Publication ethics
All articles published in AHSTR must adhere to the highest standards of ethical practices and conduct in the publication of scientific research. The AHSTR follows the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
and other relevant organizations. The AHSTR ensures that the integrity and validity of the published research are maintained and requires all authors, reviewers, and editors to strictly follow the established ethical standards. The AHSTR declares that the following violations are strictly forbidden and will be subject to disciplinary measures.
- Plagiarism of other works in all forms, including self-plagiarism
- Manuscripts and articles with fabricated and falsified data and findings.
- Articles that have been published elsewhere.
- Manuscripts and articles with citation manipulation.
- Manuscripts and articles with any kind of conflict of interest.
Manuscripts under review that violate any of these requirements will be immediately rejected. Moreover, published articles discovered to contain any such violations will be retracted from the Journal.
The AHSTR is committed to maintaining and upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. The Journal's goal is to ensure integrity and transparency throughout the publishing process and intends that the best practices in all respects are observed. The AHSTR expects all authors, reviewers, and editors to conform to ethical guidelines and fulfill their responsibilities professionally. Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement includes the following principles:
Originality: The AHSTR expects that all submitted manuscripts are original contributions and have not been previously submitted to or are presently under consideration for publication in any other journal in any language or country. Submitting a manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously is both unethical and unacceptable. It is crucial to avoid all forms of plagiarism.
The AHSTR employs Turnitin to screen for plagiarism and identify text that closely resembles previously published work. Articles with a similarity rate exceeding 25% of the text (excluding references) indicate high similarity. The evaluation also considers the sources of similar text, their distribution within the manuscript, and the length of each identical passage. Manuscripts identified as plagiarized will be immediately rejected without undergoing the peer-review process.
Authorship & Contributorship: Each person listed as an author should contribute sufficiently to the work, assume responsibility for the submitted manuscript, and agree to be accountable for all aspects concerning its accuracy and integrity. This contribution must take into conception and design of the work, including data acquisition or analysis and interpretation, as well as drafting and/or revising the manuscript for critically important intellectual content, reviewing and granting of final approval of the manuscript, performing statistical analysis, obtaining funding, and providing administrative, technical or material support, or supervision. The definition or criteria for authorship may follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors(ICMJE) at https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/
Authors should be able to identify which co-authors contribute to which parts of the work and have to specify the contribution of each co-author in the manuscript. Any person(s) who has made substantial contributions to the work reported in the work but does not meet the criteria for authorship should not be listed as an Author. Instead, their contributions should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgments" section. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen, reviewed, and approved the paper's final version, and consented to its submission for publication.
Conflict of interest: Authors are obligated to disclose all potential conflicts of interest, including financial, non-financial, professional, or personal interests. AHSTR will adhere to COPE guidelines in addressing any undisclosed conflicts of interest identified following publication.
Data Integrity and Reproducibility: Authors are expected to provide an accurate and objective account of their research, including a fair assessment of its significance. The presented data must accurately reflect the research findings, and conclusions should be drawn solely from the evidence presented within the paper. To uphold principles of reproducibility and transparency, supporting data should be made accessible and maintained for a period following publication.
Permissions: If a figure or table has been previously published in other sources or previous publications, the authors must obtain written permission from the copyright owner to reproduce the material. The original source must be cited in the figure caption and table footnote.
Human or Animal Subjects: Research involving human or animal subjects necessitates prior approval from the relevant ethics committee, with the approval code explicitly stated within the manuscript. Research involving human participants must strictly adhere to the principles outlined in the 2013 Helsinki Declaration. The publication of personal information pertaining to research participants requires their written informed consent and is permissible only when deemed essential for scientific purposes. It is crucial to include the trial registration number (also known as a clinical trial number) in the abstract of any manuscript reporting the results of a clinical trial. When conducting research involving animal subjects, adherence to established institutional and national standards for the ethical use of laboratory animals must be clearly indicated.
Confidentiality: The AHSTR uses a "single-blind" peer review process, wherein the reviewers' identities are not revealed to the authors. The AHSTR editors strive to safeguard the identity of the reviewers throughout the review process. Editors are prohibited from quoting or referencing any unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript without obtaining the author's written consent. Information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be treated as confidential and should not be used for personal gain.
Conflicts of Interest: Editors must recuse themselves from the review process when they have a conflict of interest or personal stake in the publication of research work.
Objectivity: Publication decisions are made objectively and impartially after a thorough review of the submitted manuscript and the accompanying peer reviews. The critical factors that significantly influence the decision to accept and publish the manuscript include - the articles' contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of the articulation of the argument, and the strength and reliability of the evidence presented.
Confidentiality: Reviewers should respect and uphold the confidentiality of the review process. They should refrain from discussing any aspects of the work under review with other researchers until the article is published. Unpublished materials disclosed in a manuscript under review must not be quoted or referenced by a reviewer without the express written consent of the author, as requested by the editor. Information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and should not be used for personal gain.
Conflicts of Interest: If the reviewer realizes, upon receiving the manuscript for review, that they have been involved in the research described, are acquainted with the researchers involved, or for any other reason cannot provide an objective and impartial review of the manuscript, it is incumbent upon the reviewer to promptly notify the editors and decline the review. Conflicts of interest can include competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper under review.
Objectivity: Manuscript reviews should be conducted objectively within the context of the reviewer's field-specific expertise. Key factors in evaluating manuscript quality include the significance of the article's contribution to existing research, the clarity and cogency of the argument presented, and the strength and validity of the supporting evidence. Review decisions must be grounded in established evidence and should not be influenced by personal biases or opinions.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify important and pertinent published works that the authors have not cited. Additionally, a reviewer should bring to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
The AHSTR editor-in-Chief holds the responsibility of deciding and determining which submitted articles should be approved for publication. The editor-in-Chief's decisions are guided by the recommendations of the Journal's editorial board and constrained by pertinent legal requirements. The editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in reaching and making the final decision.
The AHSTR is committed to maintaining and upholding the highest standards of research integrity, transparency, and ethical publishing practices. Furthermore, the AHSTR takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and addresses them in accordance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) or equivalent standards.
The AHSTR uses Turnitin to check for, detect, and prevent plagiarism and implements rigorous peer review processes to identify potential cases of research misconduct. Editors and reviewers are encouraged to report any concerns or suspicions regarding research misconduct.
The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board meticulously investigate allegations of research misconduct following COPE guidelines or equivalent standards. Investigations are conducted confidentially and comprehensively, ensuring the privacy and reputation of all parties involved. Authors are allowed to respond to allegations. If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate actions (retraction, post-publication correction, or expression of concern) will be taken based on COPE guidelines. If allegations are unsubstantiated or lack sufficient evidence, the case will be dismissed, and all parties will be notified.
To maintain the highest ethical standards, the AHSTR encourages authors, reviewers, and readers to report any ethical concerns or suspected misconduct. This information is crucial for upholding the integrity of academic publishing. Please contact the AHSTR with any ethical concerns or suspicions.
