Reviewing Policy

All articles for Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences are subjected to mandatory peer-
review procedure. Manuscripts with content that is technically weak or inappropriate for
the scope of the journal, failing to meet acceptable standards of English usage, or with
incomplete bibliographies will genertally rejected by Editor-in-Chief without regular review
process, directing motivated refusal.

Generally, each manuscript is initially sent to two referees. Referees must send their review
reports until the deadline to Editor-in-Chief, who is responsible for sending the paper
evaluation results to the corresponding author of the paper. Authors should follow the
advice of the referees and Editor-in-Chief when they feel this advice will improve the paper.
When they do not agree with the advice, they should write a detailed arguments describing
their reasons for disagreeing to Editor-in-Chief.

The revised manuscripts will normally be sent back to the referees for additional review.

The Editorial Board and Editor-in-Chief act as conduits for discussion between the
corresponding author and referees once a decision has been made on a paper. In cases of
conflicts or arguments for reconsidiration, Editor-in-Chief will invite the additional referee to
review the entire article and comments.

Publication Ethics

1. Introduction

1.1 Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

1.1 Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences and its Publisher European University follow principles of the integrity of publications in scientific journals, according and taking into account the recommendations of all international communities that are at the forefront of scientific literature publishing.

The Journal, with the help of comprehensive, objective and honest review, tends to select for publication only those materials related to scientific research of the highest quality, establishing standards of ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication (authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and the scientific community of the Journal),

1.2. The Publisher of the Journal does not only support scientific communications and invests in this process, but is also responsible for compliance with all current recommendations in the published work.

1.3 The Publisher undertakes to supervise scientific materials.

1.3. All publications are licensed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1. Fair play

The Editor evaluates submitted manuscripts for their intellectual content (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the Journal’s scope without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation.

2.2. Confidentiality

Editors and the Editorial Board will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone except authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and the Publisher, as appropriate.

2.3. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

2.3.1. Editors and the Editorial Board members will not use unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript without the Author’s explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas from a submitted manuscript must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

2.3.2. Editors will recuse themselves from considering a manuscript in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript. In such cases, editors ask for help of co-editors, editorial assistants or cooperate with the editorial staff rather than review the manuscript in question by themselves and make publication decisions.

2.4. Publication decisions

The Editor-in-Chief is personally and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted should be accepted and published, working in cooperation with the Editorial Board. The validity of the manuscript in question and its scientific value must always be the basis for publication decisions. The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the Editorial Board and constrained by such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

The Editor-in-Chief may also confer with other editors and reviewers in making this decision.

2.5. Publication supervision

The Editor-in-Chief who has provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions in the paper to be published are wrong should inform the Publisher about making a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or another note, as may be relevant.

2.6. Involvement and cooperation in investigation

The Editor-in-Chief in conjunction with the Publisher is to respond appropriately to ethical concerns related to reviewing manuscripts or published papers. Among measures that can be taken are communication with the Author of the manuscript the reasoning of a corresponding complaint or claim, as well as contacting relevant organizations and research centers.

3. Duties of Reviewers

3.1. Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer-review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through corresponding communication with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer-review is an essential component in formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor. The Editorial Board of the Journal shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2. Promptness

Every invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors of to decline the invitation to review.

3.3. Confidentiality

Any manuscripts suggested for review are confidential documents and should be treated as such. They must not be shown to or discuss with others except as authorized by the Editor.

3.4. Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should form their observations clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the

3.5. Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has been not cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

3.6.1. Reviewers should not consider manuscript in which they have conflicts of interests resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript. They should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

3.6.2. Unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research. Information or ideas obtained through the review process must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1. Manuscript requirements

4.1.1. Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, followed by an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

4.1.2. Review and research papers should be accurate and objective, while an editorial opinion should be clearly identified as such.

4.3. Originality and plagiarism

4.3.1. Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works. If they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms: from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical publication behavior and is unacceptable.

4.4. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

4.4.1. Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.5. Acknowledgement of sources

Authors must acknowledge the work of others and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence or discussion with third party, must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

5. Adoptions and plagiarism

The Editorial Board considering the paper may run the manuscript through the Antiplagiat system. In case of identifying numerous borrowings, the Editorial Board will act in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines

6. Policy of submitting preprints and postprints

As a part of the submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submitted manuscript was not previously published. After a manuscript has been published in Journal of Biomedical and Medical Sciences, we suggest that the link to the article on Journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Prior to acceptance and publication, the authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

This section was prepared in accordance with materials of Elsevier, as well as materials of the Committee on Publication Ethics, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and Association of Science Editors and Publishers.

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.