Responsibilities or behavior of the Editorial Board The description of the processes of peer review is defined and made known by the Editorial Team of the journal, in order that the authors are aware of the evaluation criteria. The Editorial Board will always be willing to justify any controversy in the evaluation process.
The editor should be responsible for everything published in Medical Records. It should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors; For constantly improving the magazine; For ensuring the quality of the material it publishes; For boosting academic and scientific standards. On the other hand, the editor should be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when necessary. The decision of the publisher to accept or reject a work for publication must be based solely on the importance of the article, the originality, clarity and relevance that the work represents for the journal. The publisher agrees to guarantee the confidentiality of the evaluation process, it can not reveal to the reviewers the identity of the authors. Neither can reveal the identity of the reviewers at any time.
The editor is responsible for deciding which articles can be accepted in the journal and the Editorial Board will make the final decision about the articles to be published. The publisher assumes the responsibility to properly inform the author of the phase of the editorial process in which the text is sent, as well as the resolutions of the opinion. An editor should evaluate manuscripts and their intellectual content without distinction of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, or the authors' political philosophy. The publisher and any editorial team will not disclose any information about a manuscript sent to any person other than the corresponding author, Potential reviewers or other editorial advisors All unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in a publisher's personal research without the express written consent of the author. Insider information or ideas obtained through peer review will be confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Publishers must make fair and impartial decisions and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process.
Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are the product of their original work and that the data have been obtained in an ethical manner. In addition, they must ensure that their work has not been previously published or is not being considered in another publication. A job will be considered as previously published when any of the following situations occur:
• When the full text has been published.
• When extensive fragments of previously published materials form part of the text sent to the Journal.
• When the work submitted to the Journal is contained in reports published in extenso. These criteria refer to previous publications in printed or electronic form, and in any language.
For the publication of their works, the authors must strictly follow the rules for the publication of articles defined by the Editorial Board. Authors will send to the journal an original of the article without personal information (name, contact details, ascription, etc.) and excluding their name from the bibliographic references in which it appears. The authors of the original research reports should present an accurate description of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of their importance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the article. A document should contain enough detail and references to allow others to use the work. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Authors must ensure that they have fully written the original works, and if the authors have used the work and / or words of others, it has to be duly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes conduct of unethical editorial and is unacceptable.
Consequently, any manuscript that incurs plagiarism will be removed and not considered for publication. An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts that essentially describe the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. The submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behavior and publication is unacceptable. Proper sources must be recognized. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in the nature of the work presented. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondences or discussions with third parties, should not be used without explicit written permission from the source. The authorship should 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 appear as co-authors. The lead author (s) must ensure that all co-authors are included in the article, and that they have all seen and approved the final version of the document and agreed to submit it for publication. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other financial conflict of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, it is his obligation to immediately notify the Editor of the journal and to cooperate with to retract or correct the paper.
Reviewers undertake to report any unethical conduct by the authors and to indicate all information that may be grounds for refusing publication of articles. In addition, they must commit to keeping confidential information related to the items they evaluate. For the review of the work, the reviewers should have the guidelines to perform this task. These guidelines must be provided by the Editor and are the ones to be considered for evaluation. Every selected reviewer must notify the Editor in the shortest possible time if he or she is qualified to review the research of a manuscript or if it is not in a position to do the review. Any manuscript received for review should be treated as confidential. It should not be shown or discussed with other experts, except with the permission of the Editor. Reviewers should conduct themselves objectively. Any personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Reviewers should express their points of view with clarity and valid arguments. All privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. All privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. All privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. More information on unacceptable behaviors can be found in the scientific publication in the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the Committee on Ethics of Publication (COPE) or the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
All Published work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Copyright © 2017 All rights reserved. iMedPub Last revised : November 17, 2017