Editorial Policies:

The journal provides its’ policies, which include detailed information about submission, editorial and publishing processes and guidelines for authors and reviewers. All parties are being introduced with their rights and responsibilities to ensure smooth and ethical publishing process. Visit following subsections for more details on each policy.

Authorship

The (IJMSCRR)  recommends that authorship be based totally on assembly the following 4 criteria:

• All listed authors have to have made a extensive scientific contribution to the lookup in the manuscript and accepted all its claims. Authors are generally defined as persons who have contributed sufficiently to a scientific report to be listed on the by line of the published report. Kindly Visit for information: International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship guidelines for more information on authorship. Responsibility for choices concerning the authorship of publications lies with these who carried out the work suggested in the publication. Researchers have to be conscious of the authorship practices inside their very own disciplines and must continually abide via any necessities stipulated through journals as phase of their directions to authors.
• Contributors (Co-Authors) must furnish a description of contributions made via every of them closer to the manuscript. Description ought to be divided in following categories, as applicable: concept, design, definition of mental content, literature search, scientific studies, experimental studies, facts acquisition, facts analysis, statistical analysis, manuscript preparation, manuscript enhancing and manuscript review. Authors' contributions will be printed alongside with the article. One or more writer must take duty for the integrity of the work as a complete from inception to posted article and must be specific as 'guarantor'.
• All authors of articles should expose any and all conflicts of pastime they may additionally have with guide of the manuscript or an group or product that is referred to in the manuscript and/or is vital to the effect of the learn about presented. Authors must additionally expose warfare of pastime with merchandise that compete with these cited in their manuscript.
• Plagiarism is usually understood to be the “passing off” of another’s lookup or work as your own. Manuscripts are screened for plagiarism before, during, and after publication, and if observed they will be rejected at any stage of Processing. Please notice that even the act of copying any other authors phrases and giving a reference, is regarded a plagiarism. Please rephrase any announcement that you want to use from the different sources. The ijmscrr Journal follows strict anti-plagiarism policy. All manuscripts submitted to IJMSCRR endure plagiarism test with commercially on hand software. Based on the extent of plagiarism, authors may additionally be requested to tackle any minor duplication, or similarity with the preceding posted work. If plagiarism is detected after publication, the Journal will investigate. If plagiarism is established, the journal will notify the authors’ group and funding our bodies and will retract the plagiarised article.

Authors' warranties

All authors are responsible for ensuring that:

The manuscript is their own original work, and does not duplicate any other previously published work, including their own previously published work;

The manuscript has been submitted only to this journal; it is not under consideration or peer review or accepted for publication or in press or published elsewhere;

The manuscript contains nothing that is abusive, defamatory, libellous, obscene, fraudulent, or illegal.

Non-compliance with any of the above stipulations will be viewed misconduct and dealt with accordingly. Equally, if authors are discovered responsible of infringing any of the above, the writer reserves the proper to cost the authors with fees which the journal incurs for their manuscript at the discretion of the Journal’s Editors and the publisher.

Peer Review

Each submission is checked for suitability when received by the editorial office, and may be rejected without review if it is outside the scope of the journal, is obviously of insufficient quality, or is missing important sections.

The journal invitations exterior specialists (not solely Editorial Board members) to evaluate every article that is viewed appropriate for consideration. The guide selection is made by means of the Editor-in-Chief after receiving at least two exterior reviewer reviews with recommendations.

Authors are prompted to advise appropriate reviewers, however the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial workplace reserves the proper to pick out specific reviewers. The reason for asking authors to suggest reviewers is that they are best placed to know who is an expert in the field. In addition, the suggested reviewers may be suitable for other articles on the same topic. Therefore, obtaining these names can help the editorial office to ensure that it is approaching suitable people to review all articles.

The journal uses Double-blind peer review, which means that, by default, author names are revealed to reviewers but reviewer names are withheld from the authors. Authors can request to "blind" their names.

On receipt of at least two reviews, the Editor-in-Chief will make a choice of (1) accept, (2) minor revision, (3) fundamental revision, or (4) reject. The motives for the selection will be communicated to the authors.

When the decision of minor/major revision is made, and the authors do not revise their articles satisfactorily after receiving reviewer reports, then the Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject the article. When revised articles are received they will either be sent out for further review or the Editor-in-Chief will make a decision depending on the level of revision requested.

The time to review and make a decision is extremely variable since it is sometimes difficult to find suitable reviewers, and there may be delays in receiving reviewer reports. The Editor-in-Chief and editorial office make all efforts to minimize the time from submission to first decision. The journal aims to make a first decision (after review) within 15–20 days, but cannot guarantee this.

Note that articles that do not report original research (e.g. letters to the editor, editorials) are not externally reviewed and the Editor-in-Chief makes the decision to publish.

Author Appeals

If an author considers that a decision of Rejection was incorrectly made, they may appeal the decision. To appeal a decision the author must email the Editor-in-Chief or the publisher, giving reasons why they think the decision was wrong. The appeal will be considered by a member of the Editorial Board who was not involved in the original decision (nominated jointly by the Editor-in-Chief and the Publisher). There is only one chance to appeal, so it is very important that authors clearly explain the justification for making an appeal.

Supplemental Information

The journal can accept supplementary files that support the submitted article (e.g. audio, movie, or text files: for example a survey questionnaire which is described in the article). Supplemental information should be provided with the submission. It will not be formally reviewed but will be considered to determine whether it is required by the article. Please note that authors take fully responsibility for the content of any supplemental information, and a disclaimer on the supplemental information must clearly state that they have not been formally reviewed.

Data Sharing

We encourage all researchers to archive and share their data. Several grant funders now require this, and we believe that it benefits research by enabling other researchers to reuse and reinterpret data for the benefit of all. We encourage all authors to make their data available in suitable repositories (for example FigShare, or other similar repository) where the item will be safely archived and given a unique reference number (DOI or similar), so that it can be cited in the authors’ articles.

Permissions

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce anything (e.g. figure, table, text) that has been previously published or created by another person. On request from the Editorial Office or Publisher they should be able to supply evidence of such permission.

Conflict of interest

A Conflict of Interest is defined as a situation where personal relationships (e.g. friend, colleague or family), business relationships (e.g. working in a competing company), or financial influences (e.g. funding) will affect the judgement of any person during the publication of the journal.

Authors are required to declare (within the article and to the Editor-in-Chief) any Conflict of Interest (COI) that may have affected their research (e.g. funding) or decision to submit to the journal.

Reviewers are required to declare if they have any Conflict of Interest (COI) that may affect their judgement of any article they review. The COI may not prevent them reviewing the article, but must be declared to the Editor-in-Chief as soon as it is known.

Editors are excluded from any publishing decision in which they may have a Conflict of Interest (COI). For example, if an article by a colleague of the Editor-in-Chief is submitted to the journal, the peer review and all editorial decisions will managed by another editor.

Plagiarism and copyright infringement

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their works are unique, and that they fully acknowledge the source of any content which is not entirely the authors’ own. The journal will check articles for plagiarism (i.e. reproducing any content without attribution and permission) using Crosscheck/iThenticate and considers the inclusion of plagiarised content to be misconduct by the authors.

Editorial Independence

The editors have a right to select which articles to consider for publication and which to accept and/or reject without influence from the publisher or other external bodies.

Editorial Responsibilities

The journal editors have a duty to treat all submissions confidentially, and to ensure that judgements are made free of bias, and in a timely manner. Decisions on which articles to be published are the responsibility of the editors who also have a responsibility not to bring the journal into disrepute (by knowingly accepting bad quality or unethical articles or by failing to comply with the journal policies). The appointment of the Editorial Board is the duty of the Editor-in-Chief.

Open Access

This journal, and the others published by International Journal of Medical Science in Clinical Research and Review, are published Open Access under a CC-BY 4.0 licence which allows readers to reuse the content without restriction. The authors retain the copyright of published work. Open Access allows for unrestricted sharing of scholarly information and helps to promote knowledge throughout the world.  

International Journal of Medical Science in Clinical Research and Review Open Access as an equitable means of ensuring that scholarly research, usually funded by public institutions, is made available to all. Open Access publications are more likely to be discovered, read, cited, and used for future research than those published in closed journals, and we believe it is in the best interests of authors and their parent institutions, as well as the journals themselves, to make all our content freely available and reusable.

Correction, Retraction, Withdrawal policies

Corrections:
Correctional consultant all have the want to produce clear and concise written directives for staff, wrongdoer, and the community. furnished the problems of administrative liability, accreditation standards, case law, and the want to aid expert behavior, written coverage and system is a necessity. It is additionally the foundation for personnel supervision, training, and assisting a protection when matters go wrong. Corrections are posted in the subsequent problem beneath Corrections and addendum.
Retractions:
A retraction is a public announcement made about an formerly declaration that withdraws, cancels, refutes, or reverses the unique assertion or ceases and desists from publishing the unique statement. violations of professional ethics, such as multiple submissions, falsified authorship claims, plagiarism, and other similar acts. Sporadically a withdrawal will be utilized to address blunders in accommodation or distribution. The withdrawal of an article by its writers or the manager under the counsel of individuals from the academic local area has for quite some time been an incidental element of the learned world. A number of library and academic organizations have developed guidelines for handling retractions, and IJMSCRR
1. A withdrawal note named "Withdrawal: [ article title]” is signed by the authors and/or the editor and included in the contents list and paginated section of a subsequent issue of the journal.

2. A link to the original article is provided in the electronic version.

3. A screen with the retraction note precedes the online article. This screen serves as the destination for the link; The article itself can then be accessed by the reader.

4. Except for a watermark on the.pdf that indicates that it has been "retracted" on each page, the original article remains unchanged.

5. The document's HTML version is removed.

Withdrawal Policy:

The Articles may be withdrawn by corresponding author before Publication and accepting for publication. If it is accepted, it could be used only for Articles in Press which represent early versions of articles and sometimes contain errors, or may have been accidentally submitted twice. Occasionally, but less frequently, the articles may represent infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Articles in Press, articles that have been accepted for publication but have not yet been formally published and do not yet have the complete volume, issue, or page information may be "Withdrawn" from IJMSCRR. Articles which have been published under an issue could not be withdrawn.

Authors may request their articles to be retracted if they have valid reasons why it should be removed.

Misconduct

Research misconduct is defined by federal regulations as "practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research," such as plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification. Fabrication is recording or reporting false data or results.

Misrepresentation is changing examination materials, hardware, or cycles or adjusting or discarding information or results so the exploration record doesn't precisely mirror the exploration discoveries.
Using someone else's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving them proper credit is plagiarism.
Research wrongdoing does exclude genuine blunder or contrasts of assessment. Furthermore, the government strategy on research offense doesn't make a difference to origin questions except if they include copyright infringement. Federal regulations have a very specific definition of research misconduct. Although it can be reported to an Institutional Review Board (IRB), noncompliance with policies and procedures for the protection of human research subjects does not meet the federal definition of research misconduct.

The Editors and Editorial Board will use COPE's best practices to help them resolve complaints and address misconduct fairly in cases of suspected misconduct. The Editors will investigate the allegation as part of this. A submitted composition that is found to contain such wrongdoing will be dismissed. In situations where a distributed paper is found to contain such offense, a withdrawal can be distributed and will be connected to the first article.

Any actions taken by authors or reviewers that go against this statement should be brought to the attention of the editors of our journal. The co-editors should be the first to be notified of any suspected misconduct by an editor. The editorial board of our Journal should be notified of the complaint if it is not resolved satisfactorily.

Complaints

Where an author, reviewer, reader, or other person has a complaint against the journal or editors, they should speak directly to the publisher in the first instance.  Wherever possible, the complaint will be dealt with by the relevant publishing or editorial person. Where a resolution is not satisfactory it will be passed to a more senior person for resolution.