ResearchersLinks follows and recommends best publication ethics and practices in scholarly publications, and some of these are defined in following statements:

Human and Animal Rights

Publication Ethics and Malpractices

Editorial Workflow

Author’s Rights and Obligations

HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS

All journals operated by the ResearchersLinks adopt ICMJE Recommendations on Protection of Research Participants. For more information, click here!

In addition to ICMJE recommendations, we also support 3Rs principals (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) for humans and animals usage in research. Briefly 3Rs are mentioned below, and more information can be accessed here!

Replacement: approaches which avoid or replace the use of animals
Reduction: approaches which minimise the number of animals used per experiment
Refinement: approaches which minimise animal suffering and improve welfare

As evidence, authors are required to provide local, national or international ethical approval statements in the Materials and Methods section (or text describing the experimental procedures) affirms all appropriate measures were taken. We require a traceable and unique reference number and the name of the ethical review board in the manuscript. In case, no formal ethics committee is available (applicable to only developing countries), the studies shall be sufficient compliance with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013.

CONSENT FROM INDIVIDUAL SUBJECT

Manuscripts presenting research on human subjects should provide “informed consent to participate” from participants. In case of children under 16, consent from parents or guardians shall be presented.

CONSENT FROM INDIVIDUAL PATIENT DATA

Consents might be required by the editor(s) of journal on images or videos from participants in the study. Consent form must be made available to Editors on request, and will be treated confidentially.

HUMAN RIGHTS STATEMENT

Before reporting research work involving human subjects, authors should ensure that the work has been conducted in full accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible institutional or national committees on human subjects as well as with the Helsinki Declaration. In cases, where such committees do not exist, stick compliance with the Helsinki Declaration is suggested. In any other cases, authors are required to explain the full rationale for their approach approaches, and should demonstrate all doubtful matters of the study in the submitted manuscripts.

ANIMAL RIGHTS STATEMENT

In order to avoid animal suffering and to raise animal welfare, we strictly request authors to obey all national and international guidelines set out for the care and use of animal in research. ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) has set out guidelines to improve the reporting of research using animals – maximising information published and minimising unnecessary studies. Authors are encouraged to liaise with ARRIVE items, crosscheck research work against their checklist and finally upload them during the submission process of the manuscript. We also recommend our authors to follow Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

ResearchersLinks enforces the standards and guidelines during the final decision and discrepancies, if any, should be clearly articulated by the authors. It is recommended that authors should describe all relevant information in their cover letter and convey to Editor while submitting their manuscript online.

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE

Malpractice Statement

ResearchersLinks, UK, believes that research must be conducted according to the full and appropriate ethical agenda, universally acceptable to the research community. Any issue associated to the publication ethics will be handled seriously at the Editorial Office and, if proven, ResearchersLinks reserves the right to reject the manuscript and may contact the ethics committee or the concerning committee of the author’s institutions for appropriate actions. If authors want to retract articles, they should inform the Editorial Office with a retraction letter explaining the reason. Authors also reserve the right to appeal against the Editor’s decision on the manuscript in writing to the Editorial Office. ResearchersLinks accepts papers not for business or political gain but on intellectual and ethical standards only. The Editorial Office will also strictly monitor for plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data prior to the processing of the manuscript for review process and, if plagiarism is detected at this stage or latter, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be reconsidered in any journal published, independently or in-association, by the ResearchersLinks, UK.

Publication Ethics Statement

Publication of scientific contents is meticulous, methodical and comprehensive processes that involve good ethical and managerial practices. ResearcherLinks takes the responsibility to ensure that a rigorous peer-review has been performed, and strict ethical policies and standards are observed for presented manuscripts. In cases of plagiarism, fraudulent data, inappropriate authorship credit, and similar, ResearchersLinks handle these misconducts very seriously and our editors are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero tolerance policy. To effectively maintain high publication standards, ResearchersLinks strives to work with editors, authors, peer-reviewers and copy editors on on-to-one bases. To ensure that submitted contents are original and are not duplicated from previous publications, we use iThenticate on every published article.

The publication ethics, attributed to all journals of ResearchersLinks, are based on the guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct (Comprehensively described at www.publicationethics.org) (ResearchersLinks is not yet member of COPE). These publication ethics are briefly described to provide a snapshot for authors, reviewers, editors and readers.

1. Author’s Responsibilities
2. Editor/Associate Editors/Editorial Members Responsibilities
3. Reviewers Responsibilities
4. Publisher/Copy Editor Responsibilities
5. Recording Complaints

Author’s Responsibilities

Authorship: authorship should be attributed to personnel with significant contribution to the study, manuscript drafting, and holding responsibility for the authenticity. General supervision, or financial support shall not suffice the authorship. Contribution of each author shall clearly be stated and contributing authors shall not be changed without prior written consent from the existing authors.

Acknowledgement of Funding Sources: All authors shall fairly and clearly state the portion of the studies funded, supported or sponsored by any of the government, non-government or personal sources.

Conflicts of Interest/Disclosures: authors are required to declare any financial, academic, commercial, political or personal conflicts before the publication of the manuscript.

Data Ownership and Access: authors are expected to clarify the ownership, appropriate access and full understanding of the data being presented in the submitted manuscripts.

Reporting Standards: it is essential that authors are aware of international standards on the publications, and are professional and authorised to conduct studies on living objects. Moreover, authors are expected to be fully aware of practices for multiple, redundant or concurrent publications and their mitigations consequences.

Ethical Approvals: In cases where animals are used in the submitted manuscript, the methods section must clearly indicate approval from the ethics committee of the institute or organisation and should state that all efforts were taken to minimize pain and discomfort to the animal while conducting these experiments.

Ethics of Investigation: Authors should make sure that the manuscript is designed according to the guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013, otherwise the manuscript will not be accepted for publication or will be rejected later.

Permissions: In case any part (e.g. table or figure) of the submitted manuscript has been taken from previously published work, it is the responsibility of the authors to obtain permission either from the publishers or from the authors depending on the copyright ownership. ResearchersLinks can demand this permission anytime, pre- or post-publication of the study.

Originality and Plagiarism Policy: The Editorial Office will strictly monitor text plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data prior to the review process and if plagiarism is detected at this stage or later, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be reconsidered in any journal published independently or in association with ResearchersLinks, UK.

Appeal of Decision: Authors have the right to appeal the Editor’s decision in writing to the Editorial Office stating the reasons for appealing the decision with evidence and supporting data.

Editor/Associate Editors/Editorial Members Responsibilities

Editorship: Editors (chief editor, associate editor or member of the editorial board) are expert in the field and play central roles in the peer-review process. Editors are selected based on their excellent scientific qualification, and reputation in the field. They are expected to strictly follow guidelines to not only maintain quality of publications but also to ensure best possible publication ethics.

Confidentiality: Editors shall only access the submitted manuscripts for evaluation of quality and peer-review process. They shall not disclose any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) before the publication of the material or without prior written consent of the authors. Any idea or concept generated through the submitted manuscript shall not be used for personal benefits or financial gain.

Assessment of Manuscripts: Editors shall evaluate contents purely based on the scientific quality and advancement in the existing understanding. Decisions shall not be based on race, gender, geographical origin, religion, and ethnicity and on any other personal or commercial interests.

Flexibility and Cooperation: Editors are required to suggest and support the ethical standards, be willing to consider retractions, rectifications, and erratum and cooperate with authors to improve the quality of publications.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors shall not consider any submitted manuscript for the review process himself/herself where there is conflict of interests. In such situations, an alternative associate editor or member of the editorial board shall be considered.

Accountabilities: In case publisher suspect any form of misconduct, malpractice or unethical act, the matter shall be investigated promptly in agreement with authors and would be solved with diligence.

Reviewers Responsibilities

Reviewership: reviewers are essential part of the peer-review process and are important benchmarks for quality publications. Although sometimes tedious and time consuming, reviewing a manuscript is also a privilege.

Pre-acceptance Obligations: Reviewers are expected to only accept to review the manuscript when the scope of the research/study falls within his/her areas of expertise and that they have sufficient time to submit the report timely.

Conflict of Interest and Willingness: Reviewers shall decline to review the manuscript if there is any conflict of interest, the study is beyond the ken of knowledge or they are unable to submit the evaluation in time. They shall notify the editors at their earliest convenience and can/shall suggestive alternative reviewers.

Confidentiality: The journal follow single-blinded review in which names of the reviewers are not disclosed to authors, however, reviewers are aware of authors and their affiliations. Reviewers shall only access the submitted manuscripts for evaluation of quality and peer-review process. They shall not disclose any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) before the publication of the material or without prior written consent of the authors. Any idea or concept generated through the submitted manuscript shall not be used for personal benefits or financial gain.

Objectivity: Reviewers are requested to comments on scientific contents, appropriateness of the study and value of the outcome. They are requested to not to assess the manuscripts based on race, gender, geographical origin, religion, and ethnicity and on any other personal or commercial interests.

Meeting Standards: Reviewers shall adhere to the criteria set by the journal in the online portal. Any comments on competing interests, duplication of publication, unethical practice or dubious act shall be conducted to the editor in the “confidential comments to the Editor” section in the online submission system.

Publisher/Copy Editor Responsibilities

Involvement and Cooperation in the Peer-Review Process: We are committed to bridge all components of peer-review process for delivery of quality publications and benefiting researchers. Our all advertisements, reprinting, or other commercial interests shall not effect the decision of the editors, associate editors, and reviewers.

Article Withdrawal and Corrections to the Record: The published articles may be considered for withdrawal if proven to be plagiarised, presenting fake, duplicate or fraudulent data, or showing clear evidences of infringements of ethical codes. Such articles (html, pdf, epub, eflip) will be replaced by the content stating the withdrawal of the manuscripts. Minor errors such as typos, textual changes, or clearer statements on the existing contents will be published as corrections.

Integrity and Quality of Services: We will ensure that all contents are confidential before publication, meeting standard of archiving and abstracting and timely publication of the accepted manuscripts.

Recording Complaints

In case of any concern that dictates unethical practice, misuse of data or deviation from individual’s responsibilities, it is requested to write us at journals@ResearchersLinks.com or fill this short online form for prompt actions.

EDITORIAL WORKFLOW

All submitted manuscripts undergo extensive peer-review process and circulate among Authors, Editors/Associate Editors, Reviewers and Editorial Office before final publication. Generally, this is a single-blind process where recommendation of more than two reviewers is sought and finally a decision is commented directly by the Editor-in-Chief or indirectly via associate/academic editor.

The whole process consists of below-provided editorial workflow, and following sections provide notes on each step:

Quality Control

All steps, from manuscript submission to final publication, are performed in the Manuscript Handler, a ResearchersLinks Project. All submitted manuscripts are initially quality controlled by the Editorial Office for suitability of the manuscript to the intended journal, manuscript formatting, reference provision, plagiarism checking and completion of all necessary files required to perform review process.

Peer Review Process

Once initial quality controls are passed, the manuscript is forwarded to appropriate Editor or Associate Editor or Academic Editors (Editor hereafter) depending upon whether it is a regular manuscript, part of the special issue or Guest Editorial. In case of a conflict of interest, a suitable Editorial Board Member is selected. Assigned handling editor decides the initiation of review process or decline to do so based on the quality of the presented work and scope of the journal. If Editor finds the manuscript of high quality and is within the aims and scope of the journal, the manuscript is sent to expert reviewers in the field and aimed to collect more than two reviewers recommendations.

The process is single-blind for most journals, meaning that the author does not know the identity of the reviewer, but the reviewer knows the identity of the author. Some journals operate double-blind peer review and/or open peer review process.

A mixed panel of reviewers is selected both from author’s suggestions and member of the editorial board. Reviewers are requested to (i) assess each section of the manuscript for values ranging from 0 to 5, (ii) to provide comments to Author (iii) comments to Editor, (iv) recommendations (accept, reject, minor revision, or major revision) and (v) willingness to review the revise version of this manuscript in case of minor and major revision. Reviewers can also upload a review report in the form of an attachment if the suggestions were made in a word document or in the manuscript directly.

To assist our editors, editorial assistant handle all communication with reviewers, authors, and the external editor; however, Academic Editors can check the status of manuscripts and the identity of reviewers at any time. Reviewers are given two weeks to write their review. For the review of a revised manuscript, reviewers are asked to provide their report within three days. In both cases, extensions can be granted upon request.

A paper can only be accepted for publication by editor without any involvement of the ResearcherLinks staff, however, they bridge the communication between editors and authors and deal all technical issues if required.

Editor Decision

Based on the reviewers’ comments, suggestions and overall assessments, Editor recommends one of the following options:

(i) Accept, (ii) Reject, (iii) Minor revision, (iv) Major revision, (v) Returned.

The rejected manuscripts are closed, whereas, manuscripts with minor or major revision are require appropriate actions from the Author for re-consideration by the Editor. The Editor either makes final recommendations or considers another round of review process.

Production

In case of acceptance, Authors are notified and the Publisher initiate the production process that include copy-editing, language editing, proofreading, reference linking, metadata generation for indexing and publication purposes. Immediately after the acceptance authors are invoiced for article processing charges if applicable. Authors are also requested to improve the language if required before the initiation of production process.

The Role of the Editor-in-Chief

Editor in Chief is a final and decisive authority to make any recommendations on submitted manuscripts without involvement of the Editorial Office. This is mainly due to the fact that Editors are leading personnel in the field and they make their recommendations on the bases of reviewers’ assessment. Also Editor can’t play external reviewers’ roles, except in occasional cases, to have fair, highly professional and dynamic peer-review system. Editor in Chief also approves the editorial board members and mainly involve in the selection of the special issues in the journal.

Publishing Standards and Guidelines

Following guidelines and standards are practiced by the ResearchersLinks for its journals:

ICMJE: Medical journals follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Exhaustive guidelines and recommendations are available that range from peer review process to handling complaints. These guidelines and recommendations are mainly focusing medical journal, majority of these recommendations are generic and are followed by all our journals.

The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement deals inadequate reporting of randomized and controlled trials. Authors are encouraged to liaise with CONSORT statement, crosscheck their work against the checklist and flow diagram of the CONSORT and finally upload them during the submission process of the manuscript.

TOP (Transparency and Openness in Promotion) has set out community-driven guidelines to align scientific ideals with actual practices. ResearchersLinks aim to achieve level 1 or 2 in all TOP guidelines for all our journals. Depending upon the nature and scope of the journal, specific requirements differ between different journals. Should you need information on journal-specificity please contact for detailed information?

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) is an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Authors are encouraged to liaise with PRISM items, crosscheck their work against the checklist and flow diagram of the PRISM and finally upload them during the submission process of the manuscript.

ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) has set out guidelines to improve the reporting of research using animals – maximising information published and minimising unnecessary studies. Authors are encouraged to liaise with ARRIVE items, crosscheck research work against their checklist and finally upload them during the submission process of the manuscript.

ResearchersLinks enforces the standards and guidelines during the final decision and discrepancies, if any, should be clearly articulated by the authors. It is recommended that authors should describe all relevant information in their cover letter and convey to Editor while submitting their manuscript online.

AUTHOR’S RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

All authors published their research papers in ResearcherLinks journals are entitled for following rights and obligations:

Authorship: authorship should be attributed to personnel with significant contribution to the study, manuscript drafting, and holding responsibility for the authenticity. General supervision, or financial support shall not suffice the authorship. Contribution of each author shall clearly be stated and contributing authors shall not be changed without prior written consent from the existing authors.

Acknowledgement of Funding Sources: All authors shall fairly and clearly state the portion of the studies funded, supported or sponsored by any of the government, non-government or personal sources.

Conflicts of Interest/Disclosures: authors are required to declare any financial, academic, commercial, political or personal conflicts before the publication of the manuscript.

Data Ownership and Access: authors are expected to clarify the ownership, appropriate access and full understanding of the data being presented in the submitted manuscripts.

Reporting Standards: it is essential that authors are aware of international standards on the publications, and are professional and authorised to conduct studies on living objects. Moreover, authors are expected to be fully aware of practices for multiple, redundant or concurrent publications and their mitigations consequences.

Ethical Approvals: In cases where animals are used in the submitted manuscript, the methods section must clearly indicate approval from the ethics committee of the institute or organisation and should state that all efforts were taken to minimize pain and discomfort to the animal while conducting these experiments.

Ethics of Investigation: Authors should make sure that the manuscript is designed according to the guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013, otherwise the manuscript will not be accepted for publication or will be rejected later.

Permissions: In case any part (e.g. table or figure) of the submitted manuscript has been taken from previously published work, it is the responsibility of the authors to obtain permission either from the publishers or from the authors depending on the copyright ownership. ResearchersLinks can demand this permission anytime, pre- or post-publication of the study.

Originality and Plagiarism Policy: The Editorial Office will strictly monitor text plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data prior to the review process and if plagiarism is detected at this stage or later, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be reconsidered in any journal published independently or in association with ResearchersLinks, UK.
Appeal of Decision: Authors have the right to appeal the Editor’s decision in writing to the Editorial Office stating the reasons for appealing the decision with evidence and supporting data.

Self-Archiving Rights: All authors hold full copyright and self-archiving rights. Our self-archiving policies are detailed in the RoMEO (ResearchersLinks is a green publisher at RoMEO, which is a database of publishers’ copyright and self-archiving policies). Authors are required to download the original paper and be mindful on the updates through ResearchersLinks’ CrossMark membership. Additionally, authors are allowed to archive their articles in open access repositories as “post-prints”.

Pre-print and Pre-publisher Work: We decline the publication of material that has been online on pre-print or the work has been previously published online, offline or on any other electronic or print media.

Conference/Meeting Presented Research Work: Authors are allowed to submit their research work that has been presented in a seminar, meeting or conference. However, they are required to acknowledge the presentation at first place in the manuscript.

Acknowledgments: Authors are required to cite and acknowledge original reference in other media of communication such as audio files, interview etc.

Open Access: We offer Creative Commons (CC BY) License to researchers and scholar who uses the content of the published papers. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linking and Referencing: Authors are allowed to link published papers and share the published papers online or offline in the final format printed on the journal website.

Indexing and Storing: Authors are allowed to index and store the published work in any private, public, professional and institutional repositories including ResearchGates, University Repositories, etc.