author Declaration
- Conflict of Interest
Potential conflict of interest exists:
We wish to draw the attention of the Editor to the following facts, which may be considered as potential conflicts of interest, and to significant financial contributions to this work:
The nature of potential conflict of interest is described below:
No conflict of interest exists.
We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.
- Funding
Funding was received for this work.
All of the sources of funding for the work described in this publication are acknowledged below:
[List funding sources and their role in study design, data analysis, and result interpretation]
No funding was received for this work.
- Intellectual Property
We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property. In so doing we confirm that we have followed the regulations of our institutions concerning intellectual property.
Research Ethics
We further confirm that any aspect of the work covered in this manuscript that has involved human patients has been conducted with the ethical approval of all relevant bodies and that such approvals are acknowledged within the manuscript.
IRB approval was obtained (required for studies and series of 3 or more cases)
Written consent to publish potentially identifying information, such as details or the case and photographs, was obtained from the patient(s) or their legal guardian(s).
- Authorship
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends that authorship be based on the following four criteria:
- Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
- Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
- Final approval of the version to be published; AND
- Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. For more information on authorship, please see http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html#two.
All listed authors meet the ICMJE criteria. We attest that all authors contributed significantly to the creation of this manuscript, each having fulfilled criteria as established by the ICMJE.
One or more listed authors do(es) not meet the ICMJE criteria.
We believe these individuals should be listed as authors because:
[Please elaborate]
We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors.
We confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all named authors.
- Contact with the Editorial Office
The Corresponding Author declared on the title page of the manuscript.
This author submitted this manuscript using his/her account in OJS.
We understand that this Corresponding Author is the sole contact for the Editorial process (including direct communications with the office). He/she is responsible for communicating with the other authors about progress, submissions of revisions and final approval of proofs.
We confirm that the email address shown below is accessible by the Corresponding Author, is the address to which Corresponding Author’s OJS account is linked, and has been configured to accept email from the editorial office of JPBAB:
We understand that this author is the sole contact for the Editorial process (including direct communications with the office). He/she is responsible for communicating with the other authors, including the Corresponding Author, about progress, submissions of revisions and final approval of proofs.
7. Acknowledgement
The authors should give acknowledgement section if applicable.
8. Data Availability statement
The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]
• The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].
• The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due [REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party name] but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of [third party name].
9. Ethics approval and consent to participate
Applicable or Not applicable
10. Consent for publication
Applicable or Not applicable
Misconduct
JPBAB takes seriously all allegations of potential misconduct. As members of COPE, all JPBAB journals will follow the COPE guidelines outlining how to deal with cases of suspected misconduct.
In cases of suspected research or publication misconduct, it may be necessary for the Editor to contact and share manuscripts with third parties, for example, author(s)’ institution(s) and ethics committee(s). JPBAB may also seek advice from COPE and discuss anonymized cases in the COPE Forum. The editor may consult Medeye Publishers’s Research Integrity Group.
A notice of suspected transgression of ethical standards in the peer review system may be included as part of the author’s and article’s bibliographic record.
Research misconduct
All research involving humans (including human data and human material) and animals must have been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework (see our Ethics policy for further information). If there is suspicion that research has not taken place within an appropriate ethical framework, the Editor may reject a manuscript and may inform third parties, for example, author(s)’ institution(s) and ethics committee(s).
In cases of proven research misconduct involving published articles, or where the scientific integrity of the article is significantly undermined, articles may be retracted. See our Retraction policy for further information.
Data falsification and fabrication
Data falsification is manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images, removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc. Data fabrication means the making up of research findings.
Any questions regarding data integrity raised during or after the peer review process will be referred to the Editor. The Editor may request (anonymised) underlying study data from the author(s) for inspection or verification. If the original data cannot be produced, the manuscript may be rejected or, in the case of a published article, retracted. Cases of suspected misconduct will be reported to the author(s)’ institution(s).
Publication misconduct
As members of COPE, all JPBAB journal will follow the COPE guidelines outlining how to deal with cases of potential publication misconduct.
Plagiarism
JPBAB is a member of CrossCheck’s plagiarism detection initiative and uses plagiarism detection software. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Corrections and retractions
Rarely, it may be necessary for JPBAB to publish corrections to, or retractions of, articles published in its journals, so as to maintain the integrity of the academic record.
In line with JPBAB’s Permanency policy, corrections to, or retractions of, published articles will be made by publishing a Correction or a Retraction note bidirectionally linked to the original article. Any alterations to the original article will be described in the note. The original article remains in the public domain and the subsequent Correction or Retraction will be widely indexed. In the exceptional event that material is considered to infringe certain rights or is defamatory, we may have to remove that material from our site and archive sites.
Authors, readers or organizations who become aware of errors or ethics issues in a published article are encouraged to contact the individual journal in the first instance via the contact details available on the journal website. All reports will be considered by the Editors; additional expert advice may be sought when deciding on the most appropriate course of action. The Medeye Publishers Research Integrity Group provides support to Editors in addressing publication ethics issues in a COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)-compliant manner.
Corrections
Changes to published articles that affect the interpretation and conclusion of the article, but do not fully invalidate the article, will, at the Editor(s)’ discretion, be corrected via publication of a Correction that is indexed and bidirectionally linked to the original article.
For authors who’ve changed their name and wish to correct it on their published works, please see SNCS Contact Form: Inclusive Name Change Policy : Medeye Publishers Support.
Retractions
On rare occasions, when the interpretation or conclusion of an article is substantially undermined, it may be necessary for published articles to be retracted. JPBAB will follow the COPE guidelines in such cases. Retraction notices are indexed and bidirectionally linked to the original article. The original article is watermarked as retracted and the title is amended with the prefix “Retracted article:”
Editorial Expressions of Concern
When an Editor becomes aware of serious concerns regarding interpretation or conclusion of a published article, they may choose to publish a statement alerting the readership. Scenarios in which Editorial Expressions of Concern may be published include prolonged investigations of very complex cases and when the concerns may have a significant and immediate impact on public health or public policy. An Editorial Expression of Concern may be superseded by a subsequent Correction or Retraction, but will remain part of the permanent published record.
Removal of published content
In exceptional circumstances, Medeye Publishers reserves the right to remove an article, chapter, book or other content from Medeye Publishers’s online platforms. Such action may be taken when (i) Medeye Publishers has been advised that content is defamatory, infringes a third party’s intellectual property right, right to privacy, or other legal right, or is otherwise unlawful; (ii) a court or government order has been issued, or is likely to be issued, requiring removal of such content; (iii) content, if acted upon, would pose an immediate and serious risk to health. Removal may be temporary or permanent. Bibliographic metadata (e.g. title and authors) will be retained, and will be accompanied by a statement explaining why the content has been removed.
Appeals and complaints
Appeal against a rejection
If you wish to ask the Editor or Editorial Board to reconsider a rejection of a manuscript, you should, in the first instance, contact the Editor through the instructions on the journal website. These are considered appeals, which, by policy, must take second place to the normal workload. In practice, this means that decisions on appeals often take several weeks. Only one appeal is permitted for each manuscript. Final decisions on appeals will be made by the Editorial Board Member handling the paper or the Editor.
In general, an appeal against a rejection decision on a manuscript will only be considered if:
- the authors can demonstrate that an error that determined the final decision has been made - by a referee or the Editors - during review or
- if important additional data can be provided or
- if a convincing case of bias in the process can be demonstrated
Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should submit a formal letter of appeal to the journal by contacting the journal editorial office. Include the manuscript tracking number in the email subject line and the appeal letter. Most JPBAB journal use an appeal and will not consider an appeal without it.
If appeals are successful, then authors will be given instructions on how to proceed. If an appeal merits further consideration, the Editor may send the authors' response and the revised paper out for further peer review.
For all other feedback and complaints, please check individual journal’s ‘About’ pages for more information.
Complaints
Complaints about our processes or about publication ethics will in the first instance be handled by the Editor responsible for the journal. If the Editor is the subject of the complaint, please approach the editorial and publishing management team by email to editor@jpbab.com.
For complaints about processes, such as time taken for review, the Editor will review and respond to the complainant's concerns. This feedback will be provided to relevant stakeholders to guide improvements to processes and procedures.
For complaints about publication ethics or scientific content, the Editor will follow guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics. The Editor may request advice from the Medeye Publishers Research Integrity Group on difficult or complicated cases. The Editor then decides on a course of action and provides feedback to the complainant.
If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint, it will be escalated to the journal's editorial and publishing management team for investigation. If no publishing contact is identified send the query to editor@jpbab.org
Collections and Special Issues
All manuscripts submitted to JPBAB Journal Collections or Special Issues are assessed according to the journal’s standard editorial criteria and are subject to all of the standard Editorial Policies, including the Competing Interests policy. The content of the submission will also be assessed to ensure it lies within the scope of the Collection or Special Issue.
All submissions that meet the journal’s criteria for peer review will undergo the journal’s standard peer review process. Please visit the journal’s website for information on the review process used. The peer review of any submissions for which the Editors of the Collection or Special Issue, have competing interests is handled by another Editor, who has no competing interests, to ensure the evaluation of these submissions is objective.
