Ethical aspects and Editorial Responsibilities

Ethical Policy and Editorial Responsibilities

At AG Editor, 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 (See link: https://publicationethics.org/). This document describes the principles of good practice that we apply to our publications. 

Research Integrity
The journal, 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 the journal has not been conducted in accordance with these principles, they should communicate their concerns to the appropriate editor by emailing editorial@ageditor.org. Concerns will be addressed in accordance with COPE guidelines (See link: https://publicationethics.org/guidance).

Editorial Process
Editorial Independence

In AG Editor we are independent and prevent to be compromised with third parties for any competing interest.

Diversity and Inclusion
We do not discriminate 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 protect the confidentiality in the double-blind peer review process.

Authorship and Contributions
Principles of Authorship
We recognize that different disciplines 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 review of the version to be published.
4.    Acceptance of responsibility for all aspects of the published version.

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 the journal, we do not tolerate plagiarism. 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 in the first editorial review. If plagiarism is discovered after publication, we will follow our guidelines for Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern described in COPE (See link: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4).

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. At the journal expect authors to obtain the necessary consent related to human participants and their right to privacy. Authors should ensure that they are aligned with the Code of Ethics proposed in the Declaration of Helsinki (See link: https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki/).
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 (See link: 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 (See link: 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 (See link:  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 (See link:  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 (See link:  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 (See link: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12).

Editorial responsibilities:
At AG Editor, 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.

Editor Duties
•    The editor of all journals of AG Editor are responsible for deciding which articles should be published. The validation and peer review suggestion should always be a priority to take these decisions. The editor's decisions should be based on the quality of the manuscript and its relevance, without undue outside influence.
•    The editor should guarantee that the peer review process is done taking as principal elements: fairness, impartiality, and timeliness. Research articles should be assigned to be reviewed by at least two external reviewers; in case the opinions are very different the editor should seek at least another external reviewer. 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 content without considering race, sexual orientation, gender, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy. In addition, the editor should encourage transparency and full and honest reporting in the journal's editorial policies.
•   All materials received by the journal must be treated confidentially, as well as all communications with authors and reviewers, unless there is an agreement or express consent between the parties to share information. 
•    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 current or potential conflicts of interest must be clearly declared. Editors cannot participate in decisions regarding documents they write or involve any family members or close colleagues.

Reviewers Duties
•    Peer review will always improve the content of articles and should be used as a means of improvement for authors and as a primary tool for acceptance decisions of editors. Reviewers should treat authors with respect and professionalism, including good review etiquette.
•    Any document received for review is confidential and cannot be shared. Reviewers cannot share information with third parties or with the authors themselves (Therefore, the editor will ensure that the review is double-blind). The use of the reviewed material without the express consent of the author for own studies is prohibited.
•   The reviewer must be alert to potential ethical issues and must notify to the editor if any problems or plagiarism are detected in the reviewed document. 
•   Reviews should be objective, avoid personal criticism, and address the normal biases of human subjectivity. For this reason, it is important to declare any conflicts of interest and reject the review if necessary. 

Authors Duties
• Authors must ensure that the information presented is as accurate as possible. Inaccurate information or errors/fraud are not acceptable.  
•    Authors must keep their data properly protected in case it is necessary to place them as open data or if they are required for additional information in the review. The journal could have open data requirements or may request that the data be publicly available for a period of time.
•    Authors must ensure that they have written the original work and that any content not their own has been properly cited or quoted. No form of plagiarism is acceptable.
•    Authors may not submit the same work to two journals simultaneously; if a previously published work is used as a basis for a new proposal, it must be appropriately cited.
•    The main authorship corresponds to the author who has made primary substantial contributions (conception, design, execution, or interpretation) to the submitted work; all those authors who have presented additional contributions will be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the other authors for reviews and approval of the final version of the document.
•    Generative and AI-assisted AI technologies is only accepted to improve the readability and language of the article always with human control and supervision, this must be declared in the Methods section.
•  Modifications to images are only accepted to improve their appearance, provided they do not remove original information and cannot be manipulated or changed for document purposes.
•    Authors should align to the best industry standards in the registration and submission of clinical trials, such as the CONSORT guidelines (See link: https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/consort/). Authors should provide full details of clinical trials, including methods and results, to ensure reproducibility and transparency.
• All authors must declare any conflict of interest that may represent a bias in the preparation of their work, this includes employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid testimonials, registered applications/patents, and grants or other sources of funding. financial support for research should also be disclosed.
•    If after publication the author discovers any error that must be corrected, he must notify promptly the editor and publisher. Likewise, if the editor needs any detail to be corrected, the author must cooperate in the process to guarantee the quality of the publication.