FIVEZERO journals undertake to apply publication ethics to the highest standards and to comply with the following principles of publication ethics. These principles are based on the recommendations and guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Council of Science Editors (CSE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) for journal editors.
All stakeholders are expected to bear ethical responsibilities within the scope of FIVEZERO journals, publishing ethics. In this context, the journal undertakes to follow the Code of Conduct and Principles of Transparency and Best Practice prepared by COPE (Publication Ethics Committee). Following the Cope Guidance for Editors (Cope Guidance for Editors) is under the responsibility of the Editors, and the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers must be followed by the journal referees.
The publishing processes applied in the FIVEZERO journals are the basis for the development and distribution of information in an impartial and respectful manner. The processes implemented in this direction directly reflect the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support the authors. Peer-reviewed studies are studies that embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is important that all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, referees and editors) comply with the standards of ethical principles.
1. General Actions against Scientific Research and Broadcasting Ethics
a) Plagiarism: To show others' original ideas, methods, data or works as their own work, partially or completely, without reference to scientific rules,
b) Forgery: Using data that does not actually exist or has been falsified in scientific research,
c) Distortion: Falsifying the research records or the data obtained, showing the devices or materials not used in the research as being used, falsifying or shaping the research results in line with the interests of the people and organizations,
ç) Republishing: To present repetitive publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
d) Slicing: Dividing the results of a research into pieces in a way that disrupts the integrity of the research and inappropriately and publishing in more than one issue and presenting these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,
e) Unfair authorship: Including persons without active contribution among the authors or not including those who are, changing the author's order in an unjustified and inappropriate manner, removing the names of those who have active contribution from the work in subsequent editions, having their names included among the authors by using their influence even though they have no active contribution,
(2) Other types of ethical violations
a) Not specifying the supporting persons, institutions or organizations and their contributions in the publications made as a result of researches conducted with the support,
b) To use the thesis or studies that have not yet been submitted or accepted as a source without the permission of the owner,
c) Not complying with ethical rules in researches on humans and animals, not respecting patients' rights in publications,
ç) To act contrary to the provisions of the relevant legislation in biomedical researches and other clinical trials related to humans,
d) Sharing the information contained in a work that has been assigned to review with others before it is published without the explicit permission of the owner of the work,
e) Misuse of the resources, places, facilities and devices provided or allocated for scientific research,
f) To make unfounded, unwarranted and deliberate allegations of ethical violations,
g) To publish the data obtained without the express consent of the participants in a questionnaire and attitude research conducted within the scope of a scientific study or if the research will be conducted in an institution, also without the permission of the institution,
ğ) To harm animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,
h) Failing to obtain written permissions from the authorized units in research and experiments before starting the work.
i) Research and experiments in legislation or engage in activities contrary to the provisions on related research and experimentation of the international conventions that Turkey is a party.
i) Failing to comply with the obligation of researchers and authorities to inform and warn those concerned about possible harmful practices regarding the scientific research,
j) Not using the data and information obtained from other persons and institutions in scientific studies, to the extent and as permitted, not to respect the confidentiality of this information and to ensure its protection,
k) To make false or misleading statements regarding scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions (YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, Article 4).
Within the framework of ethical rules; Studies requiring Ethics Committee Permission to be evaluated in the journal are as follows:
1. All kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, experiment, interview techniques,
2. Use of humans and animals (including material/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,
3. Clinical researches on humans,
4. Research on animals,
5. Retrospective studies in accordance with the law on protection of personal data.
In this context, in studies to be evaluated in our journal;
1. Obtaining and indicating "Informed Consent Form" in case presentations,
2. Obtaining and indicating permission from the owners for the use of scales, questionnaires and photographs belonging to others,
3. It should be stated that the copyright regulations are complied with for the intellectual and artistic works used.
4. Editors ensure the protection of human and animal rights in the studies evaluated. Editors have the responsibility to refuse to work when there is no approval of the ethics committee on the subjects used in the study, and no permission for experimental research. In studies requiring ethics committee approval, information about the permission (name of the board, date and number) should be included in the method section and also on the first / last page of the article. In case reports, the information that the informed consent / consent form was signed should be included in the article.
2. Responsibilities of Stakeholders
The stakeholders and readers of the researches are pleased to inform the FIVEZERO journals about the scientific research and publication ethics they see in the published articles to Necmettin Erbakan University Scientific Publications Coordinator ([email protected]) meets.
a) Editors' Responsibilities
Editor and assistant editors of the Journal of FIVEZERO, Code of Conduct and Best Practice for Journal Editors(COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors), Best Practice Guidelines(COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors) for Journal Editors published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and provide the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the principles of Publication Ethics Flowcharts developed by COPE in possible situations of abuse or breach of publication ethics.
• Impartiality and Publisher Freedom. Editors evaluate the submitted article suggestions by considering their suitability to the scope of the journal and the importance and originality of their studies. Editors do not take into account the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, nationality or political views of the authors submitting the article proposal. Editors should not have personal or financial conflicts of interest with articles. Other institutions other than the journal editorial board cannot influence the correction or publication decision. Editors take care that the published issues contribute to the reader, researcher, practitioner and the scientific field and to be original.
• Independence: The relationship between Editors (Editor and Assistant Editors) and the publisher is based on the principle of editor independence. According to the written agreement between the editors and the publisher, all decisions of the editors are independent of the publisher and the journal owner. Editors should reject, under no influence, incomplete or erroneous research that does not comply with the journal policy, publication rules and level.
• Privacy. Editors do not share information about a submitted article with anyone other than the responsible author, referees and editorial board. It ensures that the articles evaluated by at least two referees are evaluated according to the double-blind review system and keeps the referees confidential.
• Disclosure and Differences of Opinion. Editors and editorial board members may not use unpublished information in an article submitted for their own research purposes without the express written consent of the authors. Editors should not have a conflict of interest regarding articles they accept or reject.
• Printing Decision. Editors ensure that all articles accepted for publication are reviewed by at least two referees who are experts in their field. Editors are responsible for deciding which work will be published from the articles submitted to the journal, the validity of the study in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the comments of referees and such legal requirements. Editors have the responsibility and authority to accept or reject articles. Therefore, it has to use its responsibility and authority in place and on time.
• Ethical Concerns. Editors will take action when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted article or published article. As a matter of fact, they continue their business processes without compromising intellectual property rights and ethical standards. Any reported unethical publishing behavior will be reviewed, even if it occurs years after publication. Editors follow COPE Flowcharts in case of ethical concerns. If ethical issues are significant, correction, retraction may be applied or concerns regarding the issue may be published in the journal.
• Collaboration with journal boards: Editors ensure that all members of the advisory committee advance the processes in accordance with the editorial policies and guidelines. Informs the advisory board members about publication policies. It enables advisory board members to evaluate their work independently. It can contribute to new advisory board members and decide accordingly. For evaluation, the advisory board should send studies appropriate to the expertise of its members. It interacts regularly with the advisory board. It holds regular meetings with the editorial board for publication policies and magazine development.
b) Authors' Responsibilities
1. Reporting Standards: The authors of the original research should ensure that the study and results are presented accurately, and then the importance of the study is discussed objectively. If authors make use of other studies or use other studies, they must cite and / or cite completely and accurately.
2. Data Access and Retention: Authors are required to keep the raw data of their studies. When necessary, they should submit it for editorial review if requested by the journal.
3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit entirely original works and if they have used the work or words of others, this must be appropriately cited. Plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behavior in all its forms and is unacceptable. For this reason, a similarity rate report is requested from all authors who submit an article to the journal.
4. Multiple, duplicate, backup or simultaneous submission / publication: Authors cannot have their work in the application process of more than one journal at the same time. Each application can be started following completion of the previous application. A study published in another journal cannot be sent to the Journal of General Health Sciences. Simultaneous submission of an article to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Authorship of the Manuscript: Only those who fulfill the authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the content of the manuscript. These authorship criteria are as follows; (i) contributed to the design, implementation, data collection or analysis phases (ii) prepared the manuscript or made significant intellectual contribution or critically revised it; or (iii) saw the final version of the manuscript, approved it and agreed to be submitted for publication. Corresponding author should ensure that all authors (according to the definition above) are included in the list of authors and declare that they have seen the final version of the article and agree to be submitted for publication.
6. Statement and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should reveal conflicts of interest at the earliest possible stage (usually by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the article). All sources of financial support for the study must be declared (including the grant / fund number or other reference number, if applicable). In accordance with the publication policy of the Journal of General Health Sciences, people who contribute in real terms to the articles submitted to the journal (original scientific research article, case reports and reviews) should be written as authors. The author (s) of the article must declare that there is no personal and financial conflict of interest within the scope of the study. They should indicate this declaration at the end of the article under the heading "Conflicts of Interest" (The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest).
7. Peer Review: Authors are responsible for participating in the peer review process and are obliged to fully cooperate by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, explanations and evidence of ethical approval, and copyright permissions. If a "required revision" decision is made first, the authors should review and re-submit their manuscript until the deadline given to the reviewers' comments in a systematic manner.
8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When authors find material errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, they are obliged to inform the journal editors or publishers immediately and to cooperate with the journal editors or publishers to correct a typo in the article (erratum) or remove the article from publication. If editors or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, the author must take the responsibility of correcting or withdrawing the article immediately or providing the journal's editors with evidence of the paper's accuracy.
9. Voluntary / Consent: Authors must have a document showing that they have the rights to use the data used, the necessary permissions for the research / analysis, or that the consent of the experimental subjects has been obtained. It must also ensure that all studies involving human or animal subjects comply with national and international laws and guidelines (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki, NIH Policy on the Use of Laboratory Animals, EU Directive on the Use of Animals) must be able to confirm that the necessary approvals have been obtained, and respect subject privacy.
c) Responsibilities of Referees
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Assists editors in their editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. Completion of other articles, works, references, citations, rules and similar deficiencies related to the article should be pointed out.
2. Speed: Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the proposal of the article or knows that the article review cannot take place on time should immediately notify the editors and reject the invitation to review, thus ensuring the appointment of a new referee.
3. Confidentiality: All article suggestions submitted for review are confidential documents and should be handled as such. It should not be shown or discussed to others unless authorized by the editor. This also applies to referees who decline the invitation to review.
4. Impartiality Standards: Comments on the proposal of the article should be made impartially and recommendations should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the article. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.
5. Acceptance of References: Referees should describe relevant published works that are not cited by the authors. The referee should also inform the editor of any significant similarities between the manuscript reviewed and any other manuscript (published or unpublished).
6. Conflicts of Interest: When the referees suspect that there is any conflict of interest in the article they evaluate, they should inform the editor of the journal about the evaluation process and, if necessary, refuse the article evaluation. There should be no conflict of interest between the reviewers and the stakeholders of the article under review.