Ethical Considerations

Authorship

All persons designated as "authors" must meet the criteria for this concept. The contribution of each participant to the work must be sufficient to take responsibility for its content. The right to be named as an author is based on the following:

1. a substantial contribution to the conception and design of the study, or to the analysis and interpretation of data;
2. drafting the article text or making critical revisions;
3. final approval of the version submitted for publication.

Editors have the right to ask authors what contribution each of them made to writing the article; this information may be published. All team members who do not meet the authorship criteria but who assisted in the conduct of the study — through data collection, analysis and interpretation, or the provision of materials and tools — must be listed, with their consent, in the "Acknowledgements" section.

The order in which authors are listed is determined by their joint decision.

Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest relating to a specific manuscript arises when one of the participants in the peer review or publication process — an author, reviewer, or editor — has commitments that could influence their opinion (even if this does not actually occur). The most common source of conflict of interest is financial relationships (e.g. those related to employment, consulting, share ownership, payment of fees, and paid expert opinions), whether direct or through close relatives. Other sources may include personal relationships, academic rivalry, and intellectual biases.

All participants in the peer review and publication process must disclose any conflicts of interest.

• Authors, upon submission of a manuscript, are responsible for disclosing their financial and other conflicts of interest that could influence their work. All individuals and organisations that provided financial support, as well as any other financial or personal involvement, must be acknowledged in the manuscript. The role of the sponsor(s) in the study design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation must be described.
• Authors must identify those whom they believe should not be asked to review the manuscript due to a potential — typically professional — conflict of interest. If authors are uncertain whether a conflict of interest exists, they must explain the situation to the editor so that the editor can assess it independently.
• Reviewers must notify the editorial office of any conflicts of interest that may influence their assessment of manuscripts; they must decline to review a specific article if they consider this to be warranted.
• Editors who make decisions on manuscripts must not have any personal, professional, or financial interest or involvement in any matter they may be deciding upon. Other members of the editorial team who participate in decision-making must provide editors with a description of their financial interests (as these may influence editorial decisions) and must recuse themselves from the decision if a conflict of interest exists.

The editorial board may use information provided in conflict of interest and financial interest disclosures as a basis for editorial decisions.

Patient Rights and Confidentiality

Patients have the right to privacy, which must not be violated without their consent. Identifying information — including patients' names, initials, hospital numbers, and medical record numbers — must not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless such information is of significant scientific value or unless the patient (or parent or guardian) provides written consent for publication.

Protection of Humans and Animals in Scientific Research

When an article contains descriptions of experiments involving human subjects, authors must indicate whether these were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the committee responsible for human experimentation (institutional or national) and the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 and its revised version of 2000. In cases of doubt, authors must provide a justification for their approach and evidence that the institutional review board approved the questionable aspects of the study.

When reporting experiments involving animals, authors must indicate whether the requirements of the European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals, and the relevant national and institutional guidelines on the care and use of laboratory animals, were followed.

Publication of Negative Results

Many studies yielding negative results are in fact inconclusive. The possibility of publishing inconclusive research results is considered by the editorial board on a case-by-case basis, as such articles frequently lack biomedical value and consume resources that belong to the journal.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works. If authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited and acknowledged.

Multiple Publications

The editorial office does not consider manuscripts that are simultaneously submitted for publication to other journals, or works that have already been published in large part as an article or have become part of another work submitted or accepted for publication by any other print or electronic media outlet. This policy does not preclude consideration of an article rejected by another journal, or a full report submitted following the prior publication of preliminary results — such as abstracts or poster presentations submitted at professional conferences.

Correspondence

Readers may, where necessary, submit their comments, questions, or critical remarks on published articles, which will be printed in the journal. Authors of articles may respond to such remarks if they wish to do so.