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 and ensures that the integrity and validity of the published research are maintained. The Journal expects all authors, reviewers, and editors to strictly follow and fully abide by the set ethical standards. AHSTR hereby explicitly states that the following violations are strictly prohibited, and any such infractions will be subject to sanctions.
- 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.
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
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 in a professional manner. Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement includes the following principles:
Duties of Authors
Original Work: 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, except in the case of abstracts or preliminary reports. Submitting a manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously is both unethical and unacceptable. The AHSTR uses Turnitin to check for plagiarism and/or similarities with previous publications. Submitted articles containing substantial portions (25%) of text that are copied from other sources will be rejected.
Accuracy: Authors of papers that report original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The paper should accurately represent the underlying data. Conclusions must be drawn based on the evidence presented in the article paper.
Acknowledgment of Sources: A research paper builds upon previously published work. The author(s) should acknowledge ideas and previously published results by citing these works within the paper and including them in the list of references. Making or presenting statements of facts or ideas without providing supporting evidence through proper citation is considered not a good research practice.
Disclosure of Financial Support and Conflicts of Interest: All financial support for the research and the paper writing process should be disclosed and any conflicts of interest should be explicitly stated in the acknowledgments.
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: If the research involves the use of any human or animal subjects, approval from the ethics committee is required. Authors must state the approval code in the manuscript. All investigators and authors should ensure that research involving human subjects follows the Helsinki Declaration, as revised in 2013. Participants' personal information that could lead to their identification should not be published unless the information is crucial for scientific purposes, and the participant has given written informed consent for publication. Authors should indicate whether institutional and national standards for the use of laboratory animals were followed when reporting the involvement of animal subjects.
Authorship & Contributorship: Each person listed as an author should contribute sufficiently in 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 by 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 for which parts of the work and have to specify the contribution to each co-author in the manuscript. Any person(s) who has made substantial contributions to the work reported in the 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 after their written permission to be named has been obtained. 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: Conflicting interests could be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal and could arise in relation to an institution, organization, or another person. Authors require to declare all potential conflicts of interest in the manuscript. If an undisclosed conflict of interest found after publication, AHSTR will act in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Duties of Editors
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 in an objective and impartial manner 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.
Duties of Reviewers
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: In the event that 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: Manuscripts should be reviewed objectively in the context of the reviewer's expertise in the field. The importance of the article's contribution to the existing research in its field, the quality of articulation of the argument, and the strength of the evidence provided are critical factors in reviewing the quality of a manuscript. Review decisions should be based on established and credible evidence and not on personal 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 holds the responsibility of deciding and determining which submitted articles should be approved for publication. The editor's decisions are guided by the recommendations of the Journal's editorial board and constrained by pertinent legal requirements. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in reaching and making the final decision.
Dealing with Allegations of Research Misconduct
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.
Dealing with Allegations:
- The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board carefully evaluate the evidence and follow COPE's guidelines or equivalent standards when conducting a thorough investigation of allegations of research misconduct.
- The investigation process will be carried out confidentially and comprehensively to safeguard the privacy and reputation of all parties involved.
- In the event that allegations are made, the author(s) will be given an opportunity to respond and provide explanations for their cases.
- If the investigation summary confirms the existence of research misconduct, appropriate actions will be taken in accordance with COPES guidelines or equivalent standards. These actions may include - retraction, correction, or expression of concern. If the summary shows that the allegations are unsubstantiated or lack sufficient evidence, the cases will be dismissed, and all parties involved will be notified of the summary.
Ethical Concern Reporting Part:
To maintain and uphold the highest ethical standards in academic publishing, the AHSTR therefore encourages authors, reviewers, and readers to report any ethical concerns or misconduct to the Journal. Any reported information plays an important part in preserving the integrity of academic publishing. Please do not hesitate to contact the AHSTR for any ethical concerns or any suspicions of potential misconduct.