Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

Electronic Physician (ISSN: 2008-5842) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and scientific integrity. The journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (publicationethics.org), incorporating the COPE Code of Conduct into all stages of editorial processing, peer review, and publication.

1. Misconduct & Zero-Tolerance Policy

Electronic Physician enforces a strict zero-tolerance policy for academic and publication misconduct. All submitted manuscripts are thoroughly investigated for ethical breaches.

Unethical Practices Prohibited

• Plagiarism: Checked using iThenticate similarity screening for all submissions.
• Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Concurrent submissions or re-publishing without authorization.
• Salami Publishing: Inappropriate segmenting of a single study into minimal publishable units.
• Data Fabrication or Falsification: Manipulating or creating false data, images, or results.
• Ghost, Guest, or Gift Authorship: Omission of contributors or inclusion of non-contributing individuals.
• Fake External Reviewers or Submissions: Providing fraudulent reviewer contact details or non-authentic reviewer accounts.

Verification Notice: Authors must provide all mandatory supporting ethical documents (Ethics Committee/IRB approval letters, patient consent forms, clinical trial registration IDs) upon submission.

Part A. Responsibilities of Editors

A.1. Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief maintains ultimate responsibility for deciding which submitted manuscripts will be published, guided by the journal's editorial policies and constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

A.2. Fair Play & Non-Discrimination

Editors evaluate manuscripts strictly on their intellectual and scientific merit without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

A.3. Confidentiality & Disclosure

• Editors and editorial staff must maintain strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts. Information is only disclosed to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and editorial advisers.
• Unpublished Material: Information or data disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in an editor's personal research without explicit written consent from the authors.
• Investigations: In cases of alleged misconduct, the Editor-in-Chief may disclose relevant materials to institutional investigation committees or third-party editorial bodies as appropriate.

A.4. Corrections, Retractions & Expression of Concern

When genuine errors or serious misconduct affect published work:

• Corrections: Errata or corrigenda will be published promptly for minor errors.
• Retractions: If an error or misconduct renders the work invalid, the article will be retracted in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines and ICMJE Version Control Standards.
• Expressions of Concern: If serious concerns are raised regarding the validity or conduct of a study, the journal may inform readers while an institutional investigation is ongoing.

Part B. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

B.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and helps authors elevate the quality, methodological soundness, and clarity of their work. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive feedback.

B.2. Qualifications & Promptness

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to assess the research or knows that a prompt review will be unfeasible must notify the editorial office immediately and excuse themselves from the process.

B.3. Confidentiality & Non-Use of Information

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, shared with, or discussed with third parties unless authorized by the Editor-in-Chief. Privileged information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal or competitive advantage.

B.4. Objectivity & Standards

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of authors is strictly unacceptable. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting scientific arguments and references.

B.5. Acknowledgement of Sources & Misconduct Identification

• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
• Reviewers must notify the editor immediately if they notice substantial similarity, text overlap, or potential plagiarism between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work.

B.6. Conflicts of Interest & Reviewer Malpractice

• Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, financial, or personal connections with any of the authors, institutions, or companies associated with the paper.
• The journal takes reviewer misconduct seriously and investigates any breach of confidentiality, non-declaration of conflicts, or intentional delays for competitive gain.

Part C. Responsibilities of Authors

C.1. Reporting Standards & Data Retention

• Accuracy: Authors of original research must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior.
• Data Access & Retention: Authors may be asked to provide raw research data for editorial review. Authors should retain all research data for a reasonable time following publication and be prepared to grant public access where applicable.

C.2. Originality, Plagiarism & Permissions

• Authors must guarantee that the manuscript is original, written by them, and has not been published elsewhere in any language.
• Appropriate attribution and citation must be given for all borrowed work, text, tables, or figures.
• Copyrighted materials (e.g., figures or illustrations) must only be reproduced with explicit written permission from the copyright holder.

C.3. Concurrent Submissions

Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical and strictly prohibited.

C.4. Authorship Criteria & Acknowledgements

• ICMJE Criteria: Authorship must be limited strictly to those who meet the four ICMJE Authorship Criteria:
1. Substantial contributions to conception, design, or data acquisition/analysis.
2. Drafting or critically revising the manuscript for intellectual content.
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
• Contributors: Individuals who contributed to the study but do not meet full authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgements section with their written permission.

C.5. Research Ethics, Human & Animal Rights

• Human Studies: Must conform to the Declaration of Helsinki and be approved by a local Human Research Ethics Committee / Institutional Review Board (IRB). Written informed consent must be obtained from all participants (or legal guardians in pediatric studies). Identifiable individual data must not be published without explicit written consent.
• Animal Studies: Must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals.
• Hazards: Any unusual hazards associated with chemicals, equipment, or procedures used in the study must be clearly identified in the manuscript.

C.6. Conflict of Interest & Funding Disclosure

All authors must disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that could be perceived as influencing the research findings. All sources of external funding or research grants must be fully disclosed in the manuscript.

C.7. Notification of Errors in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is their obligation to promptly inform the journal editor or publisher and cooperate to issue an erratum or retract the paper if necessary.