Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Archives of Biotechnology and Biomedicine is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all forms of malpractice seriously. We follow international guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). This Ethics and Malpractice Statement sets forth the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher to maintain the integrity of the scientific record.

Responsibilities of Authors

• Originality: Authors must submit only original work that has not been published elsewhere. Duplicate submissions are strictly prohibited.
• Plagiarism: All manuscripts are screened for plagiarism. Authors must properly cite sources and acknowledge contributions of others.
• Data Accuracy: Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of their data. Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data is considered misconduct.
• Authorship: All listed authors must have made significant contributions to the work. Ghostwriting and honorary authorship are unacceptable.
• Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could be perceived as influencing their work.
• Corrections: Authors have a duty to inform the editorial office promptly if they discover errors in their published work, enabling corrections or retractions.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents and may not share or discuss them with unauthorized parties.
• Objectivity: Reviews must be conducted impartially, focusing on scientific merit rather than personal opinion or bias.
• Timeliness: Reviewers should complete evaluations within the agreed timeframe. If unable, they must notify the editorial office promptly.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts and decline assignments where impartiality cannot be ensured.
• Ethical Oversight: Reviewers should alert editors to suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or ethical concerns in the manuscript.

Responsibilities of Editors

• Editorial Independence: Decisions are made based solely on academic merit, without influence from commercial or political pressures.
• Fair Review: Editors ensure all manuscripts receive a fair, unbiased, and timely peer review.
• Confidentiality: Editors maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and reviewer identities.
• Integrity: Editors are responsible for safeguarding the scientific record by issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern when necessary.
• Conflict of Interest: Editors must recuse themselves from handling submissions where conflicts exist.

Publisher Responsibilities

The publisher supports the editorial board in maintaining academic integrity. Responsibilities include ensuring the independence of editorial decisions, providing secure archiving systems, and investigating allegations of misconduct in line with COPE procedures.

Research Ethics

Authors must comply with recognized ethical standards in conducting research. For human subjects, this includes obtaining informed consent and ethical approval. For animal studies, humane treatment and institutional review board (IRB) approval are mandatory. Authors must clearly state ethical approval and consent within their manuscripts.

Plagiarism and Misconduct

Plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, duplicate publication, and undisclosed conflicts of interest constitute malpractice. The journal employs plagiarism-detection software and investigates all allegations thoroughly. Confirmed cases may result in rejection, retraction, notification of institutions, and bans on future submissions.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

When errors or misconduct are identified, the journal follows COPE guidelines to issue corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern. Retractions are clearly linked to the original article, ensuring transparency and maintaining trust in the scholarly record.

Handling Complaints and Appeals

Authors and readers may submit complaints regarding editorial decisions, reviewer conduct, or ethical concerns. Complaints are investigated confidentially by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated committee. Appeals of editorial decisions are reviewed by an independent editor not involved in the original process.

Sanctions for Misconduct

In cases of confirmed malpractice, sanctions may include:

• Formal retraction of published work.
• Notification of institutions or funding bodies.
• Banning of authors from submitting for a defined period.
• Removal of articles from indexing services when required by law or policy.

Commitment to COPE Principles

As a member of the global scholarly community, the journal adheres to COPE’s Core Practices. These include clear authorship criteria, transparency in peer review, conflict-of-interest disclosures, ethical oversight of research, and procedures for dealing with allegations of misconduct. Our adherence to these principles underscores our dedication to responsible publishing.

Conclusion

The Ethics and Malpractice Statement is a living document that evolves alongside best practices in scholarly publishing. By defining clear responsibilities and enforcing them rigorously, the Archives of Biotechnology and Biomedicine ensures that it remains a trusted platform for reliable, ethical, and high-quality scientific work.