Guidelines for Reviewers:

Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the quality, integrity, and credibility of the scientific and medical publication process. Their responsibilities go beyond providing feedback to authors; they help ensure that published research is accurate, ethical, and relevant. Below are the few guidelines reviewers should follow to maintain publication standards. By adhering to these responsibilities, reviewers help maintain high standards in scientific and medical publishing, ensuring that published research is credible, rigorous, and trustworthy.

• Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts solely based on their scientific merit, originality, significance, methodology, and clarity. They should provide specific, constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscript and should submit their evaluations in specified timeframe to avoid delay in Publication process.
• Reviewers must treat the manuscript and all associated information as confidential and should not share the content of the manuscript with colleagues or students unless explicit permission is granted by the editor.
• If a reviewer has any personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest that might affect their objectivity, they must disclose these to the editor and, if necessary, recuse themselves from the review process.
• Reviewers should assess whether the study design, methodology, data collection, and analysis are appropriate for addressing the research question. They should ensure that the methods are described in sufficient detail for others to replicate the study.
• Reviewers are responsible for ensuring that the research is scientifically sound, accurate, and free from errors or bias. This includes checking whether the conclusions drawn by the authors are supported by the data presented.
• Reviewers should verify that the study adheres to ethical standards, including approval by an institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee when human or animal subjects are involved and they should provide informed consent from participants, and if patient data is included, that privacy and confidentiality are protected.
• Reviewers should assess whether the manuscript presents original and significant contributions to the field. They should ensure that the work is not plagiarized or redundant, and check for proper attribution of sources and previous work.
• Reviewers should assess whether the manuscript is clearly written and structured, ensuring that the language, presentation, and organization facilitate understanding. If not constructive suggestions on how the authors can improve the writing, presentation, and interpretation of their results should be provided.
• Based on their evaluation, reviewers provide a recommendation to the editor, such as acceptance, minor or major revision, or rejection. Reviewers should clearly justify their recommendation, providing reasons for their decision based on the manuscript’s quality and adherence to the journal’s standards.
• Reviewers can encourage authors to share raw data, software, or materials to ensure the transparency and reproducibility of the research. This is particularly important when novel datasets or tools are developed.
• Reviewers must adhere to the review process outlined by the journal. This includes completing reviews within the agreed timeline and using the journal's review system and should avoid any bias that affect their judgment.
• In cases of double-blind peer review, where neither the author nor the reviewer knows each other's identity, reviewers should take care not to reveal any information that could compromise their anonymity.
• Reviewers should stay current with developments in their field to provide relevant and informed feedback. And should continuously improve their reviewing abilities through training, self-reflection, and constructive feedback from editors.

Guidelines for Publishers:

Publishers play a critical role in scientific and medical publishing. They are responsible for ensuring that the entire publication process upholds the highest ethical standards, from manuscript submission to the dissemination of research. The following outlines the ethical roles and responsibilities of publishers in maintaining the integrity of scientific literature.

• Publishers must protect the independence of editors and the editorial board.
• The publication process should not be influenced by commercial interests, such as advertisers or sponsors. Advertising or promotional content should be clearly distinguished from peer-reviewed scientific articles to avoid confusion.
• Publishers are responsible for implementing a transparent and fair peer review process. This includes ensuring that the selection of reviewers is impartial and that the review process is handled with confidentiality and integrity and should provide clear guidance and resources for reviewers and editors to maintain high standards in the peer review process.
• Publishers must have clear policies and procedures for handling allegations of ethical misconduct, such as plagiarism, falsification of data, or conflicts of interest. These policies should align with guidelines provided by organizations like the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
• Publishers should establish clear ethical guidelines for authors, reviewers, and editors to follow, including rules about plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and data sharing.
• Publishers should work towards making research accessible through open access models. Open access ensures that research findings are available to the widest possible audience, including practitioners, policymakers, and the public.
• Publishers should use clear, transparent licensing terms (e.g., Creative Commons licenses) to ensure authors retain appropriate rights and that users know how they can use and share published content ethically.
• Publishers must ensure that advertisements within journals or publications do not compromise the ethical and scientific quality of the content and the editorial process should remain independent of any commercial interests.
• Publishers should ensure that the manuscripts under review and personal information of authors, reviewers, and editors are treated with strict confidentiality throughout the publication process.
• Publishers should work with editors to ensure that only individuals who meet the criteria for authorship are listed as authors. Publishers should help to prevent ghostwriting, honorary authorship, or other unethical authorship practices.
• Publishers have a responsibility to promote diversity in the authors, reviewers, and editors involved in the publication process, ensuring that the voices of underrepresented groups are included in scientific discourse.
• They should foster a culture of openness to post-publication peer review and debate, to engage with published research to report errors or misconduct and should also provide mechanism for publishing it.
• They should encourage authors to share their data or materials that enable reproducibility, further research, and validation of results. By fostering open science practices, publishers can promote transparency and collaboration within the research community.
• Publishers must ensure the long-term preservation and availability of published content, using reliable archiving systems. Digital preservation ensures that published articles are accessible even if the journal ceases operation.

Guidelines for Editors:

Editors play a key role in upholding the integrity and quality of medical publications. They are responsible for control the entire manuscript review process. Below are few roles and responsibilities of editors:

• Editors are responsible for ensuring that published manuscripts meet the highest scientific standards and must carefully select manuscripts for publication based on their scientific merit, originality.
• They should make decisions independently from any external pressures and should be based solely on the academic value and integrity of the work.
• Editors must declare any conflicts of interest they might have and should also prevent conflicts of interest from affecting editorial decisions.
• Editors are responsible for organizing a fair, objective, and confidential peer review process.
• Editors should ensure that reviewers provide high-quality, constructive feedback and should also protect the confidentiality of both the manuscript and the identity of the reviewers. They should evaluate feedback of reviewers and make a decision of manuscript acceptance or rejection or revision.
• They must be sure that submitted studies, particularly those involving human or animal subjects, have received appropriate ethical approval from ethics committees. If any humans are involved, informed consent and patient privacy should be protected in published articles.
• Editors are responsible for detecting plagiarism and other forms of unethical behavior by using plagiarism detection tools and if any errors or misconduct are found after publication, editors must issue corrections, errata, or retractions promptly.
• They should provide clear and transparent explanations for their editorial decisions, including the rationale for accepting, rejecting, or requiring revisions to manuscripts and should encourage in sharing their data to ensure transparency and reproducibility in the research.
• Confidentiality should be maintained for all the information related to the manuscript submission, review, and publication process and should not be shared with anyone outside the editorial team and designated reviewers.
• Editors must protect the identity of reviewers and ensure that the peer review process remains anonymous where required.
• Editors should require authors to disclose any conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, that could affect the interpretation of the research.
• Editors should have a clear and fair process for handling appeals from authors whose manuscripts have been rejected. This process should be transparent and involve additional expert review if necessary.
• Editors must handle complaints related to publication ethics promptly and thoroughly.
• Editors should maintain effective communication with authors, reviewers, and the publisher, ensuring that all parties are kept informed throughout the publication process.
• Editors should support the development of reviewers, providing guidance and feedback to ensure that the peer review process is educational and constructive for both the reviewer and the author.
• They should keep up-to-date with evolving ethical guidelines, best practices, and new developments in the field of publishing.
• Editors should ensure that the journal’s content is accessible to a broad audience, including promoting open access where possible and removing barriers to accessing scientific knowledge.