Peer Review, Ethics & Malpractice Statement

Peer-review

Editorial policies of the journal are conducted as stated in the rules recommended by the Council of Science Editors and reflected in the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Accordingly, authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to adhere to the best practice guidelines on ethical behavior contained in this statement.

Submitted manuscripts are subjected to double-blinded peer-review. The scientific board guiding the selection of the papers to be published in the journal consists of elected specialists of the journal and, if necessary, selected from national and international experts in the relevant field of research. All manuscripts are reviewed by the editor, section associate editors and at least three internal and external expert reviewers.

Ethics

The patient's informed consent is obtained should be indicated in the `Ethics` section and is required for case reports whenever data/media used could reveal the identity of the patient. The declaration of the conflict of interest between authors, institutions, acknowledgement of any financial or material support, 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, institutions.

Plagiarism: To Republish whole or part of a 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 that includes republishing an article in different languages.

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

We disapprove of such unethical practices as plagiarism, fabrication, duplication, and salamisation and efforts to influence the review process with such practices as gifting authorship, inappropriate acknowledgements, and references.

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

We use "iThenticate" to screen all submissions for plagiarism before publication.

A. DUTIES OF PUBLISHER:

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

The publisher will take all appropriate measures to modify the article in question, in close cooperation with the editors, in cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, disclosure, or retraction of the affected work in the most severe case. Together with the editors, the publisher will take reasonable steps to detect and prevent the publication of articles in which research misconduct occurs and will under no circumstances promote or knowingly allow such abuse to occur.

Editorial Autonomy

Caucasian Medical Journal is committed to ensuring the autonomy of editorial decisions without influence from anyone or commercial partners.

Intellectual Property and Copyright

Caucasian Medical Journal protects the property and copyright of the articles published in the journal and maintains each article's published version of the record. The journal provides the integrity and transparency of each published article.

Scientific Misconduct

Caucasian Medical Journal’s publisher always takes all appropriate measures regarding fraudulent publication or plagiarism.

B. DUTIES OF EDITORS:

Decision on Publication and Responsibility

The editor of the journal keeps under control everything in the journal and strives to meet the needs of readers and authors. The editor is also responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published and guided by the policies subjected to legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor might discuss with reviewers while making publication decisions. The editor is responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication. Editor ought to provide a fair and appropriate peer-review process.

Objectivity

Articles that are submitted to the journal are always evaluated without any prejudice.

Confidentiality

The editor must not disclose any information about a submitted article to anyone other than editorial staff, reviewers, and publisher.

Conflicts of Interest and Disclosure

The Editor of Caucasian Medical Journal does not allow any conflicts of interest between the parties such as authors, reviewers and editors. Unpublished materials in a submitted article must not be used by anyone without the express written assent of the author.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

Authors are obliged to notify the journal's editors or publisher immediately and to cooperate with them to correct or retract the article if significant errors or inaccuracies are detected in the published work. If the editors or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, the authors must promptly correct or retract the article or provide the journal editors with evidence of the accuracy of the article.

C. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS:

Evaluation

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts without origin, gender, sexual orientation or political philosophy of the authors. Reviewers also ensure a fair blind peer review of the submitted manuscripts for evaluation.

Confidentiality

All the information relative to submitted articles is kept confidential. The reviewers must not be discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

The reviewers have no conflict of interest regarding parties such as authors, funders, editors, etc.

Contribution to editor

Reviewers help the editor in making decisions and may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

Objectivity

They always do objective judgment evaluation. The reviewers express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers ought to identify a relevant published study that the authors have not cited. Reviewers also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

D. DUTIES OF AUTHORS:

Reporting Standards

A submitted manuscript should be original, and the authors ensure that the manuscript has never been published previously in any journal. Data of the research ought to be represented literally in the article. A manuscript ought to include adequate detail and references to allow others to replicate the study.

Originality

The authors who want to submit their study to the journal must ensure that their study is entirely original. The words and sentences getting from the literature should be appropriately cited.

Multiple Publications

Authors should not submit the same study for publishing in any other journals. Simultaneous submission of the same study to more than one journal is unacceptable and constitutes unethical behaviour.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Convenient acknowledgement of the study of others has to be given. Authors ought to cite publications that have been efficient in determining the study. All of the sources that used the process of the study should be remarked.

Authorship of a Paper

Authorship of a paper ought to be limited to those who have made a noteworthy contribution to the study. If others have participated in the research, they should be listed as contributors. Authorship also includes a corresponding author who is in communication with the editor of a journal. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in a paper.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All sources of financial support should be disclosed. All authors ought to disclose a meaningful conflict of interest in the process of forming their study.

Ethical Policy