The following policies describe the guidelines in the publication process of our journal. The Journal adopts and strives to adhere to the following standards and requirements given by:

COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics
ICMJE – International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
OASPA- Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association

• Ethical Publishing Practice
• Redundant publication
• Consent for publication
• Authorship
• Conflict of interest
• Citation Manipulation
• Funding Disclosure
• Confidentiality
• Addressing Allegations or Findings of Misconduct
• Ethical Approval of Studies and Informed Consent
• Article Correction and Retraction

Ethical Publishing Practices

All the Authors in BBRA journal must comply with best practices in publication ethics. Biosciences, Biotechnology Research Asia’s Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is based on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Redundant publication

Authors who wish to publish translations of the articles that have been published elsewhere should ensure that they have appropriate permission(s), indicate clearly that the material has been translated and re-published, and indicate clearly the original source of the material. The Editor-in-Chief may request copies of related publications if he/she is concerned about overlap and possible redundancy.

For any articles an individual must have given written, informed consent from all authors confirming that the results and any accompanying images can be published. If the article contains any identifiable images of individuals, it must include a statement confirming that they have permission to publish these images. If the article contains any clinical images or identifiable data then you must include an explicit consent statement under a separate heading of the ‘Consent’ section (we suggest: “We confirm that we have obtained permission to use [images/data] from the participants/patients/individuals included in this presentation”). Please also state the conditions under which the permission was obtained.

Alternatively, if no consent for publication was required then this should be clearly stated and a note should be added confirming that such alterations have not distorted scientific meaning.

Signed consent forms should be made available to the editorial office if requested.

Authorship

Authors should ensure that all those who have made a significant contribution are given the opportunity to be cited as authors. Other individuals who have contributed to the study should be acknowledged, but not cited as authors.

All authors should receive the final version of the submitted manuscript, agree to its submission and take appropriate responsibility for it. Any individual unwilling or unable to accept appropriate responsibility for a manuscript should not be a co-author.

All authors should be consulted about changes to authorship (e.g. the list of authors) during the publication process, and it should be clear to the journal that they have given their consent.

The removal of an author from a paper after submission requires written confirmation from all of the authors originally listed. Requests should be forwarded to: info@biotech-asia.org

For more information, please read COPE Flowcharts on Changes in Authorship

Additionally, an author is allowed to publish a single article in an issue.

Conflict of interest

All financial and non-financial competing interests must be declared in this section. In cases where no conflicts of interests exist, authors should state that “The author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this article”. Otherwise, they should mention any conflict of interest in this section of the manuscript.

Funding Disclosure

Separately from declaring Competing Interests, authors must disclose the financing which made their work possible. The Funding statement is published in the final article. This disclosure provides added transparency.

Confidentiality

Editors and the publication staff should keep all information about a submitted manuscript confidential, sharing it only with those involved in the evaluation, review, and publication processes. Confidential information should not be used for an editor’s own purposes, and editors should take reasonable steps to ensure that such information is not used inappropriately for the advantage of others. In cases of breach of confidentiality by those involved in the peer-review process, editors should contact the involved parties and follow up on such cases until they are satisfactorily resolved.

Citation Manipulation

Most metrics of the scholarly performance of the journal are based on citations from published articles. Citation manipulation refers to any systematic practice that inappropriately pressures authors to cite material with the primary goal of boosting citation rates all such practices are unacceptable.

The following forms of citation manipulation (for the purpose of increasing citation rates) will be reported:

1. Coercion: At some point during the peer-review process, editors (or anyone else involved in the process) request that authors add citations from their own journal (or a journal from the same publisher).
2. Editorials: Editors write editorials in which a disproportionate number of articles from their own journal are cited.
3. Reviewers suggesting citations of their own work. Reviewers may suggest that authors cite their articles.
4. Self-citation: Authors cite large numbers of their own articles in all or most of their publications.
5. Citation swapping: A group of colleagues (perhaps students or research associates of a particular researcher) agrees to preferentially and regularly cite each other’s articles in all or most of their publications.

Addressing Allegations or Findings of Misconduct

Concerns of possible scientific misconduct are usually expressed first to the editors of a journal about a manuscript that is under consideration or has already been published. The allegations of misconduct will be pursued, the editor is not solely responsible for monitoring possible failure to meet legal or ethical research and publication standards, it is within his or her responsibilities to create and enforce policies that encourage good publication practices. When allegations and/or findings of misconduct are presented, the editor will be faced with some level of responsibility for investigating, judging, and/or penalizing the author for these lapses. Additionally, the editor and the publisher have a responsibility to inform readers and secondary services of work formally proven to be plagiarized, fabricated, or falsified.

Ethical Approval of Studies and Informed Consent

For human or animal experimental investigations, it is a prerequisite to provide a formal review and approval, or review and waiver, by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee, which should be documented in the paper. For investigations undertaken on human subjects, the manner in which the informed consent was obtained from the study participants (i.e., oral or written) should be stated in the Methods section. Authors are encouraged to obtain patient consent when they use confidential case material. Consent is not necessary in the case of very brief case vignettes that do not contain identifying information or if the case material is disguised sufficiently to prevent identification of the patient.

In obtaining consent, the author(s) should discuss the purpose(s) of publication, the possible risks and benefits to the patient and the patient’s right to withhold or withdraw consent. In the case of a minor patient, consent should be obtained from the parent(s) or guardian(s).

Article Correction and Retraction

All the Corrections made to a published article will be with the authorization of the editor of the journal. Editors will decide the magnitude of the corrections. Minor corrections are made directly to the original article. For major changes below cases are applicable.

Erratum

An error introduced by the publisher that affects the integrity of the version of record, the reputation of the authors, or the reputation of the journal, is termed as Erratum.

An Erratum is a statement by the authors of the original paper that briefly describes any correction(s) resulting from errors or omissions. Any effects on the conclusions of the paper should be noted. The corrected article is not removed from the online journal, but notice of erratum is given. The Erratum is made freely available to all readers and is linked to the corrected article

Addendum

An addendum is a notification of the addition of information to an article. Addenda are published when the editors decide that the addendum is crucial to the reader’s understanding of a significant part of the published contribution. Addenda include Editorial Expression of Concern, which is an editorial statement alerting our readership to serious concerns with the published paper. Editorial Expression of Concern are typically updated with another amendment once further information is available.

Addenda do not contradict the original publication, but if the author inadvertently omitted significant information available at the time, this material can be published as an addendum. Addenda may be peer-reviewed, according to journal policy, and are normally subject to oversight by the editors of the journal. Addenda relating to the article content are published only rarely and only when the journal editors decide that an addendum is crucial to the reader’s understanding of a significant part of the published article. All addenda are linked to the original article to which they relate.

Retraction

A Retraction is a notice that the paper should not be regarded as part of the scientific literature. Retractions are issued if there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, this can be as a result of misconduct or honest error. Retraction takes place if:

• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper referencing, permission or justification.
• If the work is plagiarized
• If the work reports unethical research.

To protect the integrity of the record, the retracted article is not removed from the online journal, but notice of retraction is given, also it is made freely available to all readers, and is linked to the retracted article. Retractions can be published by the authors when they have discovered substantial scientific errors; in other cases, the Editors or Publisher may conclude that retraction is appropriate. In all cases, the retraction indicates the reason for the action and who is responsible for the decision. If a retraction is made without the unanimous agreement of the authors, that is also noted.

In rare and extreme cases involving legal infringement, the Publisher may redact or remove an article. Bibliographic information about the article will be retained to ensure the integrity of the scientific record.

Read COPE Guidelines for Retracting Articles

Corrigenda

A corrigendum is a notification of a significant error made by the authors of the article. All corrigenda are normally approved by the editors of the journal. Corrigendum or Author Correction. Notification of an important error made by the author(s) that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the paper, or the reputation of the authors or the journal.