Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

IJOHMN promote the best standards of publication ethics and take all possible measures against publication malpractices. We state that the following principles of Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement broadly based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors of the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE.  Some key points are including below but if we found any breach of Publication Ethics and any Malpractice we will take action according to the COPE latest guidelines on case to case basis. More details can be found here: https://publicationethics.org.

The author will be responsible for the entire research work presented for publishing. The author will be solely and completely responsible for the content of the work and must ensure that the work is not illegal, unlawful, plagiarized or violating publishing ethics. The author must ensure that the manuscript presented for publication does not contain any objectionable, pornographic, abusive, or defamatory content.  IJOHMN (SMART MOVES) is not liable to any third party or other person or entity for the work regardless of the fact that IJOHMN had any knowledge or could have reasonably known of any illegal, unlawful, or objectionable content in the work. You also agree to indemnify [compensate for harm or loss] IJOHMN (SMART MOVES) in case of any legal proceedings with the third party regarding copyright infringement or action on grounds of illegality as mentioned. 

The author must agree to the terms that neither the work is under consideration nor published in any other journal as it will be considered as Duplicate submission/publication. The author is instructed not to split a research work/study into different parts and submit it in more than one journal, as it will be considered as a Redundant publication/salami publication.

The research paper presented for publication must be original and unique. The research work should be based on proper and appropriate citations. 

a. Fundamental errors in published works

When an author knows that substantial mistake in his/her own published manuscript, the author should inform the journal editor to retract or correct the paper. If the journal’s management is informed by a third party that a published manuscript contains a substantial mistake, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or to provide evidence and justify the correctness of the original manuscript to the editorial board.

b. Data Sharing Policy

As IJOHMN is an Open  Access Journal this means our published manuscript's data can be used by others until they properly attribute it according to Creative Commons CC BY License.  Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review if required. 

c. Authorship and Contributionship

Authorship provides credit for an individual’s contributions to a study and carries accountability. According to the guidelines for authorship established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), ‘All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.’

An author should meet the following criteria

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the research work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
• Drafting the research 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 research 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. It is important to list everyone who made a substantial effort (study conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, drafting revising, approval of final version, including students or laboratory technicians) in completing the research paper, to avoid Ghost Publication.

 Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged. These authorship criteria are intended to reserve the status of authorship for those who deserve credit and can take responsibility for the work. It is the collective responsibility of the authors, not the journal to which the work is submitted, to determine that all people named as authors meet all four criteria; it is not the role of journal editors to determine who qualifies or does not qualify for authorship or to arbitrate authorship conflicts.

The corresponding author is the one individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal.  The corresponding author should be available throughout the submission and peer review process to respond to editorial queries in a timely way and should be available after publication to respond to critiques of the work and cooperate with any requests from the journal for data or additional information should questions about the paper arise after publication.

When two or three authors have written a research paper, all should decide who will be an author before the work is started and confirm who is an author before submitting the manuscript for publication. All members of the group named as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, including approval of the final manuscript.

Honorary authorship

Do not include your senior member, supervisor or any other person, if he or she has not have made a substantial contribution to your research paper and you include the name of an author along with you. It will be considered as Gift authorship or Honorary authorship.

The author is directed not to violate the above instructions and the author is also advised to check COPE guidelines to avoid anything which is considered unethical in COPE guidelines. If we found any violation of COPE guidelines is done by the author(s), the action will be taken according to COPE guidelines on case to case basis.

d. Conflict of Interest

The author declares that he/she has no conflict/competing financial, non-financial or other methods of acquiring remuneration or profitable interest in any way, or any subjective relationship that could directly or indirectly affect, encourage or influence the described work or the research paper. Any possibility of conflict arising in the form of personal, commercial, professional, political, or intellectual hidden or open must be disclosed.

e. Use of Inclusive Language

Language of the article must be clear and free of any discriminatory remarks.  The used words, phrases and language must not discriminate on the basis of gender, ethnicity, race, culture or any such words which exclude a person or group of people.  Language inclusion means writing should be free from any bias comments or bias reference. For example, one may use humankind instead of mankind, or use cleaner in place of cleaning boy or girl, business executive or entrepreneur in place of the businessman. 

f. Ethical Oversight

According to COPE  “Ethical oversight should include, but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and of business/marketing practices”. The journal is compiling the above policy and if we find any breach of the above policy we will take action according to COPE policy.

IJOHMN has assigned some responsibilities to its Reviewers, please find below the responsibilities of the Reviewers- Confidentiality: Reviewers should not share, examine with outsiders without the prior permission from the editor, or uphold the information from an assigned manuscript. A reviewer with their expertise should complete the review. 

1. Productive Assessment: The reviewer's comments should appreciate the positive aspects of the work, identify the negative aspects constructively, and indicate the enhancement needed. A reviewer should explain and hold his or her judgment clearly enough that editors and authors can understand the basis of the comments. The reviewer should ensure that an observation or argument that has been previously reported be accompanied by a relevant citation and should immediately alert the editor when he or she becomes aware of a duplicate publication. A reviewer should not use any kind of abusive language while commenting on an article. 
2. Impartiality and Integrity: The reviewer's decision should only depend on scientific merit, relevance to the subject, the scope of the journal rather than financial, racial, or ethnic origin etc., of the authors. A reviewer should not ask the author to Cite their own published work.
3. Disclosure of Conflict of Interest: To the extent feasible, the reviewer should minimize the conflict of interest. In such a situation, the reviewer should notify the editor describing the conflict of interest.  Sources of economic or financial support for the project must be revealed to avoid any kind of conflict of interest or pressure involved like financial or grant of any source. Any possibility of conflict arising in the form of personal, commercial, professional, political, or intellectual hidden or open must be disclosed.
4. Timeliness and Responsiveness: Reviewers should morally abide to provide the review comments within the stipulated time and be active enough in responding to the questions raised by the editor if any.
5. A reviewer should maintain confidentialities and do not disclose any information about the assigned manuscript to other than the editor.
6.  Confidentiality: Reviewers should not share, examine with outsiders without the prior permission from the editor, or uphold the information from an assigned manuscript. A reviewer with their expertise should complete the review. 

 3.  Responsibility of Editors and Editorial Board 

IJOHMN editors are responsible to assert the wholeness of the Journal by corrections identifying anything of meaning and looks of concern as early as possible.  It will be the editors' responsibility to ensure the quality of the paper. They will review, evaluate and prevaricate the paper. In the process, they must act neutrally in no external or internal pressure of any kind like economical, non-economical, political or religious in accepting or rejecting a manuscript.  The decision should solely be on merit, quality and uniqueness. Editors are responsible for monitoring and ensuring the impartiality, correctness, thoroughness, and respect of the peer-review editorial process.

 

• Ensure that the content or the author information present in the manuscript is readable.
• To evaluate all manuscripts such that they fall within the scope of the journal.
• Keep the journals internal integrity by recommending the corrections, dealing with retraction, supplemental data etc.
• Decision Making: IJOHMN Editor in Chief has all the authority for deciding which research work shall be published.
• Impartiality: An Editor should evaluate manuscripts without any prejudice towards cast, creed, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, or political viewpoint of the authors.
• Privacy: The Editor or any Editorial board member must not reveal any data about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate depending on the need and stage of processing.
• Conduct a Double-blind review process (reviewers of the research work won't get to know the identity of the author(s) and the author(s) won't get to know the identity of the reviewer).
• Adhere to the guidelines and procedure laid down by the IJOHMN.
• Make recommendations for improving the evaluation and dissemination of the manuscript of the journal.
• Confirm their Editorial Membership to verification email from international agencies like COPE. SCOPUS, Clarivate, etc.
• Disclosure of Conflict of Interest: The Editor or any Editorial board member should not use unpublished work for their research work without the written consent from the author.  Editors should refrain themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers and they should ask another member of the editorial board to handle that manuscript. IJOHMN require all editors to avoid all financial relationships that might constitute a conflict of interest.  Sources of economic or financial support for the project must be revealed to avoid any kind of conflict of interest or pressure involved like financial or grant of any source. Any possibility of conflict arising in the form of personal, commercial, professional, political, or intellectual hidden or open must be disclosed.

 3.  Responsibility of the Publisher

A publisher is accountable and responsible to work freely with no pressure of any kind.  The publisher must ensure the smooth and free-flow working environment and all the decisions of the Editorial Board are made independently, without any external pressure or influence and are fully independent from the publisher or any other persons. Financial supporters and funding organizations must not affect publications internal decision-making or process.