At Reseapro Journals, we adhere to internationally recognized authorship standards as defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). In an era where global publishing houses face challenges from artificial intelligence, Reseapro journals have upheld the highest standards in maintaining transparency and equity, making us truly global.
All listed authors should (i) be directly involved in the planning, conduct, and reporting of the work described in the article; and/or the analysis of the data; (ii) prepare the manuscript or critically revise for important intellectual content; (iii) approve the version of the manuscript to be published; and (iv) agree to be accountable for all aspect of the work, ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part are appropriately investigated and resolved.
We also stress transparency and fairness in authoring attribution. Each author should indicate that all eligible contributors are listed in the Acknowledgments and that no eligible contributors have been omitted. Regarding disputed authorship, Reseapro Journals complies with the COPE guidelines for the ethical resolution of the conflict. Those who receive meaningful assistance but not authorship status can be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section with their permission. This distinction, therefore, enables credit where credit is due while preserving the integrity of the authorship process. Reseapro Journals is dedicated to promoting ethics in research, ensuring that readers, researchers, authors, and society as a whole can have confidence in the validity of research content.
Authors must clearly state their contributions to uphold academic integrity and ensure transparency. One or more authors typically design and conceptualize the study, while others perform experiments, develop models, or analyse data. Some contributors draft the manuscript, while others revise it critically to enhance its intellectual content. Authors often create visualizations, interpret findings, and verify the accuracy of data and methodologies. Authors usually supervise the research, secure funding, and guide the project's methods and administration. Each author must accept responsibility for their specific role and approve the final version of the manuscript.
For example:
“Author A designed the study and performed the simulations. Author B analysed the data and wrote the manuscript. Both authors discussed the results and contributed to the final version.”
By clearly defining contributions, authors reinforce accountability and adhere to best practices recommended by major publishers and editorial guidelines.
Editors and reviewers rigorously assess each submitted article to decide its suitability for publication. They evaluate if the research is original, valid, and relevant to the journal’s scope. Authors must state the aim of the study, provide a detailed explanation of the methods, and present the results. Reviewers ensure that the data is correctly analysed and that the findings are supported by evidence.
They verify that all sources are correctly cited and that the article adheres to ethical standards, including obtaining institutional approvals, obtaining informed consent, and disclosing conflicts of interest. Proper citation of sources and transparency in reporting are essential.
The article must add value to the field by presenting new findings or offering fresh perspectives. Reviewers also review for plagiarism, data falsification, or repeated publication. Based on their evaluation, they recommend whether to accept the article, suggest changes, or reject it. This process helps maintain the quality, accuracy, and integrity of published research.
Authors must cite all sources when using the ideas, text, figures, or data of others. This includes direct copying, inaccurate paraphrasing (where most of the original concept remains unchanged), word-by-word paraphrasing (where the idea is entirely similar to the original), or self-plagiarism, where the author uses their previously published research paper without proper disclosure. Plagiarism of any kind is not tolerated; we therefore request that our authors maintain the highest integrity when communicating their research papers. Suppose we find significant overlap or unattributed content. In that case, we will reject the manuscript or request correction (only if plagiarism is present in the literature review section or sections, or the introduction section). Once submitted, the unpublished research article/manuscript is subjected to a plagiarism check using internationally recognized plagiarism detection software, such as Turnitin/iThenticate. Reports generated from any other software or an older version of the mentioned software will stand nullified. Irrespective of reports generated from your end, the plagiarism report generated by Reseapro Journals will be considered as the final and accepted plagiarism report. If we find significant overlap or unattributed content, we will reject the manuscript or request corrections. We ask all authors to cite references properly, with a focus on the quality and relevance of the sources. This helps us maintain the integrity of research and uphold the trust of the scholarly community.
Researchers who fabricate or falsify data compromise the integrity and reliability of the scientific record. Data fabrication involves inventing data or results and recording or reporting them as if they were real. Data falsification occurs when researchers manipulate research materials, equipment, processes, or change or omit data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
Both practices distort the scientific evidence base, mislead the scholarly community, and can result in harmful consequences if subsequent research or policy is based on such false findings. Authors who engage in these unethical practices undermine public trust in science, violate professional standards, and may face serious consequences, including manuscript rejection, retraction of a published research paper, institutional sanctions, and damage to their professional reputation.
Editorial teams and peer reviewers actively assess submitted manuscripts for signs of data manipulation. When concerns arise, journals may request raw data or initiate investigations by established ethical guidelines, such as those outlined by COPE publication ethics or institutional review boards.
At Reseapro Journals, we strongly discourage any form of citation manipulation, as it reduces the fairness and accuracy of academic publishing. Citation manipulation happens when authors, editors, or reviewers include unnecessary or unrelated citations to artificially increase the citation count of specific articles, authors, or journals.
Common types of citation manipulation include:
Our editors review citations to ensure that all references are relevant and academically necessary. We may reject or return submissions if we identify misuse of citations. We ask all contributors to cite responsibly, focusing on the quality and relevance of references. This helps us maintain the integrity of research and uphold the trust of the scholarly community.
Reseapro Journals strictly prohibits duplicate submissions. Authors must not submit the same manuscript, or a substantially similar version, to more than one journal at the same time. This practice violates ethical publishing standards and places an unnecessary burden on editors, reviewers, and journal systems.
All manuscripts submitted to Reseapro Journals must be original and not under consideration elsewhere. Authors must formally withdraw their manuscript from another journal before submitting it to us. Failure to disclose a duplicate submission may result in immediate rejection, notification to the author’s institution, or retraction if the article has already been published.
We are committed to maintaining the integrity of scholarly communication. We advise authors to follow COPE and ICMJE ethical guidelines and ensure that submissions are made to only one journal at a time. This policy helps protect the transparency, fairness, and quality of the peer review and publication process.
To publish a research paper, authors must follow the internationally accepted standards of research and publication ethics. All studies involving humans or animals must be conducted according to established ethical guidelines to ensure transparency, accountability, and scientific integrity. Failure to follow these principles may be considered research misconduct and will not be accepted for publication.
Human Research Ethics
The manuscript must clearly state:
Animal Research Ethics
Manuscripts must include:
Sample Ethical Compliance Statement
"The study was conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of [Institution Name] (Approval No: [XXX]). Written informed consent was obtained from all human participants. Animal studies were reviewed and approved by the Institutional Animal Ethics Committee (Approval No: [XXX]) and conducted by national guidelines and ARRIVE reporting standards."
Research Misconduct and Ethical Oversight
Reseapro Journals take allegations of research misconduct seriously. Misrepresentation of ethical approvals, lack of consent, data fabrication, or unethical treatment of human or animal subjects will result in editorial action, including retraction if necessary. Editors and publishers, guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) recommendations, are committed to upholding the highest standards of research and publication ethics.
At Reseapro Journals, we expect all editors and reviewers to uphold the highest ethical standards throughout the editorial and peer review process.
Editors must ensure a fair, unbiased, and timely review of all manuscripts. They must evaluate submissions solely on academic merit, regardless of the author's nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or personal beliefs. Editors must maintain confidentiality, avoid conflicts of interest, and not use unpublished material for their benefit. If ethical concerns arise, editors must take appropriate action in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality of published research. They must provide constructive, honest, and objective feedback. Reviewers should respect confidentiality, declare any conflicts of interest, and recuse themselves from reviewing if the manuscript presents a potential bias. They must not share or use the content for personal or professional gain. By following these ethical principles, editors and reviewers help ensure the credibility and integrity of the peer review process.
Reseapro Journals is dedicated to upholding the accuracy, transparency, consistency, and screening of research and academic papers. If published articles have errors or ethical indiscretions, we correct or retract them responsibly.
We will publish a correction if the authors or editors decide that data was incorrect or there were errors in an author’s name or the placement of a figure, but the errors do not change the conclusions of the paper. When confirmed, we run a formal correction note connected to the original article.
We retract where we have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, which can result from misconduct or honest error. This may include instances where the findings have been published elsewhere, are scientifically invalid, or the study was unethical. In such cases, we adhere to the guidelines outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
This policy is to ensure that the collection and dissemination of published work accurately reflects the scholarly record and to help authors and readers maintain the trust that is fundamental to the research process.
