- Publication decision: The journal editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted in the journal should be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the magazine's editorial board and limited by such legal requirements that must then be in force in relation to defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor can consult the editorial board or reviewers when making decisions.
- Fair play: The editor must evaluate the manuscripts for their intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious religion, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.
- Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript submitted to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial consultants and the editor, as appropriate.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest: The publisher must not use unpublished information in his own research without the express written consent of the author. The editor must refuse to endow manuscripts in which he has conflicts of interest in competitive, collaborative or other relationships or related to any of the authors, companies or (possibly) institutions linked to the articles.
- Involvement and cooperation in investigations: The editor must take reasonable responsive measures when major ethical complaints regarding a submitted manuscript or published article.
Reviewer Responsibilities :
- Contribution to an editorial decision: peer-review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the author, can also assist the author in improving the article.
- Agility: Any selected reviewer who feels disqualified to review a research reported in a manuscript or knows that its immediate review will be impossible must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process
- Confidentiality: Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They should not be treated or discussed with others.
- Standard of revision: reviewers must conduct a clear and impartial revision of the manuscrit and those evaluated must express their opinions with supportive comments.
- Acknowledgment of the source: The reviewers must identify relevant works that have not been cited by the authors. The reviewer must also draw the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published article of which he is personally aware.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest: privileged information or own ideas through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts dealing with conflicts of interest regarding the appointment of competitors, collaborators or other approvers or derivatives with any of the authors, companies or institutions linked to the articles.
- Reporting standards: authors of original research reports must present an accurate account of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of its meaning. The underlying data must be accurately represented on paper. An article must contain sufficient details and references to allow others to reproduce the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements, unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
- Originality and plagiarism: authors must ensure that they have written original works and, if the authors used the work and / or words of others, this was duly cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
- Multiple, redundant or simultaneous publication: In general, an author should not publish manuscripts that describe essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one simultaneous journal and/or publishing the same article in different journals constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
- Recognition of sources: adequate recognition of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have an influence on determining the nature of the reported work. Information provided in private, such as in a conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Information provided in the course of confidential services, such as arbitration manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work related to the services.
- Authorship: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, project, execution or interpretation of the reported study. All those who made important contributions to be owed as co-authors. Where there are other people who have participated in certain significant aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or classified as contributors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors are included and no co-authors are included in the article and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to its submission for publication.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial conflict or other conflicts of substantive interest that can be interpreted to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
- Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his own published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the IJAMB editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article.
We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprinting or other commercial revenue does not affect or influence editorial decisions.
Peer Review Process
Manuscripts received by The International Journal of Advances in Medical Biotechnology are submitted through the peer review process. The editorial board chooses external reviewers, experts in the area discussed in the manuscript, being responsible for performing blind evaluation. These opinions are sent to the authors, for possible revision, according to suggestions and corrections. Manuscripts will be sent for publication only after the final evaluation by external experts and approval by the journal's editorial board.
The evaluation process of articles submitted to The International Journal of Advances in Medical Biotechnology involves two sequential steps: desk review and evaluation by external reviewers. In desk review, the editors meet and analyze, without any identification of the authors, the articles received to assess their relevance to the scope of the journal and their potential to significantly contribute to knowledge.
When necessary, the editors also involve some member of the scientific committee in this process. This evaluation takes place monthly at the editors' meeting and the authors are informed about the opinion of the desk review stage.
Articles approved in Desk Review are forwarded to two of the reviewers who make up the review body of the journal for evaluation in the Double Blind Review system, according to their availability and expertise to review them. The referees are professors and researchers associated with national or foreign educational institutions.
The articles are evaluated, considering the relevance of the topic studied for environmental management and sustainability, the writing and formatting of the text, the logical sequence of the theoretical review with the use of appropriate references, the suitability of the methodological procedures, the depth and consistency of analyses; as well as the outline of the conclusions and the relevance of the contributions.
After the end of the evaluation process, the authors will be immediately informed about the editorial decision (MANDATORY CORRECTIONS, REJECTED OR APPROVED).
After making the requested adjustments and verifying them by the reviewers and editors, the articles will be submitted to spelling, grammar and adequacy to the standards adopted by the journal and to the final editing of the document.
The conclusion of this process does not imply the immediate publication of the article, it being up to the editors, in accordance with editorial policies, to prepare the guidelines and decide on the appropriate time for publication.
Note: If there are disagreements between the reviewers, the Editor may select a third reviewer or reject the manuscript.
The criteria for evaluating the articles take into account the relevance of the topic, clarity of the text, adequacy of the bibliography, theoretical structure and development, methodology used, and contributions offered to the area.
Copyright and Licensing
The author(s) authorize the publication of the article in the journal:
The author(s) guarantee that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not being evaluated in another journal(s);
The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts expressed in the texts, as they are the exclusive responsibility of their author(s);
Editors reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt the article to the rules of the publication.
The authors grant IJAMB the copyright, with the simultaneous work licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows the sharing of the work with the recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.