Duties of Editors

Publication decisions

The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content. Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least three reviewers.

Confidentiality, disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial staff will 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.

Editors, who have conflicts of interest with considering manuscript, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; Therfore reviewers should not share, shown or discussed any information from an assigned manuscript with others, except prior permission from the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Reviewer’s decision should solely depend on scientific merit, relevance to the subject, scope of the journal.

Acknowledgement of sources

The reviewer should ensure that an observation or argument that has been previously reported in previous publications be accompanied by a relevant citation and should immediately alert the Editor when he or she becomes aware of duplicate publication. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Duties of Authors

Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Authors should ensure that no data have been fabricated or manipulated (including images) to support your conclusions. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.

Authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal, in case expansion of previous work (please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the hint of text-recycling (“self-plagiarism”)).

Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism and authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study (in case of suspicion to unethical behavior).

Authorship of the manuscript

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript:

(i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and

(ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and

(iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication

All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section.

Conflict of interests

All authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations within three years of beginning the submitted work that could inappropriately influence, or be perceived to influence, their work.

Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper in form of an erratum.

Open access policy

The journal is freely available online. Authors are required to agree with this open access policy.