Code of Ethics

Principles and Standards for Scientific Publication

The code of ethics establishes the guidelines and standards governing the behavior of those involved in scientific publishing. Below are the key elements typically included in these codes.

General Commitments

Research Integrity: Authors must submit original and truthful work, free of plagiarism.

Peer Review: Manuscripts must be evaluated fairly and objectively by experts, maintaining confidentiality.

Conflicts of Interest: Authors, reviewers, and editors must declare conflicts of interest and manage them transparently.

Welfare of Research Subjects: Research involving humans or animals must comply with ethical and legal standards, ensuring the informed consent of participants.

Handling Retractions and Corrections

Clear procedures for retracting articles in cases of errors or misconduct.

Timely publication of necessary corrections.

Education and Training

Promotion of education in research ethics for authors and reviewers.

Provision of resources on best practices in scientific research.

Diversity and Inclusion

Promotion of diversity in research.

Encouragement of the inclusion of different perspectives.

Authors' Commitment

Originality and Truthfulness: Ensure the originality and truthfulness of the work, supported by evidence.

Declaration of Conflicts of Interest: Declare potential conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation of results.

Informed Consent: Obtain and document informed consent from human participants, and follow ethical regulations in animal studies.

Authorship Responsibility: Acknowledge all significant contributors as co-authors, ensuring that all have reviewed and approved the final manuscript.

Authenticity and Transparency

Provide complete and accessible data to verify results.

Reviewers' Commitment

Fair and Objective Evaluation: Evaluate manuscripts impartially based on scientific quality and relevance.

Confidentiality: Maintain the confidentiality of information contained in manuscripts and avoid using it for personal benefit.

Declaration of Conflicts of Interest: Decline to review manuscripts involving conflicts of interest that could bias judgment.

Constructive Criticism: Provide useful and constructive feedback to help authors improve their work.

Peer Evaluators' Commitment

Rigorously Review Process: Actively participate in the review process, ensuring ethical and methodological standards.

Process Transparency: Be transparent in evaluation methodology and open to discussing decisions with editors.

Respect for Authors' Rights: Provide clear and well-founded feedback, avoiding destructive comments.

Avoiding destructive or non-constructive comments.

Commitment to Continuous Improvement: Stay up to date on best practices and advances to provide accurate and relevant evaluations.

Updating the Code

Periodic review and updates to adapt to emerging best practices and standards.

Conclusion

This code of ethics aims to ensure quality and trust in scientific publishing. All involved parties must adhere to these principles to promote the advancement of knowledge in an ethical and responsible manner.