Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The Incisor (Indonesian Journal of Care's in Oral Health) using guidelines issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (Commission of Publication Ethics / COPE). The Incisor requires that all articles involving human subjects to respect the principles of research ethics as stated in the Declaration of Helsinki. As for research involving animals as subjects are also required to comply with the International Principles for Biomedical Research issued by the International Council of Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). Ethical publication should be clear in order to improve the quality of research. The Incisor COPE adjust to meet the ethical standards both for publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers.

The Incisor (Indonesian Journal of Care's in Oral Health) adapts COPE to meet high-quality standard of ethics for publisher, editors, authors, and reviewers. As an essential issue, publication ethics needs to be explained clearly to improve the quality of the research worldwide. In this part, we explain the standard for editors, authors, and reviewers. In addition, the publisher does not have the right to interfere with the integrity of the contents and only support to publish in a timely manner.

Here are the ethical standards for editors, authors, and reviewers.

Editors

  1. Editors should be responsible for every article published in The Incisor.
  2. Editors should help authors to follow the Guidelines for author.
  3. Editors may communicate with other editors or reviewers in making the final decision.
  4. An editor has to evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without looking to nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. Editors should decline the assignment when there is a potential for conflict of interest.
  5. Editors need to ensure the document sent to the reviewers does not contain the information of the author, vice versa.
  6. Editors’ decision should be informed to authors accompanied by reviewers’ comments unless they contain offensive or libellous remarks.
  7. Editors should respect requests from authors that an individual should not review the submission if these are well reasoned and practicable.
  8. Editors and all staffs should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
  9. Editors will be guided by the COPE flowcharts if there is a suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.

Duties of Editors

1. Fair Play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2. Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted
manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

4. Publication Decisions

The editor board journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

5. Review of Manuscripts

Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Reviewers

  1. Reviewers commented on the possibility of errors in ethical research and publications.
  2. Reviewers should do the job on time and notify the Editor if they can not finish the job.
  3. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript.
  4. Reviewers should not be receiving and reviewing the manuscript if there is a potential conflict of interest between them and the authors.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial
communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

2. Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

3. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

4. Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

6. Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Authors

  1. The author ensures that the material to be published have not been published and sent to another place simultanously.
  2. Authors must ensure the authenticity of their research and they have cited the others opinion correctly in accordance with the reference format.
  3. The author is not involved in plagiarism or self plagiarism.
  4. Authors must follow the criteria described in the guideline writing to the author of The Incisor.
  5. Authors are not advised to publish any personal information that may make the patient recognizable identity in the form of the description section, photograph or genealogy. When photographs of patients is very important and indispensable as scientific information, the authors have received approval in written form and has clearly stated it.
  6. In the case of experiments on humans, the authors state that the study was in accordance with the ethical standards of the Helsinki declaration, which leads the human experiment. If there are doubts raised whether the study took place in accordance with the declaration, the author should explain it. In the case of experiments on animals, the author has certified that the author has followed the guidelines and abroad with regard to animal experiments in the laboratory.
  7. Authors must submit the data and details to the editor, if suspected falsification or fabrication of data.
  8. The authors should explain everything that can give rise to a conflict of interest such as employment, research costs, consulting fees, and intellectual property on guidelines for The Incisor writers.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standars

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

2. Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiaris

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication:

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

6. Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the
conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

8. Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Confidentiality

Editors of The Incisor Editors treat the submitted manuscript and all communication with authors and referees as confidential. Authors must also treat communication with the journal as confidential. Correspondence with the journal, reviewers' reports and other confidential material must not be posted on any website or otherwise publicized without prior permission from the editors, whether or not the submission is eventually published.

Copyright

Copyrights of all materials published in The Incisor are held exclusively by the Journal and the respective author/s. Any reproduction of material from the Journal without proper acknowledgement or prior permission will result in the infringement of intellectual property laws. Written acceptance of the journal publishing agreement  is required before the article can be published.