Author's Duties

Standards for Publishing

After accurately describing the work done and the outcomes, authors of original research should objectively analyze the work’s relevance. Enough information and citations should be included in the manuscript to enable others to duplicate the work. While editorial “opinion” or perspective pieces should be explicitly marked as such, review articles should be factual, impartial, and thorough. It is unprofessional and unethical to make false or intentionally misleading claims.

Access to and Preservation of Data

For editorial review, authors can be asked to submit the study’s raw data alongside the publication. If at all possible, authors should be ready to make the data publicly available. As long as participant confidentiality can be maintained and legal rights regarding proprietary data do not prevent their release, authors should, at the very least, guarantee that such data will be available to other qualified professionals for at least ten years following publication (ideally through an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre).

The Manuscript’s Authorship

Since they must be able to accept public responsibility for the content, only those who fulfil these authorship requirements should be named as authors in the manuscript: (i) contributed substantially to the study’s conception, design, execution, data collection, analysis, or interpretation; (ii) wrote the manuscript or made critical revisions for significant intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the paper’s final draft and consented to its submission for publication. All individuals who significantly contributed to the work described in the manuscript (for example, technical assistance, writing and editing support, or general assistance) but who do not fit the requirements for authorship should be recognized in the “Acknowledgements” section once their written consent has been obtained. The corresponding author should confirm that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have consented to its submission for publication. They should also make sure that the author list contains all appropriate coauthors (as defined above) and exclude any inappropriate coauthors.

Risks and Issues Involving either Human or Animal

The authors must explicitly state in the paper any exceptional risks associated with the use of any chemicals, processes, or equipment used in the investigation. The manuscript should include a statement to this effect. If the work uses animals or human participants, the authors should make sure that all procedures were carried out in accordance with applicable laws and institutional guidelines and that the relevant institutional committee or committees have approved them. Additionally, the authors should specify in the publication that informed consent was acquired before using human subjects in experiments. Human participants’ right to privacy must always be respected. 

Peer-Review

By swiftly answering editors’ demands for raw data, clarifications, and evidence of ethics approval, patient consent, and copyright clearances, authors are required to completely collaborate and engage in the peer review process. When a first decision is made that “revisions are necessary,” writers should address the reviewers’ remarks methodically, point by point, and promptly. They should then revise and resubmit their manuscript to the journal by the specified deadline.

Common Errors in Published Articles 

When writers find serious mistakes or inconsistencies in their own published work, they have a responsibility to inform the journal’s editors or publisher as soon as possible and work with them to either withdraw the manuscript or amend it in the form of an erratum. It is the authors’ responsibility to swiftly revise or withdraw a published work if the editors or publisher discovers through a third party that it contains a serious error or inaccuracy or to show proof to the journal editors that the paper is right.