Publication Ethics

Editorial Board: Our aim to provide a fair platform among scholars, share our knowledge and make impacts in the medical area. Editors are collectively responsible for ensuring that the journal publishes high quality research that falls within its scope and objectives. The board comprises highly qualified academics from Universities, Research Institutes or other such organizations. Ethics for Editors

Publication Decision: All Editorial board members must obey the direction provided by the Editor- in-Chief of the journal. Editorial Board members are representatives of the journal, who show our high scientific quality to colleagues, authors, and readers. Provide advice on a range of subjects, such as feedback on past issues, future direction of the journal. Strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. Review of Manuscript: Managing blind peer review process and deciding which manuscripts are suitable for publication in the journal. Consider the journal as a publishing option for your manuscripts. Confidentiality: Editor should not reveal any information regarding the author, reviewer or the article information to anyone, complete confidentiality maintenance is mandatory. Fair Play: Editor will give unbiased and impartial consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication; at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors. Disclosure & Conflict of Interest: The editor of journal should not use unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for own research without the express written consent of the author. Misconduct: Editors are often the first recipients of suspicions about studies that may involve misconduct. If editors suspect misconduct by authors, reviewers, editorial staff, or other editors then they have a duty to take action. Complains: Editors should respond promptly to complaints and should ensure there is a way for dissatisfied complainants to take complaints further. This mechanism should be made clear in the journal.

If you are interested in serving on the editorial board, please register yourself as editorial member at https://www.innovpub.org/ or email CV to [email protected], [email protected]

Reviewer Board: After plagiarism, peer review is the principal mechanism by which the quality of research is judges. Fairness in judgment and expertise in the field peer reviews have significant responsibilities toward authors, editors and readers. All journals publishers and editors cannot succeed without some kind of peer review process and must abide by guidelines from a publishing ethics organization. Contribution to Editorial Decision: Blind 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. Timeliness: Reviewers should only accept manuscript that they are confident that they can dedicate appropriate time in reviewing. Thus, reviewers should review and return manuscripts in a timely manner. Promptness: 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 and excuse himself from the review process. Confidentiality: Maintaining the confidentiality of the review process: not sharing, discussing with third parties, or disclosing information from the reviewed paper. Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Appropriate Feedback: Providing written, unbiased feedback on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work, together with the documented basis for the reviewer’s opinion. Indicating whether the writing is clear, concise, and relevant and rating the work’s composition, scientific accuracy, originality, and interest to the journal’s readers. Complying with the editor’s written instructions on the journal’s expectations for the scope, content, and quality of the review. Avoiding personal comments or criticism. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: Noting any ethical concerns, such as any violation of accepted norms of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects or substantial similarity between the reviewed manuscript and any published paper or any manuscript concurrently submitted to another journal which may be known to the reviewer. Acknowledgment of Sources: 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. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through 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.

If you are interested in serving on the reviewer board, please register yourself as reviewer at https://www.innovpub.org/ or email CV to [email protected], [email protected]

Ethics for Authors

Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of their original research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Manuscripts will follow the submission guidelines of the journal. Originality: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publications: Authors should not 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 the same research in more than one journal. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in the research work. Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If at any point of time, the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in submitted manuscript, then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor. Copyright Form: All the articles published in Innovative Publication’s Journal are distributed under a creative commons license. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright of their work (all usages allowed except for commercial purpose).

Disclaimer The author(s) of each article appearing in this Journal is/are solely responsible for the content thereof; neither the Journal nor its editors or publisher or anyone else involved in creating, producing or distribution assumes any liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information provided in the Journal, nor shall they be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special, consequential or punitive damages arising out of the use of the Journal.

Resources

• P.I.E. Guidelines for Reviewers • COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers • ICMJE - Responsibilities in the Submission and Peer-Review Process • WAME - Conflict of Interest in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals