Peer Review, Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Peer-Review
Submission is considered on the conditions that papers are previously unpublished and are not offered simultaneously elsewhere; that authors have read and approved the content, and all authors have also declared all competing interests; and that the work complies with the ethical approval requirements and has been conducted under internationally accepted ethical standards. If ethical misconduct is suspected, the Editorial Board will act in accordance with the relevant international rules of publication ethics (i.e., COPE guidelines).
Editorial policies of the journal are conducted as stated in the rules recommended by the Council of Science Editors and reflected in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. Accordingly, authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to adhere to the best practice guidelines on ethical behavior contained in this statement.
Submitted manuscripts are subjected to double-blinded peer-review. The scientific board guiding the selection of the papers to be published in the journal consists of elected specialists of the journal and, if necessary, selected from national and international experts in the relevant field of research. All manuscripts are reviewed by the editor, section associate editors, and at least two external expert reviewers.
Human and Animal Rights
For the experimental, clinical, and drug human studies, approval by the ethical committee and a statement on the adherence of the study protocol to the international agreements (World Medical Association of Helsinki 'Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects,' amended October 2013) are required. In experimental animal studies, the authors should indicate that the procedures followed were by animal rights (Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals), and they should obtain animal ethics committee approval. The Ethics Committee approval document should be submitted to the Rheumatology Quarterly together with the manuscript.
The approval of the ethics committee; a statement on the adherence to international guidelines mentioned above; and proof that the patient's informed consent is obtained should be indicated in the `Material and Method` section. These items are required for case reports whenever data/media could reveal the identity of the patient.
For persons under 18 years of age, please provide a consent form that includes both parents' signatures or of the person's legal guardian or supervisor.
Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct
The Rheumatology Quarterly uses plagiarism screening service to verify the originality of content submitted before publication. This journal does not accept articles that indicate a similarity rate of more than 15%, according to iThenticate reports.
It is important for authors to avoid all forms of plagiarism and ethical misconduct, such as:
Plagiarism: To republish whole or part of a content in another author's publication without attribution.
Fabrication: To publish data and findings/results that do not exist.
Duplication: Using data from another publication; this includes republishing an article in different languages.
Salamisation: Creating multiple publications by abnormally splitting the results of a study.
Data Manipulation/Falsification: Manipulating or deliberately distorting research data to give a false impression.
We disapprove of such unethical practices and of efforts to influence the review process with such practices as gifting authorship, inappropriate acknowledgements, and references in line with the COPE flowcharts.
Submitted manuscripts are subjected to automatic software evaluation for plagiarism and duplicate publication. Authors are obliged to acknowledge if they published study results in whole or in part in the form of abstracts.
DUTIES OF PUBLISHER:
Handling of unethical publishing behaviour
The publisher will take all appropriate measures to modify the article in question, in close cooperation with the editors, in cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, disclosure, or retraction of the affected work in the most severe case. Together with the editors, the publisher will take reasonable steps to detect and prevent the publication of articles in which research misconduct occurs and will under no circumstances promote or knowingly allow such abuse to occur.
Editorial Autonomy
Editorial Autonomy The Rheumatology Quarterly is committed to ensuring the autonomy of editorial decisions without influence from commercial partners.
Intellectual Property and Copyright
The Rheumatology Quarterly protects the property and copyright of the articles published in the journal and maintains each article's published version of the record. The journal provides the integrity and transparency of each published article.
Scientific Misconduct
The Rheumatology Quarterly’s publisher takes all appropriate measures regarding fraudulent publication or plagiarism.
DUTIES OF EDITORS:
Decision on Publication and Responsibility
The editor of the journal strives to meet the needs of readers and authors, and to provide a fair and appropriate peer-review process. The editor is also responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published and guided by the policies subjected to legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor might discuss such policies, procedures, and responsibilities with reviewers while making publication decisions. The editor is responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
Objectivity
Articles that are submitted to the journal are always evaluated without any prejudice.
Confidentiality
The editor must not disclose any information about a submitted article to anyone other than editorial staff, reviewers, and publisher.
Conflicts of Interest and Disclosure
The Rheumatology Quarterly does not allow any conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers, and editors. Unpublished materials in a submitted article must not be used by anyone without the express written assent of the author.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
Authors are obliged to notify the journal's editors or publisher immediately and to cooperate with them to correct or retract the article if significant errors or inaccuracies are detected in the published work. If the editors or publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a material error or inaccuracy, the authors must promptly correct or retract the article or provide the journal editors with evidence of the accuracy of the article.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS:
Evaluation
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts without regard for the origin, gender, sexual orientation, or political philosophy of the authors. Reviewers also ensure a fair, blind peer review of the submitted manuscripts for evaluation.
Confidentiality
All the information relative to submitted articles is kept confidential. The reviewers must not be discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
The reviewers have no conflicts of interest among authors, funders, editors, etc.
Contribution to editor
Reviewers help the editor make publishing decisions and may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
Objectivity
Reviewers offer objective judgments and evaluations. The reviewers express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers ought to identify a relevant published study that the authors have not cited. Reviewers also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS:
Reporting Standards
A submitted manuscript should be original, and the authors ensure that the manuscript has never been published previously. Research data should be represented literally in the article. A manuscript should include adequate detail and references to allow others to replicate the study.
Originality
Authors must ensure that their study is entirely original. References to the literature should be appropriately cited.
Multiple Publications
Authors should not submit the same study to multiple journals. Simultaneous submission of the same study to more than one journal is unacceptable and constitutes unethical behaviour.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Acknowledgement to the workof others must be given. Authors should cite publications of relevance to their own study. All of the sources for the author’s study should be noted.
Authorship of a Paper
Authorship of a paper ought to be limited to those who have made a noteworthy contribution to the study. If others have participated in the research, they should be listed as contributors. Authorship also includes a corresponding author who is in communication with the editor of a journal. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in a paper.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All sources of financial support should be disclosed. All authors should disclose if a meaningful conflict of interest exists in the process of forming their study. Any financial grants or other support received for a submitted study from individuals or institutions should be disclosed to the Editorial Board of the Rheumatology Quarterly. The ICMJE Potential Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form should be filled in and submitted by all contributing authors to disclose a potential conflict of interest. The journal's Editorial Board determines cases of a potential conflict of interest of the editors, authors, or reviewers within the scope of COPE and ICMJE guidelines.
Conditions that provide financial or personal benefit bring about a conflict of interest. The reliability of the scientific process and the published articles is directly related to the objective consideration of conflicts of interest during the planning, implementation, writing, evaluation, editing, and publication of scientific studies.
Financial relations are the most easily identified conflicts of interest, and it is inevitable that they will undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and the science. These conflicts can be caused by individual relations, academic competition, or intellectual approaches. The authors should refrain as much as possible from making agreements with sponsors in the opinion of gaining profit or any other advantage that restrict their ability to access all data of the study or analyze, interpret, prepare, and publish their articles. Editors should refrain from bringing together those who may have any relationship between them during the evaluation of the studies. The editors, who make the final decision about the articles, should not have any personal, professional, or financial ties with any of the issues they are going to decide. Authors should inform the editorial board concerning potential conflicts of interest to ensure that their articles will be evaluated within the framework of ethical principles through an independent assessment process.
If one of the editors is an author in any manuscript, the editor is excluded from the manuscript evaluation process. In order to prevent any conflict of interest, the article evaluation process is carried out as double-blinded. Because of the double-blinded evaluation process, except for the Editor-in-Chief, none of the editorial board members, international advisory board members, or reviewers is informed about the authors of the manuscript or institutions of the authors.
Our publication team works devotedly to ensure that the evaluation process is conducted impartially, considering all these situations.
Conflict of Interest
The declaration of the conflict of interest between authors, institutions, acknowledgement of any financial or material support, aid is mandatory for authors submitting a manuscript, and the statement should appear at the end of the manuscript. Reviewers are required to report if any potential conflict of interest exists between the reviewer and authors, institutions.
Appeals and complaints
Appeal and complaint cases are handled within the scope of COPE guidelines by the Editorial Board of the journal. Appeals should be based on the scientific content of the manuscript. The final decision on the appeal and complaint is made by Editor-in-Chief. An Ombudsperson or an Ethical Editor is assigned to resolve cases that cannot be resolved internally. Authors should get in contact with the Editor in Chief regarding their appeals and complaints via e-mail at [email protected].
