Untitled Document

Publication Ethics

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal, RUJMS contributes to growth of knowledge. The best standards of publication ethics are encouraged. We take all possible measures against publication malpractices. It is important that those who are involved in the act of publishing: authors, editors, peer reviewers and the publisher, all should agree upon the standards of proper ethical behavior. Faculty of Medical Science, Rama University, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India as publisher of the journal RUJMS, take their duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.

Duties of Authors

• Reporting standards Authors of papers should present an accurate description of their work with an objective discussion of its significance. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to reproduce the data. Underlying data within the paper should be accurate. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements imply unethical behavior and are not acceptable. Review and professional publication articles should be accurate and clear objective. .

• Data access and preservation Authors should preserve the raw data for a reasonable time after publication. It may be required in connection with a paper for editorial review. Also it should be prepared to provide public access to such data if practicable. .

• Novelty and plagiarism All articles submitted to RUJMS are checked for plagiarism using tools which check for similarity. Similarity check software usually cannot check images. The authors should make sure that they have submitted entirely original works for publication. The images and tables submitted are original and not sourced from the internet. The authors must make sure that the work and/or words of others have been appropriately cited or quoted.
Plagiarism takes several forms like copying or paraphrasing substantial portions of another’s paper (without attribution), claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is strictly unacceptable. .

• Multiple, unnecessary or coexisting publication Publishing same research work in more than one journal or primary publication concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and should be avoided. In general, an author must not submit for consideration in another journal, an already published paper. Publication of same kinds of articles in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided 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. The primary reference should be cited in the secondary publication. .

• Acknowledgement of sources Authors should cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work. Information obtained individually, as discussion with third parties or correspondence should not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services. .

• Authorship of the paper Authorship should only be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Authors should provide acknowledgment to all others who have assisted in the research but who do not fall under the category of co-authors. The corresponding author must make sure that all appropriate co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. .

• Disclosure and conflicts of interest All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the research should be disclosed. .

• Fundamental errors in published works When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper. .


• Publication decisions The editors of RUJMS will take final decision regarding, which of the submitted articles should be accepted for publication. This decision should be driven by the validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may discuss with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision. .

• Impartiality An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content only. Their decision should not be influenced by race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. .

• Confidentiality Any information about a submitted manuscript should not be disclosed by the editor and any editorial staff to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. .

• Disclosure and conflicts of interest Editor should not use any unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in his/her own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be not used for personal advantage. If there exist any conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers, editors should ask other member of the editorial board to review and consider. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern, must be followed. .

• Involvement and cooperation in investigations An editor should take necessary action once ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). This response generally include contacting the author of the manuscript and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. .

Duties of reviewers

• Contribution to editorial decisions Peer review assists the editor of RUJMS in making editorial decisions. Communications of reviewer with the author through the editorial assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. RUJMS shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing. .

• Promptness Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. .

• Confidentiality Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. .

• Standards of objectivity Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. .

• Acknowledgement of sources Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also inform the editors if they find any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.

• Disclosure and conflict of interest Reviewer should not use any unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in his/her own research without the express written consent of the author. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Untitled Document
  • Follows us our servcies