OICC Press is firmly committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and integrity, in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). By submitting a manuscript to journals at OICC Press, authors acknowledge that they have read and agree to abide by these publication ethics policies.
Authors, reviewers, editors, and all involved parties are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines:
OICC Press is dedicated to applying the codes and principles of conduct established by the publisher, which are primarily derived from the forth version of the “Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing” updated on 15 September 2022 by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
As per COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practices, our journals strictly adhere to the blinded peer-eview process, double or single. This method is crucial as it ensures an unbiased evaluation of the manuscript, thereby maintaining the credibility of our journals.
The peer-review process, a cornerstone of our journals’ operations, determines a manuscript’s publication suitability through editorial evaluation and external review.
Initially, the editor-in-chief assesses papers internally, aiming to swiftly proceed to external review or reject them, authors may receive feedback for improvement before making the decision. Manuscripts chosen for their potential to contribute significantly to their respective fields undergo blind peer-review by international reviewers supervised by the associate editor and Editor-in-Chief. Review completion typically takes 4-8 weeks, with occasional delays. The Editor-in-Chief, relying on the expertise and insights of the reviewers and assistant editors’ pieces of advice, has final acceptance authority.
All submissions undergo blinded review, a process we highly regard for maintaining academic and scientific research quality and objectivity. Reviewers play a crucial role in this process. They will provide feedback to the Editors-in-Chief, who will make the final decision with the aid of an editorial committee for most articles. We assure you that reviews and manuscripts are private documents until publication, and we trust in the reviewers’ professionalism to refrain from discussing them, even with colleagues. When they are invited to peer-review, complete the reviewing form promptly and respond to all requests. Notifying the editorial office if the manuscript isn’t within your expertise or if you can’t commit enough time suggests a qualified colleague if needed. Review the manuscript’s methods and objectives carefully for suitability. Reviews should be constructive and objective, advising the Editor-in-Chief on manuscript selection. Reviewer responses to journal questions should be thorough, including suggestions for improvement or rejection if necessary. They write clearly for non-native English speakers, avoiding complex language. When providing specific remarks, list points by number and provide page and line numbers. Treat authors’ work respectfully, and indicate if English corrections are needed. Only editors access reviewer score sheets and authors receive comments.
Editors provide reviewers with comprehensive guidance on their responsibilities, emphasising the importance of handling submitted material confidentially. This guidance should be regularly reviewed and should reference or provide a link to the relevant code of conduct. Editors should mandate that reviewers disclose any potential conflicts of interest before agreeing to assess a submission. Editors should implement systems to safeguard peer reviewers’ identities unless an open review system is employed, which must be explicitly communicated to authors and reviewers.
Reviewers must maintain anonymity and decline to review if they encounter technical issues, time constraints, or conflicts of interest. Submissions are treated confidentially, and external advice requires editorial approval. Reviewers should not pass on articles for personal gain and must ensure articles meet high standards and are original. They should inform the editor if they know an article is under consideration elsewhere. Review criteria vary but may include adherence to guidelines, article goals, transitions, structure, recommendations, references, and language quality. Reviewers’ comments on these aspects determine acceptance or rejection. They are encouraged to provide unbiased feedback, and the editor-in-chief makes the final decision.
All manuscripts must be handled with confidentiality to protect authors’ rights. Authors trust editors with their research, which can impact their reputation and career. Disclosure of confidential information during review violates authors’ rights, and editors must also respect reviewers’ confidentiality. Confidentiality may be breached in dishonesty or fraud but should otherwise be maintained. Editors are forbidden from disclosing any information about submitted papers, including receipt, content, review status, or criticisms, except to authors and reviewers, and they cannot be used in litigation without permission. Reviewers must understand that submitted papers are private property and refrain from discussing them publicly or appropriating ideas before publication. Reviewers should not make copies of manuscripts or share them without permission. After evaluations, reviewers should return or destroy manuscripts, and editors should not keep rejected manuscripts. Reviewer comments cannot be published without permission from the reviewer, author, and editor.
The Journals adhere to and implement the rules and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics in its reviewing and publishing processes. For more details, please visit: https://publicationethics.org While we employ blinded peer-review, the research community can be small, making reviewers familiar with the authors. Reviewers should disclose any significant conflicts of interest to the editor and decline review requests if biases are strong. Focus on evaluating the article rather than passing judgment on individuals. Authors are likely to appreciate unbiased feedback, leading to better work. Editors appreciate honesty about conflicts of interest, even if it means finding a new reviewer.
Editors’ relationship with the Publisher and the owner is grounded on editorial independence, adhering to the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. Editors make publication decisions based on the quality and appropriateness of articles for the journal, free from interference by the Publisher.
In line with promoting extensive intercultural information exchange, we provide immediate access to all its content. Each journal article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, allowing unrestricted use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction, provided proper credit is given to the original author(s) and source. While authors retain copyright, they grant the publisher exclusive rights to publish their articles. Readers are encouraged to respect the authors’ rights and provide appropriate credit when using the content.
Authors retain personal use rights, including sharing articles for personal use and maintaining intellectual property rights, including research data. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en.
Authors should ensure that all individuals who have made significant contributions to the research are listed as co-authors, and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript. The corresponding author plays a crucial role in managing the journal’s administrative requirements, including ethics committee approval, authorship details, conflict of interest statements, and clinical trial registration. They are primarily responsible for communicating with the journal throughout the submission, peer review, and publication processes, promptly responding to editorial inquiries, and assisting with post-publication requests.
Once an article is accepted, journals do not allow new authors to be added or changes to the first or corresponding authors. A signed letter from the correspondence author and all other co-authors is required to remove an author. Any changes to the order of the byline’s name must be accompanied by a signed consent letter from all authors.
The corresponding author plays a crucial role in managing the journal’s administrative requirements, including ethics committee approval, authorship details, conflict of interest statements, and clinical trial registration. They are primarily responsible for communicating with the journal throughout the submission, peer review, and publication processes, promptly responding to editorial inquiries, and assisting with post-publication requests.
Authors must ensure that their work is original and has not been previously published elsewhere. Any use of others’ work or ideas must be properly cited. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. All authors are strongly advised to thoroughly check their manuscripts for content before submitting them to the journal for publication. Authors may utilise reputable and valid plagiarism-checking software to ensure their manuscripts are plagiarism-free. Upon submission and before final publication, all submitted papers will undergo plagiarism checks using iThenticate and other plagiarism detection software by journals. Suppose plagiarism is suspected or detected by reviewers, editors-in-chief, readers, or editorial staff at any stage of the publication process. In that case, the manuscript will be rejected, and all authors, including the corresponding author, will be notified accordingly. Self-plagiarism is also considered and addressed appropriately. COPE’s code of conduct and flowcharts will be applied if plagiarism is detected in a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Authors are required to disclose any financial or personal conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their work. If no conflicts exist, authors should state this explicitly.
Authors should ensure the accuracy and integrity of their research data. Fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data is considered unethical and will not be tolerated.
Authors conducting research involving human or animal subjects must adhere to relevant ethical guidelines and obtain appropriate approval from institutional review boards or ethics committees.
Manuscripts submitted to the journal must be original and not published elsewhere. This rule also applies to manuscripts under review elsewhere. Authors must address copyright issues before citing figures or tables from another source.
The IAU journals are supported for the Article Processing Charges by IAU. For other journals, more information is provided by each individual journal.
All journals are committed to following publisher regulations and ethical guidelines. Each journal adheres to COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practices for publication ethics. The OICC Press is dedicated to upholding these principles as a university-supported, open-access, peer-reviewed publisher. You can access more details of each journal’s publication ethics codes on their website.
Editors-in-Chief are responsible for overseeing the publication process and making decisions related to the publication. They have the responsibility to evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic merit, relevance, and originality, regardless of authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, or institutional affiliation. Editors-in-chief should also handle all submissions with confidentiality and disclose any conflicts of interest. The Editors-in-Chief bear responsibility for all content published in the journal, committing to:
1. Addressing the needs of readers and authors.
2. Continuously enhancing the journal’s quality.
3. Implementing processes to ensure published material’s quality.
4. Upholding freedom of expression.
5. Safeguarding the integrity of the academic record.
6. Preventing business interests from compromising intellectual and ethical standards. 1.7 Promptly addressing corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary.
Best practice of Editors-in-Chief role:
According to defining the roles of authors and contributors, authors should openly declare their utilisation of AI technologies, such as LLMs or chatbots, in submissions. This openness is critical for readers to evaluate the reliability of the findings. It fosters trust in the integrity of the work and facilitates an accurate assessment of the research process, encompassing data analysis and writing methods, .
Editors use the COPE form and procedure to manage conflicts of interest/competing interests issues. Journals have establish a transparent process for handling submissions from editors, employees, or editorial board members to ensure impartial review.
Editors undertake all reasonable measures to uphold the quality of their content, acknowledging that journals and sections within journals may have distinct objectives and criteria with the best practices of:
All journals adhere to confidentiality laws in their jurisdiction. Regardless of local statutes, Editors-in-Cheif consistently safeguard the confidentiality of individual information obtained during research or professional interactions. Therefore, based on the COPE Code of Conduct obtaining written informed consent for publication from individuals who may recognise themselves or be identifiable by others (e.g., in case reports or photographs) is almost always necessary.
Since their establishment, various journals have been published bimonthly, quarterly, or biannually. More details about the publication frequency of each journal can be found on their respective webpages.
Policies related to the Intellectual Properties are based of the COPE guidlines and flowcharts. Editors are vigilant regarding intellectual property matters and collaborate with the Publisher to address potential violations of intellectual property laws and conventions by:
• Implementing systems to detect plagiarism (e.g., using software or searching for similar titles) in submitted manuscripts, routinely or when suspicions arise.
• Providing support to authors whose copyright has been infringed upon or who have experienced plagiarism.
• Being prepared to collaborate with the Publisher to protect authors’ rights and pursue offenders, such as by requesting retractions or removing material from websites, regardless of whether the journal holds the copyright.
Editors are responsible for taking action if they suspect misconduct or if allegations of misconduct are brought to their attention, regardless of whether the papers in question are published or unpublished. Editors should not merely reject papers that raise concerns about potential misconduct; they are ethically obligated to investigate alleged cases. Editors should adhere to the COPE flowcharts when applicable. Editors should initially solicit a response from individuals suspected of misconduct. If unsatisfied with the response, they should request an investigation from relevant employers, institutions, or appropriate bodies, such as regulatory or national research integrity organisations. Editors should make every reasonable effort to ensure that a proper investigation into alleged misconduct occurs. If not, editors should persist in seeking a resolution to the issue.
Errors, inaccuracies, or misleading statements must be promptly corrected and prominently addressed. Editors should adhere to COPE guidelines on retractions.
For any questions or concerns regarding publication ethics, authors, reviewers, and readers are encouraged to contact us or the editorial office of each journal at https://oiccpress.com/contact-us-oicc-press/.
Editors address complaints promptly and provide dissatisfied complainants with a clear mechanism for escalating their concerns. The journal outline this process, including instructions on referring unresolved issues to COPE. Editors adhere to the procedure outlined in the COPE flowchart on handling complaints.
Some Journals are now electronically archived in different repositories, including:
Authors are allowed to deposit the published version of their work in an institutional or other repository of their choice.
IAU provides significant support for the publishing costs of all its own journals. In addition these journals enjoy the volunteer works from their own academic community. If, a journal requires submission fees and article processing charges (APCs) to cover the remaining costs more details are provided in their webpages.
OICC Press journals doe not engage in direct marketing activities.
Last Updates: 05/05/2024