Publication Ethics

The editor of ZAHRA: JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND MEDICAL RESEARCH is responsible for deciding which articles to submit to journals should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the discretion of the journal's editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

  1. Fair play

An editor evaluates manuscripts at all times for their intellectual content regardless of the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.

  1. Confidentiality

Editors and any editorial staff may not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors, and publishers, as appropriate.

  1. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used in the editor's research without the author's written consent.

  1. Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions ; Peer reviews assist editors in making editorial decisions. Through editorial communication with authors can also assist authors in improving papers.

Promptness ; Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that immediate review is not possible must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality ; Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. The manuscripts may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity ; The review must be done objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources ; Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should also call the editor's attention to any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest ; Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship or connection with the author, company, or any institution with which the paper is related.

Duties of Authors:

Reporting standards ; Authors of the original research report must present an accurate account of the work done and an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be represented accurately on paper. A paper must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Statements that are deceptive or intentionally inaccurate are unethical and unacceptable behavior.

Data Access and Retention ; Authors are required to provide raw data concerning the paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if possible, and under any circumstances. Be ready to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism ; Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. If the authors have used the work or words, then these have been appropriately cited or cited.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication ; An author may not generally publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or significant publication. Simultaneously submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources ; Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper ; Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the reported study. Everyone who has made significant contributions should be listed as a co-author. Others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project; they must be recognized or listed as contributors. Correspondence authors must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper. All co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and approved its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects ; Suppose the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use. In that case, the author must identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest ; All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works ; When an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in his published work, he must immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.