Publication Ethics

Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public trust in scientific findings, and that people receive credit for their work and ideas. Publication ethics are central to the scholarly scientific research publishing to win the trust and the confidence of the research community. Authors, reviewers, editors and publishers are important stakeholders of the publication process and each one of these elements must adhere to the standard ethical practices to enhance the authenticity and the originality of the published work.
Olites adopts the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on publication ethics. Olites publishers also explain the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for our Journal Editors and the Peer Reviewers Ethical guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as the best practice. We pride ourselves on our high standards of quality and focus regarding the publication of original and innovative papers, with no margin for compromise on ethical standards.
We request our contributors, editors, reviewers and people encompassed in different steps of publication to follow the ethical guidelines to progress the significance of academic publishing.
  • The publisher should act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
  • Publisher must be aware of all the international publication norms and ethics irrespective of the publication model and must make a statement to this effect to disclose their publication policy.
  • Publisher in collaboration with the editor in chief should take necessary measures to correct acts of plagiarism or violation of copyright if detected in the publication process.
  • Publisher must publish an erratum in case of any technical or typological error in the published manuscript by making a clear statement to this effect.
  • Publisher should retract any publication that is impinges the code of conduct of the research publication.
  • As per the editorial policy of the periodical the publisher must make arrangements to provide access to the published material to its users.
  • The publisher must take necessary measures in the circulation, preservation, archiving and distribution of the published research by partnering with organizations/institutions.
  • Author/s remains in the center of the entire publication process as the author takes the initiative to explore an innovative research area to be considered as manuscript for publication.
  • Author‘s zeal in searching for novelty and their commitment to adhere to originality promotes the best research and publication standards.
  • Author/s should maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. Where appropriate and where allowed by employer, funding body and others who might have an interest, to deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location, for sharing and further use by others.
  • They must stick to originality and should thoroughly acknowledge the source of information in writing the manuscript.
  • Any contempt or violation of copyrights is a criminal offence and hence the authors must refrain from such acts by taking prior permission of the copyright holder before publishing.
  • Author/s must take enough care while including images, pictures and figures and usage of any copyrighted image should be duly acknowledged or should be used with prior permission.
  • Author must maintain confidentiality towards patient’s identities that have participated in the clinical studies. Disclosure of the names, pictures and other identities affects the privacy of the participants and it is against the research norms.
  • Authors must furnish the approval of the regulatory bodies when the research involves animals, human and bio specimen. Author/s must include a statement on ethics approval at the commencement of the Methods section by mentioning the name and the address of the ethics committee.
  • Author must act proactive in responding to any criticism, corrections from any quarter and should take steps to rectify discrepancies if any if the article gets published.
  • Reviewer plays a pivotal role in the entire review process in enhancing the quality of the manuscript based on which the manuscript gets published or rejected.
  • He/she should be subject expert in the concerned field as he/she should enriches and enhances the value of the manuscript with their critical analysis and suggestions.
  • Reviewers should not consider article in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from viable, collaborative, or other relationships or influences with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the assigned article.
  • Reviewers should examine the article based on scientific excellence nevertheless on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, citizenry or political values of authors.
  • Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments it helps to enhance the quality of the article.
  • Reviewer must remain objective while making decisions by thoroughly adhering to the research standards. They should examine the copy critically for aspects like duplication, violation of copyrights, and abuse of any clinical ethical practices, including human, animal and the environmental rights.
  • The reviewer should add value to the final outcome of the manuscript after the review process through knowledge sharing, and enhancement.
  • Editor should prepare the journal ethical policies and endorse among reviewers and scientific communities maintaining the highest level of integrity and standards.
  • Editors ought to make fair and transparent decisions and should report potential conflicts if any. Decisions must be given based on scientific excellence nevertheless on gender, race, ethnicity, religion, citizenry or political values of authors.
  • After having evaluating the manuscript for its relevance, originality and novice, the editor must assign the manuscript for review.
  • Editors should forward the manuscripts for reviewer’s scrutiny and should abide by the reviewer’s recommendations towards acceptance/rejection of the manuscript for publication.
  • Editor must act impartial and judicious in assigning the manuscript for review by selecting the right reviewer and keeping the identities of the author/s confidential to avoid bias.
  • The editor must act transparent while assessing the originality of the manuscript for plagiarism by applying appropriate and universally acceptable software tools to avoid personal bias.
  • Editor must remain impartial by accepting or rejecting the manuscript based on the reviewer’s comment.
  • Editor must disclose the conflict of interest if any while performing the editorial duties to remain judicious. Editor must stay away from such decisions in case of any personal, institutional and financial conflict of interests.
  • Editor must not disclose any unpublished material in the manuscript without the author’s consent.
Scientific Misconduct, Publication Malpractice, Manuscript Retraction

There are standard codes of conduct and behavior that need to be followed while publishing scientific work. Any violations in this behavior are deemed scientific misconduct. This may include data fabrication, data falsification, as well as failure to disclose conflict of interest and plagiarism. Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.  If there is an investigation at the author’s institution, the editor should keep track of the investigation outcomes, inform the readers about it, and if misconduct is proven, initiate a retraction of the article.