MAKALE ÇAĞRISI
Aralık 2024 Sayısı için makale kabulü başlamıştır.
ETHİCAL PRİNCİPLES
The publication process in the Journal was created to develop and present information objectively. For this reason, the processes applied to reflect the quality of the authors and the quality of the institutional work that supports the authors. The articles reviewed embody and encourage the scientific method. In this respect, it is important that all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, referees and editors) comply with the standards regarding ethical principles.
The Journal expects all stakeholders to bear the ethical responsibilities described below within the scope of publication ethics.
The ethical duties and responsibilities adopted by The Journal have been prepared by taking into account the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and policies.
Actions Contrary To Scientific Research And Publication Ethics:
ETHİCAL STATEMENT
Studies Requiring Ethics Committee Approval
Publication Of Research That İnvolve Human Subjects:
The Journal adopts the "Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers" of the Publication Ethics Committee (COPE) in order to create ethical assurance in scientific periodicals.
In this context, the following points should be followed in the manuscripts submitted to the journal:
RESPONSİBİLİTİES OF WRİTERS
Article Writing
All authors cited as research writers must contribute to the research substantially. Other contributors should be listed as co-authors. Contributors to the research should be mentioned as 'contributors'. The corresponding author should take the consent of other authors before sending the study to the journal. Those who do not have a direct contribution to the research should not be listed as authors.
Originality and Authenticity
All data in the study must be true and original. The author should present an objective discussion of the importance of his work based on accurate data. Intentionally presenting false information is unacceptable and unethical behavior.
Multiple, Unnecessary and Simultaneous Publishing
The author should not attempt to publish the same research in more than one journal, or attempt to republish a previously published article, and should comply with scientific research and publication ethics. Such attempts are unacceptable unethical behaviors.
Resources
It is mandatory to show / cite all sources used in the study.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
All authors must clearly state any potential financial and interest conflicts that may affect the results of the study. If financial support has been received for the study, its sources should be indicated.
Publishing Fee
No fee is charged from the authors for any research published in our journal.
Correction of Published Studies
It is the author's responsibility to inform the editor if any significant deficit or mistake is detected in the published work. The author should cooperate with the editorial team of our journal in order to take the necessary actions to correct the situation.
Withdrawal of the Article
The author can only withdraw the work evaluated in the publishing processes at the pre-check stage. Works cannot be withdrawn at other stages of the publishing process.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should aim to make original research and report. The mentioned literature should be appropriately cited. Uncited mentions from other publications, including the author's own work, are an important moral issue and a crime. If plagiarism is detected in the articles submitted to our journal, they are removed from the publication processes immediately. If it detected after publication, immediate action is going to be taken about the author and the article.
Double-Blind Refereeing
As double-blind refereeing is applied in our journal, author information should not be written in the article file.
RESPONSİBİLİTİES OF REFEREES
Contribution to the Editorial Decision
The referee is obliged to consult the "Referee Evaluation Criteria" in the evaluation process from the moment they are appointed and accepted the task through the system. The referee assists editors with their editorial decisions and assists authors in improving their articles through editorial communication. The referee should point out the completion of other articles, works, references, citations, rules and similar shortcomings related to the article.
Abiding by the Schedule
Any referee who does not feel qualified to review the article proposal or knows that the article review cannot take place on time should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review, thereby ensuring that the new referee assignment is made.
Confidentiality
Articles reviewed should be kept confidential before publication.
Referees acknowledge that the work submitted for their review is the private property of the authors. This also applies to referees who decline their invitation to review.
The names of the referees are not disclosed / published.
Objectivity
Referees should be objective in the decision to publish the text they examine.
Comments on the text should be made impartially and recommendations should be made in a way that the authors can use to improve the text. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate.
Resources
The referee should identify relevant published work that is not cited by the authors. The referee should also inform the editor of any significant similarities between the article reviewed and any other article(published or unpublished).
Conflict of Interest
Conflicts of interest should be reported to the editor. There should be no conflict of interest between the referees and the stakeholders of the article under review. In case of any conflict of interest and an appointment outside of the field of expertise, it is recommended to present the situation to the editor and withdraw from the referee process if necessary.
Ethics
Should the referees notice any ethical violation, plagiarism, etc. they should inform the editor. Referees acknowledge that the work submitted for review is the private property of the authors.
EDİTORİAL RESPONSİBİLİTİES
PUBLİCATİON LANGUAGE
PUBLİCATİON PRİNCİPLES
PUBLİCATİON POLİCİES
EVALUATİON POLİCİES
Articles and translations are subjected to two types of evaluation:
Structural Evaluation
ACADEMİC EVALUATİON
Editorial Board Evaluation
For the Book and Symposium Reviews, the evaluation is made by the editor of the field assigned by the editor.
Referee Evaluation:
Texts with a negative report by one referee are returned to the author, even if the other is positive.
Referee Policy
Fiscal Policy
Appeal Process
We welcome serious objections to reviews by editors and reviewers. An objection message should be sent to the editorial team via e-mail, stating that we did not send your article for our scientific misconceptions. If the objection turns out to be justified, you may be invited to a revised submission version of your article. Thus, the work is sent back to the outer referee. As much detail as possible should be included in the appeal letter. One objection is considered for each article. Therefore, the objection must be clearly stated.
Complaint Procedure
This procedure applies to complaints about content, procedures or policies that are the responsibility of Darüşşifa Journal of Islamic Medical History Studies or our editorial staff. Complaints can provide an opportunity and incentive for improvement, and we aim to respond quickly, courteously and constructively.
The complaint must be related to the content, procedures or policies that are the responsibility of Darüşşifa Journal of Islamic Medical History Studies or our editorial staff. Complaints should be emailed directly to the email address and will be treated confidentially. The editor immediately responds to complaints. The editor follows the procedure outlined in the COPE flowchart regarding complaints.
Complaints are reviewed by the relevant member of the editorial team and if they cannot be resolved, the following processes are followed:
• If this initial response is deemed inadequate, the complainant may request that their complaint be forwarded to a more senior member of the journal.
• Complaints can be forwarded to the editor-in-chief if the complainant is not satisfied.
• A full response will be given within two weeks if possible.
COPE publishes a code of practice for editors of scientific journals. This will make it easier to resolve disputes with editors, journals and publishers, but only after the journal's own complaints procedures are exhausted.
Allegations-Suspects of Scientific Misconduct
Scientific misconduct has different definitions. We address these issues on a case-by-case basis, while following the guidance created by major editorial ethics institutions. If the editor suspects an ethical violation or if there is an alleged violation, they are obliged to take action. This task covers both published and unpublished articles. The editor should not simply reject articles that raise concerns about potential abuse. Ethically, it is obliged to follow the alleged lawsuits. The editor should follow the COPE flowcharts where appropriate. Editors should first seek a response from anyone suspected of misconduct. If they are not satisfied with the answer, they should ask the relevant employers or institution to investigate. The editor should use all reasonable efforts to ensure that an appropriate investigation into the alleged misconduct is carried out; if this does not happen, the editor should make all reasonable attempts to persist in finding a solution to the problem. This is an arduous but important task.
Darüşşifa Journal of Islamic Studies in the History of Medicine adheres to COPE's Ethics Toolkit for a Successful Editorial. Darüşşifa Journal of Islamic Medical History Studies. editors; will take action to prevent the publication of articles in which plagiarism, citation manipulation, data tampering, data fabrication, and other research misconduct occur. In no case. Darüşşifa Journal of Islamic Medical History Studies. or its editors will not knowingly allow such abuse to occur. Darüşşifa Journal of Islamic Medical History Studies. If their editors become aware of any allegations of research misconduct related to an article published in their journal, they will follow COPE's guidelines regarding the allegations.
Reviewers should notify the Editor when they suspect research or publication misconduct. The editor is responsible for carrying out the necessary actions by following the COPE recommendations.
Darüşşifa Journal of Islamic Medical History Research undertakes to apply it to COPE flowcharts when faced with allegations of abuse in the following or similar subjects.
What to do when rebroadcast is suspected
• What to do when plagiarism is suspected
• What to do when fabricated data is suspected
• What to do in requests for change of authorship
• What to do when an undisclosed conflict of interest is suspected
• What to do when unfair or gift authorship is suspected
• What to do when an ethical problem is suspected in an article
• Ethical violation suspected e-mail, etc. What to do when notified directly with
• What to do when a suspected ethical violation is announced via social media
Aralık 2024 Sayısı için makale kabulü başlamıştır.
The journal is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
OJS Hosting, Support, and Customization by | OJSDergi.com