Responsibilities or behavior of the Editorial Board
The description of the peer review process defines it and makes it known the Editorial Team of the magazine, so that the authors are aware of what the evaluation criteria. The Editorial Board is always ready to justify any controversy in the evaluation process.
Editor responsibilities or behavior
The editor should be responsible for everything published in Archives of Medicine. You should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors; to constantly improve the magazine; to ensure the quality of the material published; to boost academic and scientific standards. Moreover, the publisher must be willing to issue corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when necessary. Editor's decision to accept or reject a job for publication must be based solely on the importance of article, originality, clarity and relevance that work represents for the magazine. The publisher is committed to ensuring the confidentiality of the evaluation process may not reveal to the reviewers the identity of the authors. Nor may reveal the identity of the reviewers at any time. The editor is responsible for deciding which items can be accepted in the magazine and the Editorial Board will make the final decision about the articles to be published. The editor is responsible for duly inform the author of the editorial process phase in which the text is sent as well as the resolutions of the opinion. An editor should evaluate manuscripts and their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors. The editor and any editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, potential reviewers or other editorial advisers All unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in personal research of an editor without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review will be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors must make fair and impartial decisions and ensure a review process fair and appropriate peer.
Responsibilities of authors
The authors should ensure that their manuscripts are the product of their original work and that the data have been obtained ethically. They must ensure that their work has not been previously published or are not being considered in another publication. It is considered as a previously published work when any of the following situations:
• When the full text has been published.
• When large fragments of previously published materials are part of the text sent to the Journal.
• When the work submitted to the journal is contained in memoirs published in extenso.
These criteria relate to previous publications in printed or electronic form and in any language. For the publication of their work, the authors must strictly follow the rules defined for the publication of articles by the Editorial Board. The authors send the original magazine article without personal information (name, contact details, secondment, etcetera.) And excluding his name from the references in which it appears. The authors of reports of original research should present an accurate description of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the article. A document must contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to use the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and / or words of others, must be duly summoned. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes conduct non-editorial ethics and unacceptable. Consequently, any manuscript incurred in plagiarism will be eliminated and not considered for publication. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. The presentation of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behavior and the publication is unacceptable. They must recognize the sources properly. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in the nature of the work presented. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence or discussions with third parties should not be used without explicit written permission from the source. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, implementation or interpretation of the study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The principal authors or must ensure that all coauthors are included in the article, and that everybody has seen and approved the final version of the document and agreed to its submission for publication. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial conflict of fund or other interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his published work, it is your obligation to immediately notify or magazine editor and cooperate with to recant or correct the paper.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers undertake to notify any unethical conduct by the authors and point out all the information that may be reason to refuse publication of articles. They must also commit to keeping confidential information related to articles that evaluate. For the review of the work, reviewers should have guidelines for this task. Such guidelines should be proportionate das by the Editor and are those that should be considered for evaluation. All selected reviewer must notify in the shortest time possible to the Editor if qualified to review the investigation of a manuscript or is not in the possibility of revision. Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. should not show or discuss with other experts, except with permission of the publisher. Reviewers should be conducted objectively. All personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and with valid arguments. Any privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.
You can find more information on unacceptable behavior in scientific publishing in the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) or the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).