Policy Of The Archives Of Rheumatology
The Archives of Rheumatology follows the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) for dealing with scientific misconduct.
Some of the scientific misconducts are as follows:
- Falsification of data.
- Improprieties of authorship.
- Violation of generally accepted research practices
- Redundant publication and duplicate publication
All allegations of scientific misconduct are taken very seriously. The manuscript review process will be halted until these allegations have been investigated and resolved.
The Archives of Rheumatology receives and publishes manuscripts by the instructions of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Details of ICMJE and COPE are available at www.icmje.org and http://publicationethics.org/.
The ICMJE recommends that authorship should be based on the following four criteria:
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for relevant intellectual content; AND
3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
4. 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.
Contributors who do not meet all the four criteria for authorship, but helped in the study, may be listed in the acknowledgment section. Examples of those who may be listed can include, but is not limited by, the following:
- Individuals who helped in the acquisition of funding
- Individuals who generally supervised the research group
- Individuals who provided general administrative support
- Colleagues who assisted in designing the study
- Individuals who helped in reviewing the manuscript, including writing assistance, technical and language editing, and proofreading
- Physicians who referred cases
- Individuals who provided laboratory assistance
- Statisticians for statistical tests and analysis
- Secretarial help
- Parents who responded to the questionnaire
- Pharmaceutical companies
- Organizations which may have helped
- Concerned colleagues who provided micrographs, x-rays, or slides
The corresponding authoris the individual who takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal.
Statements describing detailed contributions made by each author are required at the time of submission of the manuscript. The Archives of Rheumatology does not accept to change in the authors list concerning additions and deletions after the initial submission.
Ethical Approval of Research
Every manuscript including retrospective studies submitted to The Archives of Rheumatology should have the ethical approval by the ethical review board of the institution.
About the experiments on humans, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were by the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation and with the latest version of the Helsinki Declaration. Do not use patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers, in text and illustrative material.
About the experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether institutional and national standards for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed. Further guidance on animal research ethics is available from the International Association of Veterinary Editors’ Consensus Author Guidelines on Animal Ethics and Welfare(http://veteditors.org/ethicsconsensusguidelines.html).
Conflict of Interest
Any conflict of interest should be declared by all authors. This may include grants or honorarium, credits, and promotions, memberships or any personal or professional relationships which may appear to influence the manuscript. Such competing interests are not unethical but should be declared.
Conflict of interest statement must also appear at the end of the text before the references. If there are no conflicts of interests, the authors should state, “none to declare.”
All sources of grants received, and its spending should be disclosed. If there are no funding sources, the authors should state “none to declare."
All the authors of manuscripts submitted to and published in the Archives of Rheumatology agree to transfer all copyright ownership of the manuscript. After publication, such manuscripts can only be reproduced after permission from the editorial board and the publisher.
The editorial board reviews all manuscripts submitted to The Archives of Rheumatology initially. If a manuscript not found suitable for publication as regards to the topic or poor writing is likely to be rejected before the peer review process. After initial review, the manuscript is sent for external peer reviews. This is a double-blind process. At least two peer reviewers review all manuscripts.
The articles authored by the editorial board or Turkish League Against Rheumatism are also externally peer reviewed. These manuscripts are blinded to members who are in the authors list.
The reviewers are selected carefully for a healthy peer-review process.
Editorials will not be subjected to an external peer review.
If the authors want to withdraw the manuscript during its processing, a withdrawal request has to be sent via the manuscript submission system. The withdrawal requests should be written in an explanatory manner, and the reasons for withdrawal must be stated clearly.
Please note that without a formal application for withdrawal, a manuscript is not considered withdrawn and use of such a manuscript elsewhere will be construed as ethical misconduct.
Responses to Published Work
The editor-in-chief will review comments on previously published articles in The Archives of Rheumatology and forwarded to the authors of the published manuscript for a reply. Appropriate time will be given for the response. Both will be published simultaneously in one of the forthcoming issues. In case the author of the published article does not reply, the comments will be published on their own.
This process will only be undertaken if the comments are appropriate.
The Archives of Rheumatology follows the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
Journal editors should consider retracting a publication if:
- they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication
- it constitutes plagiarism
- it reports unethical research
Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if:
- they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors
- there is evidence that the findings are unreliable, but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case
- they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive
- an investigation is underway, but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time
Journal editors should consider issuing a correction if:
- a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (primarily because of honest error)
- the author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e., a deserving author has been omitted, or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included)
Clinical Trial Registration
The registration is not obligatory; however, The Archives of Rheumatology advises to register clinical trials one of the following databases:
1. WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/network/primary/en/index.html)