Ethical Principles and Publication Policy – Neuro-Cell Molecular Research

Scientific Responsibility

All authors should have direct academic and/or scientific contributions to the submitted manuscript. The authors should have all of the following specifications: Should plan or execute the study in the manuscript, should write or revise the manuscript, and accept the final draft

Ethical Rules and Plagiarism

This Journal is committed to the standards of research and publication ethics and does not allow any form of plagiarism. The journal uses a plagiarism screening service to verify the originality of content submitted before publication. If plagiarism is detected in the articles submitted to the Journal for publication, the responsibility belongs to the authors. In case of any suspicion or claim regarding scientific shortcomings or ethical infringement, the Journal reserves the right to submit the manuscript to the supporting institutions or other authorities for investigation. The Journal accepts the responsibility of initiating action but does not undertake any responsibility for an actual investigation or any power of decision.

This Journal uses “iThenticate” to screen all submissions for plagiarism before publication. This journal does not accept articles that indicate a similarity rate of more than 20%, according to iThenticate reports. It is essential that authors avoid all forms of plagiarism and ethical misconduct, as represented below.

We disapprove of unethical practices and of efforts to influence the review process with such practices as gifting authorship, inappropriate acknowledgments, and references in line with the COPE flowcharts.

Authors are obliged to acknowledge if they published study results in whole or in part in the form of abstracts.

Correction, Retraction, Clarification Policy, and Editorial Responses

This journal recognizes its obligation to correct errors in the work that it has published and to consider readers’ criticisms of that work.

Corrections and Retraction

Errors of this type will be corrected online as soon as possible, in coordination with the publisher, and will be printed in an erratum sheet that will appear in the next issue and be included in the digital version of the article. The corrected article will include a footnote stating the date of correction and the volume and issue in which the erratum will appear. In a situation where the corrections are significant in scope or quantity, they would not be corrected online, but the digital version would include a footnote signaling the publication of the erratum.

Erratum or publisher correction: Correction of a significant error made by the journal that affects the scholarly record, the scientific integrity of the article, or the reputation of the authors or the journal.

Corrigendum or author correction: Correction of a significant error made by the author that affects the scholarly record, the scientific integrity of the article, or the reputation of the authors or the journal.

Editorial Responses

Responses of this type will be peer-reviewed and, where possible, sent to the referees who reviewed the original submission; to the extent possible, all parties will remain anonymous. Responses are subject to oversight by the editors of the journal and will be published after full consultation with all interested parties.

Editorial expression of concern: Notifies of the addition of information to an article, for example in response to a reader’s request for clarification or correction of a significant omission. Such addenda are published when the editors decide they are crucial to the reader’s understanding of a significant part of the published contribution.

Retraction: Notifies the readership of unsound results or misconduct, following an investigation of the issue by the editor and publisher. The original article will remain available but will be marked as retracted through a published note from the editor.

Article removal: In rare instances, this Journal may be obliged to remove an article as a consequence of legal action. Such removal will be marked on the issue table of contents, and a notice indicating removal will replace the article contents.

For further information on professional standards in publishing, see the website of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Clarification and Appeals

If something in the editor’s decision letter or the review materials is unclear or inconsistent, authors may email questions to the editorial office to request clarification from the editor before revising their manuscript.

Editors cannot discuss submissions or the review process directly with authors (by phone, video, in person, etc.).

The designated corresponding author should email all correspondence about your submission to the editorial office (not the editor).

Staff will upload your written clarification request to the peer review system where it will only be visible to the editor and the associate editor (reviewers will not see authors’ clarification requests). The editor will decide whether to consult with the associate editor, and the editor will provide a response that will be archived in the system (reviewers will not see the editor’s response).

Requiring written requests for clarification is not meant to act as a barrier. This process ensures good record-keeping, gives the editor sufficient time to reflect on answers and allows the editor to consult before responding.

This Journal does not provide or approve formal revision plans. The editor will consider your request and try to provide the best possible feedback. However, clarification from the editor does not guarantee a positive outcome and should not be mistaken as a signal of approval of a specific revision plan. If a revised manuscript is submitted, it will be evaluated by the entire review team.

Plagiarism: To republish the whole or part of the content in another author’s publication without attribution.

Fabrication: To publish data and findings/results that do not exist.
Duplication: Using data from another publication; this includes republishing an article in different languages.

Salamisation: Creating multiple publications by abnormally splitting the results of a study.

Data Manipulation/Falsification: Manipulating or deliberately distorting research data to give a false impression.

We disapprove of such unethical practices and of efforts to influence the review process with such practices as gifting authorship, inappropriate acknowledgments, and references in line with the COPE flowcharts.

Submitted manuscripts are subjected to automatic software evaluation for plagiarism and duplicate publication. Authors are obliged to acknowledge if they published study results in whole or in part in the form of abstracts.

Human and Animal Rights

For the experimental, clinical, and drug human studies, approval by the ethical committee and a statement on the adherence of the study protocol to the international agreements (World Medical Association of Helsinki “Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects,” amended October 2013) are required. In experimental animal studies, the authors should indicate that the procedures followed were by animal rights (Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals), and they should obtain animal ethics committee approval. The Ethics Committee approval document should be submitted to the Neuro-Cell Molecular Research Journal together with the manuscript.

The approval of the ethics committee; a statement on the adherence to international guidelines mentioned above; and proof that the patient’s informed consent is obtained should be indicated in the “Method” section. These items are required for case reports whenever data/media could reveal the identity of the patient.For persons under 18 years of age, please provide a consent form that includes both parents’ signatures or the person’s legal guardian or supervisor.

Publication Policy

The Editorial Board of Neuro-Cell Molecular Research Journal and the responsible Publisher adhere to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), Council of Science Editors (CSE), European Association of Science Editors (EASE), the US National Library of Medicine (NLM), the World Medical Association (WMA), and National Information Standards Organization (NISO). The Journal conforms to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing.

As the Journal’s policy, an approval of research protocols by an ethics committee following international agreements “WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects (last updated: October 2013, Fortaleza, Brazil)”, “Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals (8th edition, 2011)” or “International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals (2012)” is required for all research studies. If the submitted manuscript does not include ethics committee approval, it will not be processed for evaluation.

For articles concerning experimental research on humans, a statement should be included that shows informed consent of patients and volunteers was obtained following a detailed explanation of the procedures that they may undergo. The Journal may request a copy of the Ethics Committee Approval from the authors.

ncmrj authors are required to confirm the following items.:
• Submitted articles must be the original study of the author(s).
• Only unpublished articles should be submitted.
• Submitting an article to more than one journal at the same time is unethical.
• Any conflict of interest should be clearly stated.
• Data sources used in the article should be explained.
• Any errors detected after the article is submitted should be reported to ncmrj editors immediately.

ncmrj reviewers are required to confirm the following items:

• All articles should be reviewed legally based on the intellectual content of the article, regardless of the gender, race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or political values of the author(s).

• Reviews should be objective and constructive, avoiding being hostile or provocative and making libelous or offensive comments.

• To make a comprehensive review, the authors should have the required field expertise and should only review articles that can be evaluated on time.

• Any conflict of interest detected during the review process must be reported to ncmrj editors.

• All information about the article should be kept confidential.

• Information obtained during the review process should not be used for the benefit of the reviewers themselves or any other person, the organization, or to put others at a disadvantage position or to discredit them.

• Any information that may be the reason for the rejection of the publication of an article should be reported to ncmrj editors.

ncmrj editors are required to confirm the following items:

• All articles should be evaluated reasonably based on the intellectual content of the article, regardless of the gender, race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or political values of the author(s).

• All information about the article should be kept confidential.

• Any observed conflict of interest with the articles should be disclosed.

• The editorial board takes on the responsibility to make the publication decisions of the submitted articles based on the peerreviews, the policies of the journal’s editorial board, and legal restrictions against plagiarism, defamation, and copyright.

Ethic Responsibility

The journal searches for conformity to the provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki (http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b3.htm) in all clinical studies. The scientific and ethical liability of the manuscripts belongs to the authors and the copyright of the manuscripts belongs to the Neuro-Cell Molecular Research Journal. The authors are responsible for the contents of the manuscript and the accuracy of the references. All manuscripts submitted for publication must be accompanied by the Copyright Transfer Form [copyright transfer]. Once this form, signed by all the authors, has been submitted, it is understood that neither the manuscript nor the data it contains have been submitted elsewhere or previously published and the authors declare the statement of scientific contributions and responsibilities of all authors.

If the article includes any direct or indirect commercial links or if any institution provided material support to the study, authors must state in the cover letter that they have no relationship with the commercial product, drug, pharmaceutical company, etc. concerned; or specify the type of relationship (consultant, other agreements), if any. The authors must provide a statement on the absence of conflicts of interest among the authors and provide authorship contributions. In case of any suspicion or claim regarding scientific shortcomings or ethical infringement, the Journal reserves the right to submit the manuscript to the supporting institutions or other authorities for investigation. The Journal accepts the responsibility of initiating action but does not undertake any responsibility for an actual investigation or any power of decision.

Preparation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses must comply with study design guidelines: PRISMA statement of preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6(7): e1000097.) (http://www.prisma-statement.org/).

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All sources of financial support should be disclosed. All authors should disclose if a meaningful conflict of interest exists in the process of forming their study. Any financial grants or other support received for a submitted study from individuals or institutions should be disclosed to the Editorial Board of the Neuro-Cell Molecular Research Journal. The ICMJE Potential Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form should be filled in and submitted by all contributing authors to disclose a potential conflict of interest. The journal’s Editorial Board determines cases of a potential conflict of interest between the editors, authors, or reviewers within the scope of COPE and ICMJE guidelines.

Conditions that provide financial or personal benefit bring about a conflict of interest. The reliability of the scientific process and the published articles is directly related to the objective consideration of conflicts of interest during the planning, implementation, writing, evaluation, editing, and publication of scientific studies.

Financial relations are the most easily identified conflicts of interest, and they will inevitably undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and the science. These conflicts can be caused by individual relations, academic competition, or intellectual approaches. The authors should refrain as much as possible from making agreements with sponsors in the opinion of gaining profit or any other advantage that restrict their ability to access all data of the study or analyze, interpret, prepare, and publish their articles. Editors should refrain from bringing together those who may have any relationship between them during the evaluation of the studies. The editors, who make the final decision about the articles, should not have any personal, professional, or financial ties with any of the issues they are going to decide. Authors should inform the editorial board concerning potential conflicts of interest to ensure that their articles will be evaluated within the framework of ethical principles through an independent assessment process.

If one of the editors is an author in any manuscript, the editor is excluded from the manuscript evaluation process. To prevent any conflict of interest, the article evaluation process is carried out double-blinded. Because of the double-blinded evaluation process, except for the Editor-in-Chief, none of the editorial board members, international advisory board members, or reviewers is informed about the authors of the manuscript or institutions of the authors.

Our publication team works devotedly to ensure that the evaluation process is conducted impartially, considering all these situations.

Conflict of Interest

The declaration of the conflict of interest between authors, institutions, and acknowledgment of any financial or material support, or aid is mandatory for authors submitting a manuscript, and the statement should appear at the end of the manuscript. Reviewers are required to report if any potential conflict of interest exists between the reviewer and authors, or institutions.

Appeals and complaints

Appeal and complaint cases are handled within the scope of COPE guidelines by the Editorial Board of the journal. Appeals should be based on the scientific content of the manuscript. The final decision on the appeal and complaint is made by Editor in Chief. An Ombudsperson or the Ethical Editor is assigned to resolve cases that cannot be resolved internally. Authors should get in contact with the Editor in Chief regarding their appeals and complaints via e-mail info@ncmrjournal.com.tr