Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

This journal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is expected of all parties involved in the act of publishing: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher. This statement is based on internationally accepted guidelines and Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

---

1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced.
4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
5. Authorship Criteria & Contributorship: Authorship must accurately reflect individuals' contributions to the research and its reporting. All listed authors must meet all four ICMJE criteria: (1) substantial contributions to conception/design or data acquisition/analysis, (2) drafting or revising critically for intellectual content, (3) final approval of the version to be published, and (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Ghost authorship (omitting significant contributors) and Gift/Guest authorship (including non-contributing individuals) are strictly prohibited. Non-author contributors should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section. Manuscripts must include a contributorship statement.
6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial, professional, personal, or institutional conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support (including grant numbers and funding agencies) for the project should be explicitly disclosed.
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted or published manuscript, the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to issue a correction (erratum/corrigendum) or retract the paper.
8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, ensuring all ethical approvals and informed consents have been obtained.

---

1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board and peer reviewers, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. Editors are constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors take responsibility for everything they publish and maintain procedures to ensure material quality and record integrity.
2. Review of Manuscripts: Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated for originality and scope. Editors manage peer review fairly and wisely, selecting peer reviewers with appropriate expertise while avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
3. Fair Play: Editors evaluate manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Upholding editorial independence and integrity is paramount.
4. Confidentiality: Editors must ensure that information regarding submitted manuscripts is kept strictly confidential. Editors critically assess potential breaches of data protection and ensure proper informed consent for presented research.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without explicit written consent from the author. Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have competing interests.
6. Handling Allegations of Misconduct: When allegations of misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, duplicate publication) arise pre- or post-publication, editors follow COPE Flowcharts to conduct objective, confidential investigations. Proven misconduct will result in manuscript rejection, correction, retraction, or institutional notification.

---

1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. Manuscripts must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited. Any statement of prior report must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should notify the journal immediately of any ethical concerns, irregularities, or misconduct suspicion without personally investigating further.
3. Standards of Objectivity: Reviews must be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and constructive feedback aimed at improving the manuscript. Reviewers should specify essential additional investigations versus optional suggestions.
4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers must decline reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions.
5. Promptness: Reviewers should respond within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers should only accept manuscripts if they are confident they can complete the review within agreed deadlines, informing the editor promptly if an extension is needed or if they are unqualified to review.

---

To ensure long-term availability, preservation, and accessibility of published scholarly work, this journal maintains strict electronic archiving and identification policies:

• Digital Archiving: All published articles are archived permanently in trusted digital preservation repositories (such as PKP PN, LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, or Portico).
• Self-Archiving Policy: Authors retain the right to archive pre-print, post-print, or publisher’s versions of their work in institutional repositories or subject repositories in accordance with the journal's open-access policies.
• Persistent Identifiers: Every published article is assigned a unique Digital Object Identifier (DOI) to guarantee persistent linking, indexing, and citation stability.

---

1. Post-Publication Discussions: This journal encourages academic dialogue and post-publication debate. Readers may submit scientific critiques, comments, or Letters to the Editor regarding published articles. Original authors will be invited to respond, and accepted discussions undergo editorial review for publication in subsequent issues.
2. Corrections (Erratum / Corrigendum): When errors or inaccuracies are identified that do not invalidate the findings, the journal acts in accordance with COPE Guidelines:
   • Erratum: Issued for errors introduced by the publisher during production.
   • Corrigendum: Issued for errors made by authors affecting accuracy without invalidating overall conclusions.
3. Retractions: Articles will be retracted if findings are unreliable due to major error, data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, redundant publication, or unethical procedures. Formal Retraction Notices will state reasons and authorship/editorial source, while the original article PDF will remain online permanently watermarked as "RETRACTED" to preserve historical scholarly records.

---