Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The journal follows the core practices, guidelines and resources of the Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE.

Editors follow the guidelines of COPE core practices, COPE best practices and require reviewers to follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. 
If malpractice is reported in the article, the editors reserve the right to retract the paper following the procedures described in the COPE retraction guidelines. 
All the parties participating in the peer-review and editorial processes (authors, reviewers, editors) are required to consider and disclose any relationships and obstacles that can potentially cause conflicts of interest.

The person given in Principal Contact is responsible and manage any Ethical issues. Unresolved cases may be referred to COPE for advice.

1. Allegations of misconduct

When the Journal faces suspected cases of research and publication misconduct or any allegations from whistleblowers the Principal Contact is responsible to investigate, resolve, handle allegations of misconduct and manage the resolving process regarding pre-publication and post-publication and inform the parties  within 2-4 weeks based on the guidelines of COPE Allegations of misconduct.

2. Authorship and contributorship

Requirements for authorship and contributorship as well as processes for managing potential disputes are follow guidelines of COPE Authorship and contributorship.

Authorship

For an author one should have:

1, made substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data;
2, been involved in drafting the manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
3, given final approval of the version to be published. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content; and
4, agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, alone, does not usually justify authorship. Author should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific other parts of the work. In addition, authors should have confidence in the integrity of the contributions of their co-authors. Any further contribution details (eg, equal contribution) must be included in the contributors or acknowledgement sections at the end of the article.

Only natural persons are accepted as authors.
Minimum one corresponding author per article is applied in the management system. 
The corresponding author takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process, and typically ensures that all the journal’s administrative requirements, such as providing details of authorship, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration documentation, and gathering conflict of interest forms and statements, are properly completed, although these duties may be delegated to one or more co-authors.

In case of disagreements among authors the journal follows the guidelines of COPE.

Contributorship

List of authors' names are locating at the beginning of the paper and, secondly, the list contributors (some of whom may not be included as authors) at the end of the paper giving details of the contribution. Authors and contributors must determine among themselves the precise nature of each person's contribution. 

Alteration to authorship or contributorship

Any change in authors and/or contributors after initial submission must be approved by all authors with the assistance of corresponding author. This applies to additions, deletions, change of order to the authors, or contributions being attributed differently. Any alterations must be explained to the editor. 

3. Complaints and appeals

The policy of the journal is primarily aimed at protecting the authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher of the journal. The process of handling complaints and appeals follows the guidelines of COPE Complaints and appeals. Principal Contact is responsible to investigate, resolve, handle complaints and appeals and manage the resolving process and inform the parties within 2-4 weeks.

4. Conflicts of interest / Competing interests

A Conflict of Interest exists if a person or institution has a relationship, personal or otherwise, which has the potential to compromise or in any way interfere with professional objectivity or judgment in issues related to the relationship. A Conflict of Interest is actual if a relationship exists, or apparent if the possibility for a relationship could be inferred. The processes for handling conflicts of interest whether identified before or after publication follow the guidelines of COPE Conflicts of interest.

There are several areas where you my encounter a conflict of interest for example:

Authors: if they are funded by the company that produces the products that they are writing about this may influence their reporting.
Reviewers: if they are working in the same area of research at a competing institution to the authors, then this will not only influence their judgement, but may encourage them to advise rejection of the competing article so that their research is published first.
Editors: if an editor receives an article from a friend or colleague this may bias their judgement of its suitability to publish.

A conflict of interest may not invalidate a manuscript or a decision, but it should be declared so that suitable action can be taken.

Authors are required to inform the Principal Contact about any conflict of interest before submit their manuscript. This allows the Editors and reviewers to make an informed judgement of the work. On behalf of all the authors, the corresponding author has the responsibility to advise the Editor of an actual or apparent conflict of interest at the time of submission of the manuscript.

Reviewers are required to declare a conflict of interest when they are asked to review an article – the Editor can then judge whether they are suitable to review the article or not.

When the Editor has a possible conflict of interest, then the evaluation procedure (peer review and publishing decision) must be undertaken in a way that avoids biased decisions. 

Editorial board members can submit to their journal, but they are not involved in the decision-making process for their own article.

Parties must report any financial interest in corporate or commercial entities dealing with the subject matter of the manuscript.

The journal cooperates and shares information other publishers and journals to handle any conflicts of interest or other Ethic issues if necessary.

5. Data and reproducibility

The journal follows the guidelines of COPE Data and reproducibility in case of suspecting potential image or figure manipulation, fabricated data, data manipulation in a submitted or published article. The journal allows submitting and makes available research data together articles.

With regard to image manipulation it is allowed to technically improve images for readability. Proper technical manipulation refers to adjusting the contrast and/or brightness or color balance if it is applied to the complete digital image (and not parts of the image).

6. Ethical oversight

Aurthors have to protect the autonomy, safety, privacy, and welfare of human research subjects vulnerable populations and adhere the regulations, specific research requirements and ethics standards for their field (for example World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki). Publication of any personal information about a human subject will normally require the consent of the human subject. COPE Ethical oversight guidelines are used in any suspected ethical problem.

7. Intellectual property

Copyright and publishing licenses: Copyright of manuscripts published is retained by the Author(s) under license as Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). This permits anyone to copy, redistribute, remix, transmit and adapt the work provided the original work and source is appropriately cited according to license rules.
By submitting the manuscript the Author(s) grant and authorize the journal to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.

Costs associated with publishing: The journal does not charge authors any article processing charges (APCs), open access charges, submission, or publication fees for Authors and freely available for Readers.

Prepublication that will preclude consideration: Consideration preclude is not applied. Posting a manuscript to a preprint server prior to or concurrently with submission to the journal will not preclude consideration of manuscripts for peer review and publication.

Constitutes plagiarism and redundant/overlapping publication: violating the following policies the manuscript will be rejected.

Plagiarism: The author should develop his own contents while preparing any manuscript towards publication and should avoid plagiarizing the contents of other author’s paper without proper citation. If Manuscripts that are found to have been plagiarized from a manuscript by other authors, whether published or unpublished, will be considered as plagiarism.
Duplicate Submission: Authors should not submit the same manuscript, simultaneously to more than one journal to consider for peer review process. Manuscripts that are found to have been published elsewhere or to be under review elsewhere will be considered duplicate submission.
Duplicate Publication: Duplicate publication is the publication of a paper that shares the same hypotheses, data, discussion, and conclusions substantially with one already published, without clear, visible reference to the previous publication.
Redundant publication: Redundant publication is the publication of a paper that overlaps substantially that has already been reported in large part in a published article or is contained in another paper that has been submitted or accepted for publication elsewhere.
Data Fabrication or Falsification: Data fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting the fabricated information without carrying out the study. Falsification includes the manipulating research materials, equipment, processes, changing, and selective omission/deletion/suppression of conflicting data without scientific or statistical justification.
Improper Authorship/Contributorship: Authorship credits should be given those who do substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, and final approval of the version to be published. All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged as contributorship.

Further information for Authors can be found in the information section on the journal's main page.

For other property and details the COPE Intellectual property is applied.

8. Journal management

The journal works as a non-profit organization; participants (Editorial Board, Editors, Reviewers, Lectors etc.) support the journal on a voluntary basis. The complete journal management is supported by the Open Journal System which is an online journal management and publishing system. The training of journal staff is supported by Information on the Open Access Mandate of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences by their tutorials on OJS. Editors asked to study the COPE guide to ethical editing. On other issues the COPE rules apply.

9. Peer review processes

The papers should be original, unpublished, and not in consideration for publication elsewhere at the time of submission.
All paper submissions will be referred in a blind review process by initial editor screening and at least two anonymous experts including the international Editorial Board and other external reviewers. The reviewers are independent of the authors. The peer review and internal quality control requires the time period of approx. one month for one review round.
The final decision about acceptance is made by the Chairman of the Editorial Board, with the professional support of Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board based on the evaluation of it's suitability to the journal scope and requirements, reports of qualified reviewers, lectors and plagiarism check.

The review process is completely managed by OJS online management system. Editors and Reviewers asked to study the about and ethics principles of the journal and COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

10. Post-publication discussions and corrections

Any debate of post publication is managed by Principal Contact. The journal initiates an internal investigation involving the Editor, Editor-in-Chief and if it is necessary the Editorial Board. Based on the results of the investigation the journal dispose the correcting, revising or retracting articles according to COPE Post-publication discussions and corrections guidelines.

Addons

Main duties of Editors

• Publication decision
• Review process
• Fair play
• Confidentiality
• Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
• Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Main duties of Reviewers

• Contribution to Editorial Decision
• Promptness
• Confidentiality
• Standards of Objectivity
• Acknowledgement of Source
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Main duties of Authors

• Reporting standards
• Data Access and Retention
• Originality and Plagiarism
• Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
• Acknowledgement of Sources
• Authorship of the Paper
• Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
• Fundamental errors in published works

Main Duties of Publisher

• Advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions
• Assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors
• Working closely with other publishers and industry associations to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions–and are prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary

Duties in details

Duties of Editor-in-chief, Editorial Staff, and Editorial Board

Publication decisions
Editor in Chief or the assigned editorial board members from time to time are responsible for making decisions on size and content of the manuscripts submitted to the journal and ensure the integrity of the publication review process. Editors shall conduct proper and fair investigation into ethical complaints.
The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Other editors, reviewers or members of the editorial board can assist in making this decision. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Fair play 
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Any of editorial board members must not use materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript (published or unpublished) for their own research without the author's written authorization.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
The Editor-in-chief, Editorial Staff and members of the Editorial Board must not use the unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own researches without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or another member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions (recommend revisions, re-submission, rejection, acceptance etc.) and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Reviewers assess the validity, methodology and procedures of the research. Reviewers should complete their reviews within the journal stipulated timeframe.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers conduct their business of review objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Reviewers check unethical practice and plagiarism. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call 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.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. All manuscripts submitted to our journals are now screened by a plagiarism detection software.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.