Publication ethics of Nanomedicine Journal (NMJ)
Based on ethical guidelines for publication suggested by Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), ethical policies of Nanomedicine Journal (NMJ) attempts to clearly state and define the roles of three target groups of individuals: Authors, reviewers and editors.
- According to the guidelines provided by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), authorship should be based on the following four criteria:
- Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
- Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
- Final approval of the version to be published
- Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors.
- Communication between the journal and the authors of a manuscript is done only electronically between the journal’s office and the corresponding author on behalf of all authors of the manuscript
- Manuscripts published or currently under review elsewhere are ineligible for submission. Authors are required to cite their previous works if the submitted manuscript has considerable similarities with their previous works and should explain how the submitted manuscript offers new contributions beyond their previous publications
- By submitting a manuscript, the corresponding author and all co-authors have agreed to actively participate in the publication process of their manuscript in a timely manner
- The corresponding author must ensure all co-authors are listed on the manuscript and must obtain written permission from the authors to submit their work
- The corresponding author, on behalf of all other authors, should fill a copyright transfer agreement form to enable NMJ to publish their work
- Authors of published articles should promptly notify the journal if they find any part of their published material needs to be corrected. Any changes or corrections to a published work require the consent of all authors.
- Authors should disclose all sources of financial support or other possible sources of conflict of interest. For more information about possible conflicts of interest, please read the section on conflict of interest
- Rejected manuscripts will not be reviewed again
Conflict of interest
A Conflict of interest refers to a situation when the objectivity and impartiality of a person involved in the publication of a scientific article may be potentially undermined by the possibility of a conflict between the person’s self-interests, such as financial interests or personal relationships, and the person’s professional interests. Authors are required to disclose all possible conflicts of interests, including relevant financial supports, interests and individual relationships and affiliations.
Nanomedicine Journal uses the ICMJE Conflict of Interest form which authors require to download it from http://www.icmje.org/conflicts-of-interest/ and send the completed form to us during submissions process.
- Editors are accountable for everything published in the journal
- Editors should maintain the scientific integrity of the academic record
- The editorial team is committed to informing authors about the review process of their manuscript. The corresponding author can independently follow the publication process of their manuscript by logging on the website.
- Received manuscripts under review will be evaluated based on the following values:
- Originality, contribution to nanomedicine-related issues
- Soundness of methodology, analysis or interpretation of data
- Clarity of presentation
- Editors enjoy complete authority to reject/accept a manuscript based on priority for publication in the journal
- Editors should not reveal the identity of reviewers to authors or vice versa.
- Publication of manuscripts suspected of duplication or plagiarism will be put on hold and the editor-in-chief will be responsible for further investigations and considerations on the matter.
- Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subjective expertise required to carry out a proper assessment
- Reviewers who are unable to provide a prompt review for an assigned manuscript should notify the editor-in-chief to be excluded from the peer-review process
- Information obtained during peer-review process should not be used for any person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discrete others
- In cases of potential conflicts of interests, reviewers should notify the journal and seek advice whether something constitutes a conflict of interest
- Reviewers should be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from making hostile, inflammatory, libelous or derogatory personal comments
- Reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited.