Declaração de Ética e Má Prática de Publicação
O Journal of Neurology & Neurophysiology cumpre as questões éticas e erros e também realizaria uma revisão legal, se necessário. A revista garante que a reimpressão ou publicidade não influencie as decisões dos editores. O Conselho Editorial da revista permite que você se comunique com outros editores, revistas e autores mediante solicitação de conexão.
Responsabilidades dos Autores
Espera-se que um autor apresente o relato do trabalho de maneira genuína, juntamente com o significado. Espera-se que os autores apresentem trabalhos originais, e uma citação apropriada deve ser feita ao citar trabalhos de outros.
Um autor não deve incluir a mesma pesquisa em mais de um manuscrito para uma publicação ou periódico primário. O escopo do trabalho relatado deve ser baseado na citação adequada de outras publicações influentes.
Qualquer interesse financeiro ou pessoal que rege as descobertas ou pesquisas no manuscrito, juntamente com os detalhes do apoio financeiro e suas fontes, devem ser revelados.
Responsabilidades dos revisores
O revisor é responsável perante o autor e o editor em relação ao manuscrito. A revisão por pares é o principal mecanismo pelo qual a qualidade da pesquisa é julgada. A maioria das decisões de financiamento em ciência e no avanço acadêmico de cientistas é baseada em publicações revisadas por pares.
Responsabilidades éticas dos revisores
Responsabilidades do Editor e Conselho Editorial
Decisões de publicação: A decisão de publicar um artigo submetido ao Journal of Neurology & Neurophysiology é tomada pelo conselho editorial. O editor deve seguir os regulamentos contemporâneos relativos à difamação, violação de direitos autorais e plágio que são eficazes. Ele tem o direito de tomar decisões em consulta com revisores ou membros do conselho editorial.
Fair play: um editor deve avaliar os manuscritos por seu conteúdo intelectual sem considerar raça, gênero, orientação sexual, crença religiosa, origem étnica, cidadania ou filosofia política dos autores.
Confidentiality: the editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
General duties and responsibilities of the editor
Actively seek the views of authors, readers, reviewers and editorial board members about ways of improving their journals processes.
Encourage and be aware of research into peer review and reassess journal processes in the light of new findings.
Support initiatives designed to reduce academic misconduct.
Support initiatives to educate researchers about publication ethics.
Assess the effects of their journal policies on author and reviewer behavior and revise policies, as required, to encourage responsible behavior and discourage misconduct
Ensure that any press releases issued by the journal reflect the message of the reported article and put it into context.
[1] Relations with readers
Ensure that all published reports of research have been reviewed by suitably qualified reviewers (e.g. Including statistical review where appropriate).
Ensure that non-peer-reviewed sections of their journal are clearly identified.
Adopt processes that encourage accuracy, completeness and clarity of research reporting.
Consider developing a transparency policy to encourage maximum disclosure about the provenance of nonresearch articles.
Adopt authorship or contributorship systems that promote good practice (i.e. So that listings accurately reflects who did the work) and discourage misconduct.
Inform readers about steps taken to ensure that submissions from members of the journals staff or editorial board receive an objective and unbiased evaluation
[2] Relations with authors
Publish clear instructions in their journals about submission and what they expect from others.
Provide guidance about the criteria for authorship and/or who should be listed as a contributor.
Review author instructions regularly and provide links to relevant guidelines (e.g. COPE).
Require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.
Ensure that appropriate reviewers are selected from submissions (i.e. Individuals who are able to judge the work and are free from disqualifying competing interests).
Respect requests from authors that an individual should not review their submission, if these are well-reasoned.
Be guided by the COPE flowcharts in cases of suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.
Publish details of how they handle cases of suspected misconduct (e.g. With links to the COPE flowcharts).
[3] Editors, the peer review process, and relations with reviewers
Editors should provide reviewers with guidelines, which should be current.
Editors should strive to protect peer reviewers identities.
Editors should ensure that material submitted to their journal remains confidential while under review.
[4] Relations with editorial board members
Identify suitably qualified editorial board members who can actively contribute to the development and good management of the journal.
Appoint editorial board members for a fixed term of office (e.g. Three years).
Provide clear guidance to the editorial board members about their expected functions and duties, these
might include:
submissions:
[5] Relationship with publishers, owners, and advertisers
The relationship of editors to publishers and owners is often complex but should in each case be based firmly on the principle of editorial independence. Notwithstanding the economic and political realities of their journals, editors should make decisions on which articles to publish based on quality and suitability for readers rather than for immediate financial or political gain. Editors should have declared policies on advertising in relation to the content of the journal and on processes for publishing supplements.
Conflict of interest
Editors should have systems for managing the conflicts of interest of themselves, their staff, authors, and reviewers. Readers should be informed on who has funded research and on the role of the funders in the research.
Guidelines for retracting articles
Journal of Neurology & Neurophysiology takes its responsibility to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record of our content for all end users very seriously. Journal of Neurology & Neurophysiology places great importance on the authority of articles after they have been published and our policy is based on best practice in the academic publishing community.
It is a general principle of scholarly communication that the editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal shall be published. In making this decision, the editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. An outcome of this principle is the importance of the scholarly archive as a permanent, historic record of the transactions of scholarship. Articles that have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as far as is possible. However, very occasionally circumstances may arise where an article is published that must later be retracted or even removed. Such actions must not be undertaken lightly and can only occur under exceptional circumstances, such as:
Article Withdrawal: Only used for Articles in Press which represent early versions of articles and sometimes contain errors, or may have been accidentally submitted twice. Occasionally, but less frequently, the articles may represent infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like.
Article Retraction: Infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Occasionally a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication.
Article Removal: Legal limitations upon the publisher, copyright holder or author(s).
Article Replacement: Identification of false or inaccurate data that, if acted upon, would pose a serious health risk..
Manuscript Type Article Processing Charges: Research Article 1705 EURO Review/Case Report/other 1550 EURO
Maintain the integrity of the academic record
Encouraging academic integrity
Request evidence of ethical research approval for all relevant submissions and be prepared to question authors about aspects such as how patient consent was obtained or what methods were employed to minimize animal suffering.
Ensure that reports of clinical trials cite compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki, Good Clinical Practice and other relevant guidelines to safeguard participant.
Ensure that reports of experiments on, or studies of, animals cite compliance with the US Department of Health and Human Services Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals or other relevant guidelines.
Consider appointing a journal ethics panel to advise on specific cases and review journal policies periodically.
Ensuring the integrity of the academic record
Tome medidas para reduzir a publicação redundante encoberta, por exemplo, exigindo que todos os ensaios clínicos sejam registrados.
Certifique-se de que o material publicado seja arquivado com segurança (por exemplo, por meio de repositórios online permanentes, como o PubMed Central).
Tenha sistemas para dar aos autores a oportunidade de disponibilizar gratuitamente artigos de pesquisa originais.
Evite que as necessidades de negócios comprometam os padrões intelectuais e éticos.
Erros, declarações imprecisas ou enganosas devem ser corrigidas prontamente e com o devido destaque. Os editores devem seguir as diretrizes do COPE sobre retratações