Declaration on Ethics and Good Publication Practices
(Editorial policies, including ethics, for this publication comply with the principles of the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit PERK)
Ethical guidelines for the journal publication
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal Biomedical and Biopharmaceutical Research (BBR) is an important piece in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct image of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing - the author, the journal editor and the editorial board, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.
ALIES, a non-profit organization that acts as editor of BBR, takes very seriously all its duties and responsibilities regarding all stages of publication, including the ethical aspects involved. We are committed to ensure that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, ALIES and the BBR Editorial Board will assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are regarded as unethical behaviour and therefore unacceptable.
Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective. Editorial opinions should be clearly identified as such.
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if possible.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors are personally responsible for ensuring that they have entirely written original works, and if authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, including passing off another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without attribution, and 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, in general, 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. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. If admissible, and clearly declared by the author, this and the editors will agree on the secondary publication. This publication will contain data and interpretation of the primary publication, and that should be clearly referred in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. This signifies that authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of 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.
Author Contributions and Authorship
An Authorship Declaration Statement is required upon submission for transparency. Each individual contributions to the paper should be outlined using the relevant CRediT roles - conceptualization; experimental design; data curation; analysis; funding acquisition; administration; resources; software; supervision; validation; visualization; writing - draft; writing - review ; writing - final version approval. Statements should be formatted with full author initials first.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the (1) conception and design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, (3) final approval of the version to be submitted. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors (Acknowledgements). 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 agreed to its submission for publication.
Upon acceptance, the list and order of authors is considered final. After this time any changes to the list and order of authors will not be accepted .
Involvement of human participants or experimental animals
Involving the use of human participants or experimental animals, authors must state that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and guidelines and have been approved by the appropriate institutional committee (Ethical or equivalent). Authors must also declare the informed consent and the observation of the privacy rights for all human participants.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible. 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 are mandatorily kept confidential and cannot be used for personal advantage.
Other examples of possible conflicts of interest that should be disclosed involve employment relationships, including consulting, ownership of shares, fees, expert opinions, patent applications/registrations and grants or other financing.
The editors should not decide on manuscripts in the face of any potential conflict of interest of any kind in which they may be involved, including professional or personal relationships with any of the authors. In this case, another Editor will be invited to lead the review process, ensuring that the Editor in question does not participate in the decision. The same principle is adopted if an Editor is an author/co-author of one of the manuscripts under submission; in this case, the author will declare in the respective section that the editor did not participate in the review or decision process.
Peer review Policies
(adopted guidelines are based on existing COPE´s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors).
Once submitted, the manuscript is assigned to one editor (senior or reviewer) for initial assessment and decision upon the technical and scientific soundness of the manuscript and its acceptance for peer-reviewing. At the submission stage, authors may suggest potential reviewers, although these suggestions might not be followed.
BBR provides a secure access to the manuscript to reviewers and authors while maintaining total anonymity (personal as institutional) for all authors. Referees are not identified to the authors, except at the request of the referee. The review process is thus double blinded.
Decision is based on the reviewer reports (a minimum of two). The Editor-in-chief then decides
- To accept outright
- To request a minor revision, where authors revise their manuscript to address specific concerns;
- To request a major revision, where authors revise their manuscript to address significant concerns and potentially undertake additional work
- To reject outright
When referees or the Editor requests modifications to the manuscript, the author will be invited to submit a revision with a deadline indicated by the Editor. This process can be repeated until the reviewers see all their doubts adequately answered.
Authors must provide a point-by-point response to referees explaining how the manuscript has been changed. The revised manuscript may be revised by the original referees or not, at the Editor’s discretion. The revision is to be submitted at the online platform as a revision, using the indicated Tracking number previously provided, and not as a new manuscript.
Final submission and acceptance
When the manuscript is accepted for publication it signifies that no further editorial issues exist. The reception date stated on the paper is the date on which the original passed the first assessment for quality checks. The accepted date stated on the paper is the date on which the Editor sent the acceptance letter. After acceptance, authors are sent proofs of their manuscript. Only minor corrections (title, author list or scientific errors) will be permitted. All corrections must be approved by the publishing team. BBR reserves the right to make the final decision regarding matters of style and the size of figures.
Open access statement
BBR adopts the Open Access Declaration, according to the Budapest Open Access Initiative.
Reproduction rights and publication
This journal adopts the CC BY-NC (Creative commons) distribution license.