IABCR Journal is dedicated to following the highest ethical principles of scholarly publishing and promoting the highest standards of integrity and ethical conduct in research and its evaluation.

It is mandatory for authors, reviewers, and editorial board members to comply with "Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement".

The International Archives of BioMedical and Clinical Research (IABCR) is committed to best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions. The deterrence of publication malpractice is one of the important tasks of the editorial board. The International Archives of BioMedical and Clinical Research is very strict in any kind of unethical conduct, and will not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors should be assured before submitting articles to the International Archives of BioMedical and Clinical Research that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, they warrant that their article has neither been published elsewhere in any language fully or partly nor is it under review for publication anywhere.

This journal would not be responsible for any dispute related to the authorship of a submitted paper. Any change in the authorship (such as addition or deletion of author(s) or change in the sequence of author list) should be intimated to the editorial office through a letter signed by all authors before publication of the paper.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Researchers should conduct their research from the research proposal to publication in line with best practices and codes of conduct of relevant professional bodies and/or national and international regulatory bodies. In rare cases, it is possible that ethical issues or misconduct could be encountered in your journal when research is submitted for publication.

Ethical responsibilities of authors

IABCR is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record. IABCR follows the COPE guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct.

Particularly:

• Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific endeavour.
• Maintaining the integrity of the research and its presentation can be achieved by following the rules of good scientific practice, which include:
• The manuscript has not been submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration.
• The manuscript has not been published previously (partly or in full), unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work (please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the hint of text-recycling (“self-plagiarism”)).
• No data have been fabricated or manipulated (including images) to support your conclusions
• No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (“plagiarism”). Proper acknowledgments to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions are secured for material that is copyrighted.
• Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism.
• Consent to submit has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from the responsible authorities - tacitly or explicitly - at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out, before the work is submitted.
• Authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work and therefore share collective responsibility and accountability for the results.

In addition:

• Changes of authorship or in the order of authors are not accepted after acceptance of a manuscript.
• Requesting to add or delete authors at the revision stage, proof stage, or after publication is a serious matter and may be considered when justifiably warranted. Justification for changes in authorship must be compelling and may be considered only after receipt of written approval from all authors and a convincing, detailed explanation about the role/deletion of the new/deleted author. In case of changes at revision stage, a letter must accompany the revised manuscript. In case of changes after acceptance or publication, the request and documentation must be sent via the Publisher to the Editor-in-Chief. In all cases, further documentation may be required to support your request. The decision on accepting the change rests with the Editor-in-Chief of the journal and may be turned down. Therefore authors are strongly advised to ensure the correct author group, corresponding author, and order of authors at submission.
• Upon request authors should be prepared to send relevant documentation or data in order to verify the validity of the results. This could be in the form of raw data, samples, records, etc.
• If there is a suspicion of misconduct, the journal will carry out an investigation following the COPE guidelines. If, after investigation, the allegation seems to raise valid concerns, the accused author will be contacted and given an opportunity to address the issue. If misconduct has been established beyond a reasonable doubt, this may result in the Editor-in-Chief’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to:
• If the article is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author.
• If the article has already been published online, depending on the nature and severity of the infraction, either an erratum will be placed with the article or in severe cases complete retraction of the article will occur. The reason must be given in the published erratum or retraction note.
• The author’s institution may be informed.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

To ensure objectivity and transparency in research and to ensure that accepted principles of ethical and professional conduct have been followed, authors should include information regarding sources of funding, potential conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), informed consent if the research involved human participants, and a statement on welfare of animals if the research involved animals.

Authors should include the following statements (if applicable) in a separate section entitled “Compliance with Ethical Standards” before the References when submitting a paper:

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

Research involving Human Participants and/or Animal

Disclosure of potential Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all relationships or interests that could have direct or potential influence or impart bias on the work. Although an author may not feel there is any conflict, disclosure of relationships and interests provides a more complete and transparent process, leading to an accurate and objective assessment of the work.

Awareness of a real or perceived conflicts of interest is a perspective to which the readers are entitled. This is not meant to imply that a financial relationship with an organization that sponsored the research or compensation received for consultancy work is inappropriate.

Examples of potential conflicts of interests that are directly or indirectly related to the research may include but are not limited to the following:

• Research grants from funding agencies (please give the research funder and the grant number)
• Honoraria for speaking at symposia
• Financial support for attending symposia
• Financial support for educational programs
• Employment or consultation
• Support from a project sponsor
• Position on advisory board or board of directors or other type of management relationships
• Multiple affiliations
• Financial relationships, for example equity ownership or investment interest
• Intellectual property rights (e.g. patents, copyrights and royalties from such rights)
• Holdings of spouse and/or children that may have financial interest in the work

In addition, interests that go beyond financial interests and compensation (non-financial interests) that may be important to readers should be disclosed. These may include but are not limited to personal relationships or competing interests directly or indirectly tied to this research, or professional interests or personal beliefs that may influence your research.

The corresponding author collects the conflict of interest disclosure forms from all authors. In author collaborations where formal agreements for representation allow it, it is sufficient for the corresponding author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors. The  ICMJE form can be downloaded here.

Human and Animal Rights 

1) Statement of Human Rights

When reporting studies that involve human participants, authors should include a statement that the studies have been approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach, and demonstrate that the independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.

2) Statement on the Welfare of Animals

The welfare of animals used for research must be respected. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals have been followed, and that the studies have been approved by a research ethics committee at the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted (where such a committee exists). For studies with animals, the following statement should be included in the text before the References section.

Informed consent

All individuals have individual rights that are not to be infringed. Individual participants in studies have, for example, the right to decide what happens to the (identifiable) personal data gathered, to what they have said during a study or an interview, as well as to any photograph that was taken.

Hence it is important that all participants gave their informed consent in writing prior to inclusion in the study. Identifying details (names, dates of birth, identity numbers and other information) of the participants that were studied should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and genetic profiles unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the participant (or parent or guardian if the participant is incapable) gave written informed consent for publication. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve in some cases, and informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt.

For example, masking the eye region in photographs of participants is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic profiles, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning.

Please note that standards could vary slightly per journal dependent on their peer review policies (i.e. double blind peer review) as well as per journal subject discipline. Before submitting your article check the Instructions for Authors carefully.

The corresponding author should be prepared to collect documentation of compliance with ethical standards and send if requested during peer review or after publication.

The Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned guidelines. The author will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned guidelines.

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.
2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality, making use of appropriate software to do so. After passing this test, the manuscript is forwarded to two reviewers for single-blind peer review, each of whom will make a recommendation to accept, reject, or modify the manuscript. The review period will be up to 30 days.
3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the Journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.
4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without the written consent of the author.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information.
2. Acknowledgment of Sources: Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any kind of similarity or overlap between the manuscripts under consideration or with any other published paper of which reviewer has personal knowledge must be immediately brought to the editor's notice.
3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. Promptness: In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

For more information, Visit Author Guidelines