Publication ethics and malpractice statements
Translational Research in Urology journal conforms to the international regulations against scientific misconduct including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, etc. The Journal is committed to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and any cases of suspected misconduct will be assessed during the peer-review and publication process based on COPE guidelines.
Based on the ICJME recommendations "all those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged".
According to the ICMJE guidelines, all authors must fulfill the following 4 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.
For more information on authorship criteria, please see the ICMJE website.
Any change in authorship (i.e. order, addition, and deletion of authors) after initial submission must be approved by all authors via written confirmation, in line with COPE guidelines. It is the corresponding author’s responsibility to ensure that all authors confirm they agree with the proposed changes. If there is disagreement amongst the authors concerning authorship and a satisfactory agreement cannot be reached, the authors must contact their institution(s) for a resolution. It is not the journal editor’s responsibility to resolve authorship disputes. A change in authorship after publication of an article can only be amended via publication of an Erratum.
Submission of an article implies that:
- The work explains is reliable and valid and that neither this manuscript nor one with significantly like content under this authorship has been published or is under consideration for publication anywhere else as well as electronically in the same form, in English or other languages, without the written consent the copyright holder.
- All authors approved to let the corresponding author provide as the primary correspondent with the editorial office, to review the edited manuscript and proof.
Duplicate/ Previous Publication or Submission
Manuscripts are understood that not to be published earlier on the print or electronic side and are not under consideration by another publication. Copies of related or possibly duplicated materials (including those containing significantly similar content or using the same data) that have been available before or are under concern for another publication must be provided at the time of online submission.
Definition: When an author tries to present the work of someone else as his or her own, it is called plagiarism. In addition, when an author uses a considerable portion of his or her own previously published work in a new one without properly citing the reference, it is called a duplicate publication sometimes also referred to as self-plagiarism. This may range from publishing the same article in another journal to 'salami-slicing', which is data segmentation, to adding little new data to the previous article.
Policy: The editorial team/reviewers of Translational Research in Urology will check the submitted manuscripts for plagiarism twice (once after submission and once before publication) using available plagiarism detection software such as iThenticate. If suspected plagiarism is found in an article either before (by reviewers or editorial team) or after (by readers) publication, Translational Research in Urology will act according to COPE’s code of conduct and flowcharts.
Conflict of interest
Based on ICMJE guidelines, a conflict of interest can be once an author (or the author’s institution), reviewer, or editor has personal or financial relationships that influence (bias) improperly his/her research. These associations differ from those with insignificant potential to those with larger possibilities to influence judgment, and not all relationships represent true conflict of interest.
Informed Consent Policy
Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper. Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should disclose to these patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with the journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or laws. We decide that patient confidentiality is better guarded by having the author archive the consent and instead of providing the journal with a written statement that attests that they have received and archived written patient consent. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the published article.
Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are de-identified, authors should provide assurance, and editors should note that such changes do not distort scientific meaning.
Patient identifiers will not be published in IJHS Journal unless written informed consent is given and the content is essential for the scientific purpose and merit of the manuscript. Photographs of subjects showing any recognizable features must be accompanied by their signed release authorizing the publication, as must case reports that provide enough unique identification of a person (other than the name) to make recognition possible. Failure to obtain the informed consent of the patient before submission would result in manuscript rejection.
Role of Funding Source
Authors are requested to noticeably recognize who provided financial support for the performance of research and/or homework of the article and in brief, explain the role of the funder/sponsor in any part of the work including design and conduct of the study. The following rules should be followed:
- The sentence should begin with: ‘This work was supported by …’
- The full official funding agency name should be given, i.e. ‘The National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health’ or simply 'National Institutes of Health' not ‘NCI'(one of the 27 sub institutions) or 'NCI at NIH’.
- Grant numbers should be complete and accurate and provided in brackets as follows: ‘[grant number …….]’
- Multiple grant numbers should be separated by a comma as follows: ‘[grant numbers ………, ………………]’
- Agencies should be separated by a semi-colon (plus ‘and’ before the last funding agency)
The journal is now archiving electronically at the local & international repositories as follows: