Publication Ethics

The following text expresses the standards of ethical behaviour of all the components involved in the publication of articles in the journal Internal Medicine: author, editor, editorial board, reviewer, publisher. These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidlines for Journal Editors.

1. Responsibilities of the publisher and the editorial board

Decision to publish an article

The editor of a Solen journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles accepted by the journal will be published. The Editorial Board makes the final decision on the publication of selected articles based on independent, anonymous peer review. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and by the laws that come into effect in the case of libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may consult with the editorial board or reviewers in making his/her decisions.

Fair play

The editor evaluates a manuscript on its intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, or philosophy of the authors.

Discretion/confidentiality

Neither the editor nor any other member of the editorial staff may disclose any information about an accepted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher.

Review procedure

All submitted manuscripts undergo a double review process. The review process is double-blind (for both authors and reviewers). The final decision on publication is made by the Chair of the Editorial Board together with the Executive Editors.

2. Responsibilities of reviewers

Review

The bi-anonymous peer review process contributes to the professional quality of articles and assists the editor in his/her decision to include an article for publication.

Eligibility of the reviewer

A reviewer who does not feel sufficiently qualified to evaluate an article should notify the Editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

Discretion/confidentiality

Any manuscript accepted for review must be treated by the reviewer as a confidential document and must not be shown to or discussed with uninvolved persons.

Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their opinion clearly and support it with arguments.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Information or ideas obtained from reviews must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should not evaluate a manuscript in which there is a conflict of interest based on competitive rivalry, created in collaboration or other relationship or connections with an author, company or institution affiliated with the article.

3. Author's obligations

Level of articles

Each article must contain detailed information and references that allow readers to replicate the data. An article based on research must include an accurate account of the work presented as well as an objective discussion of its significance. It is a condition of publishing clinical research that the procedures used comply with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and have been approved by the relevant ethics committee. Work based on animal experiments must respect the same rules. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism

Only original work that has not been previously published anywhere or submitted to another journal for publication is accepted for publication. If an author uses the work or words of another author, he/she must properly cite them. If reprinting images published elsewhere, the original source must be cited and written permission from the exclusive right holder must be provided. Plagiarism, in all forms, constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, duplicate or simultaneous publication

An author should generally not publish a manuscript describing the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Accepting the same manuscript in more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of source

Authors should cite publications that might be relevant to determining the substance of the work. Information obtained privately, e.g. in conversation, correspondence, discussion with third parties, must not be used or published without acknowledgement (written permission) directly from the source.

Authorship of the article

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the study or article presented. All those who contributed to the article or study should be listed as co-authors. Those who contributed to sub-important aspects of the project (research, article) should be identified or listed as contributors. The author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the article and that they have approved the final version and agreed to submit it for publication.

Conflicts of interest

Authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other relevant conflicts of interest that could be interpreted as affecting the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support must be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in publishing

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her published work, it is the author's responsibility to immediately notify the journal editor and cooperate in the retraction or correction of the article.