Publication ethics and malpractice statement

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Last updated on November 6, 2019

The journal Reumatizam and its publisher, the Croatian Society for Rheumatology, adhere to the statement of the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE; https://publicationethics.org/core-practices). The journal also consults research and publication ethics  recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME; http://www.icmje.org/), the Council of Science Editors (CSE; https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME; http://wame.org/).

 

Handling editor duties

Fairness and editorial independence

Editors should judge the submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, validity of the study, clarity) and on the relevance to the remit of the journal, without bias on the basis of the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, citizenship, religious or political beliefs, or institutional affiliation. The decision to edit and publish is not determined by government policy or the policy of any other agency outside the journal. The editor-in-chief is fully responsible for the selection of publication of quality articles falling within the aims and scope of this journal and adhering to research and publication ethics standards.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff shall not share any information about a received manuscript with anyone except with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

Conflict of interest statement

The publisher and editorial board members shall not use unpublished information from the submitted manuscript in their own research without the author’s explicit written permission. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors from work on a manuscript shall be kept confidential and shall not be used for private gain. The editors should avoid evaluating manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or any other relationship/connection with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper, and should ask another member of the editorial board to handle such a manuscript.

Publication decision

The journal editors guarantee that all submitted manuscripts considered for publishing are peer-reviewed by at least two peer reviewers, experts in the scientific topic addressed in the manuscript. The editor-in-chief is responsible for decisions on which of the submitted manuscripts is to be published, based on the validity of the work, its importance to researchers and readers, and the reviewer comments, including legal requirements currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor-in-chief may consult with other journal editors or additional reviewers in making publication decisions.

Involvement and cooperation in investigation

The editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or the society) should take appropriate measures if ethical concern arises about a submitted manuscript or a published article. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior shall be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. The editors strictly follow the COPE flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts). If the investigation proves any ethical concern, the journal will publish a correction, a retraction, an expression of concern, or other notification as may be relevant. The retractions are arranged in line with the COPE retractions guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines).

 

Editorial board member duties

All Croatian and other representative members of the editorial board are chosen for a three-year term that can be extended based on the evaluation of their contributions to the journal Reumatizam. All editorial board members should:

• upon invitation, act as peer reviewers for the submissions in their field of expertise;
• upon invitation, submit editorials commenting on the submissions in their field of expertise;
• submit full research papers and reviews of interest to the audience of this journal;
• promote this journal at local and international rheumatology congresses and other meetings to attract the best submissions;
• regularly upgrade their editorial and review skills by attending science editing meetings of the Croatian Society for Rheumatolgy;
• act responsibly in line with the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (https://publicationethics.org/core-practices);
• ethically promote the journal articles using Twitter and other social media channels in line with the Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications  (https://bit.ly/34ECq1l).

 

Reviewer duties

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review helps the journal editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the authors, may assist them in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential part of scholarly communication and a service to profession. Its aim is to improve the quality, readability, and ethical value of the submissions..

The reviewers are selected by the editor-in-chief to provide fair, objective, and courteous comments on the submissions. In the reviewing process, they are encouraged to consult the relevant standards of the EQUATOR Network (http://www.equator-network.org/). To increase this journal’s transparency, the reviewers are acknowledged by publicizing their names annually. They may also choose to list their contributions on their ORCID iDs (https://orcid.org/) and forward this journal’s official reviewer acknowledgements to Publons (http://publons.com/), a service which is currently owned by Clarivate Analytics.

 

Promptness

Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript submitted for review, or knows that a prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor at the earliest opportunity, and decline the invitation to review, so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review is a confidential document and must be treated as such. It must not be shown to or discussed with others, without the explicit permission of the editor-in-chief (who will only grant permission in exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the invitation to review.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of sources

The reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement which is an observation, derivation, or argument that has been reported and published should be accompanied by a relevant citation. Asking the authors to cite the reviewer’s own work(s) is allowed provided it is highly relevant and may improve the quality of the manuscript. The reviewer should also call the editor-in-chief’s attention to any similarity or overlap between the manuscript submitted for review and any other paper (published or unpublished), of which he/she has personal knowledge.

Disclosure of conflicts of interest

The reviewer who has a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or any other relationship or connection with any of the authors, pharmaceutical companies, or institutions with interest in the manuscript’s subject matter and the research work described therein, should immediately declare such interest by notifying the editor, and decline the invitation to review, so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

The reviewers are not allowed to use the unpublished material contained in the submitted manuscript in their own work. The privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review shall be kept confidential and shall not be used for the reviewer’s private interests.

This applies also to invited reviewers who have declined the invitation to review.

 

Authors’ duties

The authors should submit manuscripts with potentially significant positive implications for the advancement of rheumatology and rehabilitation care in Croatia and neighboring countries.

The authors of original research and review articles should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Prior to the submission, the authors are advised to consult relevant standards of the EQUATOR Network (http://www.equator-network.org/). Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

 

Data access

The authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review, and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure the accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected, and that legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written and submitted entirely original work, and if they have reused their own and others’ work in whole or in part, they have to appropriately refer to that. If the submission is based on previously published congress abstract(s), the authors should provide a related note. All scientific facts and ideas of others should be linked to relevant references. Plagiarism of words, ideas, and graphics constitutes unethical behavior and is not tolerated at this journal.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, 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.

The publication of some types of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. Reference to the primary document must be made in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only individuals who meet the criteria for authorship should be listed as authors in the manuscript, as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content. Authorship criteria comprise the following: substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; giving final approval of the version to be published; and agreeing to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All  individuals who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support), but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as authors, but should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgments” section after their written permission has been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the authors’ list, and verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

The authors should, at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript), disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones, such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation as keynote speakers, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert opinions or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones, such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, and knowledge of or belief in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number, if any).

Acknowledgment of sources

The authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence, or discussions with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from such sources. The authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as the use of court documents or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that entail any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with the relevant legislation and institutional guidelines, and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has/have approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. The authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experiments involving human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.

Peer review

The authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to the editor’s requests for raw data, clarifications, proof of ethics approval, patient consent, and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “revisions necessary”, the authors should respond to the reviewer comments point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting the manuscript to the journal in due time.

Fundamental errors in published works

When the authors discover errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, they have to notify the journal editors or publisher, and cooperate with them either to correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract it. The retractions are arranged in line with the COPE guideline (https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines).

 

Publisher duties

Handling of unethical publishing behavior

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected article. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

Access to journal content

The publisher is committed to enable the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensure accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining an own digital archive. For details, please see: https://reumatizam.hlz.hr/.