Ethical aspects and Editorial Responsibilities
Ethical Policy and Editorial Responsibilities
At AG Editor (Argentina), the integrity of the academic content and the publication process is fundamental, which is why we adhere to the standards and guidelines proposed by The Committee on Publication Ethics - COPE (https://publicationethics.org/). This document describes the principles of good practice that we apply to our publications.
Research Integrity
Health Leadership and Quality of Life, we maintain high standards of research integrity. We expect publications to adhere to the following principles:
• Honesty: in all aspects of the research.
• Meticulous Care: thoroughness and excellence in research practice.
• Transparency: open and clear communication.
• Respect: care for all participants and research subjects.
• Accountability: taking responsibility for our own research as well as for that of others when we detect behavior that does not meet our standards.
Procedure for Reporting Concerns
If anyone believes that research published by Health Leadership and Quality of Life has not been conducted in accordance with these principles, they should communicate their concerns to the appropriate editor by emailing editorial@ageditor.ar. Concerns will be addressed in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Editorial Process
Editorial Independence
We are committed to editorial independence and strive to prevent it from being compromised by competing interests, fear or any other corporate, commercial, financial or political influence.
Diversity and Inclusion
We do not discriminate against authors, editors or reviewers based on personal characteristics or identity. We promote diversity and inclusion at all stages of our publication process.
Evaluation Procedure
Peer review is fundamental to maintaining the standards of our publications. We provide appropriate systems, training and support to facilitate rigorous, fair and effective peer review. We offer training and support systems for editors and reviewers. We protect the confidentiality of participants in the double-blind peer review process.
Authorship and Contributions
Principles of Authorship
We recognize that different disciplines and publication formats have varying rules about who is included as an author. Where no other guidelines are specified, we recommend applying the following principles:
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data.
2. Drafting of the paper or critical review of its intellectual content.
3. Final approval of the version to be published.
4. Acceptance of responsibility for all aspects of the job.
Corresponding Author Responsibilities
The corresponding author has specific responsibilities, such as proofreading manuscripts, handling revisions and resubmissions, and responding to post-publication queries.
Affiliations
Membership Guidelines
Article affiliations should represent the institutions where the research was conducted, supported or approved.
Plagiarism
Definition and Policies against Plagiarism
At Health Leadership and Quality of Life, we do not tolerate plagiarism in any of our publications. Plagiarism is defined as the use of ideas, words, data or other material produced by others without acknowledgement. Submissions containing suspected plagiarism will be rejected. If plagiarism is discovered after publication, we will follow our guidelines for Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern described in COPE.
Duplicate and Redundant Publication
Policies against Duplication
Duplicate or redundant publication, or "self-plagiarism," occurs when a paper, or substantial parts of a paper, is published more than once without proper referencing or justification for the overlap. We do not support substantial overlap between publications.
Human or Animal Research
Ethical Approval
Research involving humans or animals must be approved by the relevant ethics committees and must comply with international ethical and legal standards. We also expect authors to respect the right to privacy of human participants and to obtain the necessary consent before submitting their work. Authors should ensure that they are aligned with the Code of Ethics proposed in the Declaration of Helsinki (http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053).
In the case of randomized clinical trials, the authors must have the endorsement of the Clinical Research Ethics Committee (or similar according to the regulations of the country of origin), declare the financing for its execution and be registered in and endorsed by a public registry of clinical trials (e.g. www.clinicaltrials.gov).
Conflicts of Interest and Financing
Statement of Conflicts
We seek to ensure that our publications are free from undue influence. Authors, employees, editors, and reviewers must declare any potential conflict of interest that could interfere with the objectivity or integrity of a publication.
If there is no conflict of interest, authors should declare in the corresponding section: "Conflicts of interest: none".
In the case of conflicts of interest, the authors of the articles should declare it in the corresponding section (Conflicts of interest) and attach the declaration of Conflicts of Interest according to the model proposed by the ICMJE (https://www.icmje.org/downloads/coi_disclosure.docx). The information in the declaration must coincide with that of the manuscript submitted.
Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern
Guidelines for Corrections
Editors will consider retractions, corrections or expressions of concern in line with the COPE Retraction Guidelines (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4). If an error is discovered, a corrigendum or erratum will be issued as appropriate. Retractions are reserved for articles containing serious errors or substantial plagiarism.
Image Manipulation, Counterfeiting and Fabrication
We expect authors to avoid modifying images in a way that leads to falsification or fabrication of their results. We recognize that there may be legitimate reasons for modifying images, but these should not distort the results. If identified, the policies proposed by COPE (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.21) will be followed.
Research Fraud and Inappropriate Conduct
Anti-Fraud Procedures
If research fraud or misconduct is discovered, we will work with the relevant publishers and other appropriate institutions to investigate. Any publication found to contain fraudulent findings will be retracted following COPE guidelines for retraction (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4).
Versions and Adaptations
Regional Adaptations
Our publications are distributed in different cultural, environmental and economic contexts. We can issue different versions of some articles to suit these contexts without compromising the quality or accuracy of the materials.
Transparency
We strive to follow the COPE Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing and encourage our authors to uphold these same principles (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12).
Data and Supporting Evidence
Registration and Data Access
We support transparency and openness around data, codes, and other materials associated with research. We expect authors to maintain accurate records of supporting evidence necessary to enable others to understand, verify and replicate new findings.
Marketing Communication
Social media and email communication should maintain the integrity of the content and the academic record. Promotion and marketing strategies must maintain the integrity of the content and must not influence editorial decisions. We use ethical communication channels to promote our publications and ensure that academic content is accessible and respected.
Procedure for the Identification and Handling of Allegations of Research Misconduct
Identification and Action Mechanisms
The editors and publisher will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and falsification/fabrication of data, has occurred. In no case will an editor or publisher encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow it to occur. In the event that any allegation of research misconduct related to a published article becomes known, the COPE guidelines (or equivalent) for dealing with the allegations will be followed (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12).
Editorial responsibilities:
At AG Editor (Argentina), the integrity and quality of our academic publications are paramount. Our publication ethics policy sets out the principles and standards we follow to ensure that our publication processes are fair, transparent and ethical.
Duties of the Editor
• The editor of a scholarly journal is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always underpin these decisions. The editor's decisions should be based on the quality of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal, without undue outside influence.
• The editor should ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and timely. Research articles should be reviewed by at least two external, independent reviewers, and the editor should seek additional opinions if necessary. The reviewers selected should have appropriate expertise in the relevant field and should be free of conflicts of interest.
• The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. In addition, the editor should encourage transparency and full and honest reporting in the journal's editorial policies.
• The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers. Unless otherwise agreed with the authors and reviewers, the editor should not disclose any information to third parties without the express consent of the parties involved.
• The editor should not use generative or AI-assisted AI technologies to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript, as the critical thinking and original evaluation necessary for this work is beyond the scope of this technology. Editors are responsible for and must maintain the confidentiality and integrity of the editorial process.
• Any potential conflicts of editorial interest should be declared to the editor prior to appointment and updated if new conflicts arise. Editors should not be involved in decisions about articles they have written themselves or that have been written by family members or colleagues.
Duties of Reviewers
• Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and can help the author improve the article through communication with the editor. Reviewers should treat authors and their work with respect and professionalism, and observe good review etiquette.
• Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not share the review or information about the manuscript with anyone, nor contact authors directly without the permission of the editor. The use of unpublished material in the reviewer's own research without the express consent of the author is prohibited.
• Reviewers should be alert to potential ethical problems in the manuscript and should report these to the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work of which the reviewer is aware.
• Reviews should be conducted in an objective manner. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing an article. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should declare any potential conflict of interest and excuse themselves from the review if necessary.
Duties of Authors
• Authors should present an accurate report of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately presented in the article. Fraud or deliberately inaccurate statements are unacceptable.
• Authors may be asked to provide research data in support of their article for editorial review and/or to comply with the open data requirements of the journal. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible and retain such data for a reasonable period after publication.
• Authors should ensure that they have written completely original work, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, this should be properly cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical editorial behavior and is unacceptable.
• An author should generally not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one primary journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable. The secondary publication of an article should reflect the same data and interpretation as the primary paper, and the primary paper should be cited in the secondary publication.
• 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 substantial contributions should be listed as coauthors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate and inappropriate coauthors are included in the article, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.
• Authors may use generative and AI-assisted AI technologies in the writing process only to improve the readability and language of the paper. The application of the technology should be done under human supervision and control, and authors should carefully review and edit the output. Authors should declare the use of these technologies in their manuscript in the "Methods" section and this statement will appear in the published work.
• It is not acceptable to enhance, darken, move, remove or introduce a specific feature within an image. Adjustments to brightness, contrast or color balance are acceptable as long as they do not obscure or remove any information present in the original. Manipulating images to improve clarity is acceptable, but manipulating for other reasons could be seen as ethical abuse and will be dealt with accordingly.
• Authors should align to the best industry standards in the registration and submission of clinical trials, such as the CONSORT guidelines. Authors should provide full details of clinical trials, including methods and results, to ensure reproducibility and transparency.
• All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other individuals or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid testimonials, registered applications/patents, and grants or other sources of funding. Sources of financial support for research and article preparation should also be disclosed.
• When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary. If the editor or publisher discovers an error in the published work, the author must cooperate with the editor to correct the paper.
