Editorial Policies

DOUBLE-BLIND PEER REVIEW PROCESS

This journal employs a double-blind peer review system to ensure impartiality in manuscript evaluation. Initially, a scientific Editor assesses all submissions for adherence to the journal's scope and instructions. Subsequently, manuscripts typically undergo evaluation by a minimum of two external experts, alongside internal ethical and statistical Editors. Reviewers are allotted a maximum of two weeks to provide their feedback.

The progression of the review process is contingent upon the timely submission of reviewer reports. Handling Editors make publication decisions based on these comprehensive evaluations. Authors have the option to recommend qualified reviewers; however, the ultimate discretion for accepting these suggestions rests with the editor. Authors will be promptly notified of the Editors' final decision. Please note that any deliberate falsification of information pertaining to suggested reviewers, including but not limited to providing inaccurate names or email addresses, will lead to the immediate rejection of the manuscript at any stage of the publication process.

 

PUBLICATION FREQUENCY

The Journal frequency is quarterly include Jan-March, April-June, July-Sept, and Oct-Dec.

 

OPEN ACCESS POLICY

This journal operates on an immediate open access model, ensuring that its content is freely accessible to the public without delay. This policy is founded on the principle that unrestricted availability of research significantly contributes to a broader, global dissemination and exchange of knowledge.

 

ARCHIVING

This journal utilizes PKP PN and the LOCKSS system to ensure the long-term survival of Web-based scholarly publications, and to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration.

 

EDITORIAL INDEPENDENCE

The handling Editor retains full authority for the final decision on each manuscript. We are committed to upholding strict editorial independence, ensuring that all decisions are made free from any personal, political, or financial influence.

Iranian Scientific Association of Medical Ethics did not interfere in the evaluation, selection, or editing of individual articles, either directly or by creating an environment in which editorial decisions are strongly influenced.

 

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Journal of the Iranian Scientific Association of Medical Ethics followed the indications provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The Journal also follows the guidelines mentioned in the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals issued by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

 

PUBLISH POLICY

You will receive an email notification when your proof is ready for review in PDF. It is the authors’ responsibility to check that all the text and data as contained in the page proofs are correct and suitable for publication. We request that authors pay particular attention to the author's names and affiliations since no changes can be made after the publication. The proofs must be returned by the deadline to ensure that the journal can be published on time.

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MISCONDUCT

Journal of the Iranian Scientific Association of Medical Ethics is endorsing the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals in which the highest ethical standards in the conduct of research and other scholarly activities are expected. Any individual found guilty of willful ‘misconduct’ as defined below is subject to disciplinary action by the Editorial board.

Definition of research misconduct:

The US Office of Research Integrity defines the following terms in relation to research misconduct:

(a) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.

(b) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.

(c) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

(d) Research misconduct does not include honest errors or differences of opinion.

 

PLAGIARISM

Any form of plagiarism will not be tolerated. If serious evidence of plagiarism was detected by the editorial team or reviewers in any stage of the article process it be can lead to the rejection of the article. But, if only content plagiarism with a tolerable rate (5-30% plagiarism) was detected, the author(s) may ask to revise their content.

Similarity check for all submitted manuscripts performed by iThenticate plagiarism detection software.

 

RETRACTION

Editorial team will consider retracting a publication if there is clear evidence that:

  1. The findings are unreliable:

Research Misconduct: This is the most common reason and includes:

Fabrication of data: Data or results were made up.

Falsification of data: Research materials, equipment, processes, or data were manipulated or omitted, leading to an inaccurate representation of the research. This often includes inappropriate image manipulation.

Honest Error: There are significant errors that fundamentally undermine the findings or conclusions, even if unintentional (e.g., miscalculation, experimental flaw, contamination, or using incorrect reagents).

  1. Ethical Violations:

Plagiarism: Presenting another's work (ideas, words, data) as one's own without proper attribution. This also extends to self-plagiarism (reusing significant portions of one's own previously published work without proper citation).

Redundant/Duplicate Publication: Publishing the same article or substantial portions of the same data in more than one journal without proper disclosure, permission, or justification.

Unethical Research: The research itself was conducted unethically (e.g., lack of informed consent, non-compliance with animal welfare guidelines, or absence of required ethical approvals).

Undisclosed Major Conflicts of Interest: A significant conflict of interest that could unduly influence the interpretation or recommendations of the work was not declared.

Authorship Misconduct: This can involve fraudulent claims of authorship, exclusion of deserving authors, or disputes that cannot be resolved and affect the integrity of the work.

Peer Review Manipulation: Attempts to improperly influence the peer review process.

  1. Legal or Copyright Issues:

The article is found to be defamatory or violates personal privacy.

The publication contains material or data used without proper authorization, infringing on copyright.

There is a serious health risk to the general public if the information in the article is acted upon.

 

COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS

If you disagree with a decision made by the Journal of the Iranian Scientific Association of Medical Ethics, the author may appeal the decision by providing an email to Editor with a detailed point-by-point response to the reviewer and editor's comments. The Editor will review the peer review process undertaken for the submission. If the decision was made in line with editorial criteria, the Editor’s decision to reject is final. Journal will acknowledge receipt of an appeals within 7 business days. Only one appeal is permitted for each manuscript. Final decisions on appeals will be made within 4-8 weeks by the Editorial Board Member handling the paper or the Editor-in-Chief.

In general, an appeal against a rejection decision on a manuscript will only be considered if:

(a) the authors can demonstrate that an error that determined the final decision has been made - by a reviewer or the Editors - during the review

or

(b) if important additional data can be provided

or

(c) if a convincing case of bias in the process can be demonstrated

Complaints

Complaints about our processes or about publication ethics will be handled by the Editor responsible for the journal. The author will be notified of the outcome by email. If the author wishes to pursue their complaint further, they may contact COPE directly. Information can be found on the COPE website:

https://publicationethics.org/facilitation-and-integrity-subcommittee

 

ADVERTISING POLICIES

Currently, Journal of the Iranian Scientific Association of Medical Ethics published by Pars Biomedical Publisher did not accept commercial advertising for its periodicals, website, and other forms of communication.