. Одновременная отправка одной и той же рукописи более чем в один журнал представляет собой неэтичное поведение при публикации и является неприемлемым.

Должное признание работы других всегда должно быть дано. Авторы должны ссылаться на публикации, оказавшие влияние на определение характера работы, о которой они сообщают.

Авторство должно быть ограничено теми, кто внес значительный вклад в концепцию, дизайн, выполнение или интерпретацию исследования, о котором сообщается. Все те, кто внес существенный вклад, должны быть указаны как соавторы.

Когда автор обнаруживает существенную ошибку или неточность в своей собственной опубликованной работе, автор обязан незамедлительно уведомить об этом редактора журнала или издателя и сотрудничать с редактором, чтобы отозвать или исправить статью.