ETHICAL POLICIES FOR PUBLICATION IN THE EDITIONS OF THE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF VARNA
The publications of the Medical University of Varna, along with the scientific articles and reports published therein, adhere to ethical policies established by internationally recognized requirements and standards for good publication practices set by various scientific organizations and international committees. These include the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE); the Council of International Organizations for Medical Sciences (CIOMS); the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME); the World Medical Association (WMA); the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), among others.
The publications comply with ethical principles and requirements for manuscripts submitted for publication, as outlined in the following internationally accepted documents:
– Committee on Publication Ethics. Guidelines on Good Publication Practice. (COPE), (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines);
– Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/);
– The NISO Recommended Practices for the Presentation and Identification of E-Journals (PIE-J); (https://www.niso.org/standards-committees/pie-j);
– Elsevier. Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk
– Elsevier. Publishing Ethics. (https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/publishing-ethics).
– Elsevier. Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication (https://www.elsevier.com/authors/ policies-and-guidelines);
– Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (https://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf);
– Council of Science Editors. CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 3rd Revised Edition. Wheat Ridge, CO (http://www. councilscienceeditors.org/wp-content/uploads/entire_whitepaper.pdf);
– The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/);
– Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License – https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The ethical publishing standards in the publications of the Medical University of Varna have been adopted by the Research Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Varna.
The ethical principles are generally focused on the duties and responsibilities of publishing authors, journal editors, and reviewers of submitted manuscripts.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS
Requirements for Objectivity and Truthfulness
Authors of the publication of the scientific study must present the work performed in the research accurately, reliably, and objectively, including the actual results and their objective discussion.
It is unacceptable for authors to conceal the truth—whether intentionally, due to ignorance, or negligence.
It is ethically unacceptable to alter, omit, and/or intentionally misinterpret the data—such as falsification or fabrication.
Any manipulation of results and the deliberate publication of false conclusions to support or prove the author’s thesis is unacceptable.
Originality, Plagiarism, and Citation
Authors of original manuscripts must ensure that the manuscript submitted for publication is original and developed by them. The manuscript should contain a sufficiently detailed description of the design and/or experimental section, along with citations related to it that allow for complete reproduction.
Plagiarism in all its forms (misuse of names, copying, or paraphrasing) is unacceptable, unethical, and the authors are personally responsible for it.
When using results or text from the publications of other authors, these must be accurately and properly cited.
If unpublished data from other authors is used, the author must have obtained (and documented) permission from the author(s) of the research or the copyright holder of the corresponding result. If permission is granted, the citation should be specific.
Informally obtained information from conversations, correspondence, discussions, or information obtained during confidential activities (e.g., reviewing articles or project funding applications) must not be used or reported without explicit written permission.
Access to Primary Data
Authors must provide access to primary original data if requested by the reviewer after publication. The primary data should be stored in a secure location with restricted access and retained for a sufficient period following publication.
Multiple and Simultaneous Publication
It is against the ethical policies to submit a manuscript that has already been published in another journal or is under review awaiting publication decision.
It is unacceptable to submit materials that duplicate parts of an already published article or unnecessarily “split” publications.
Authors declare that the scientific materials have not been previously published in any written or electronic form; are not submitted and will not be submitted for publication in another journal during the review process in this particular publication of the Medical University of Varna, and until a final decision is made by the editorial board. In case of overlap with an already published article, including the use of the same topics and repeating data, the article must be fully cited.
Acknowledgments, Funding, and Sponsorship
In accordance with ethical policies for publication, acknowledgments should be made for assistance received from other participants in the study—individuals who have contributed intellectually or provided technical, organizational, material, or financial support.
All individuals who have contributed to the development of the material but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be mentioned in the acknowledgment section. Authors are responsible for obtaining written consent from those to whom they express gratitude.
Gratitude should be expressed to colleagues, reviewers, and editors who have provided valuable suggestions or offered real help in improving the work. Special thanks should be given to colleagues who have shared results from their published or unpublished research with the author.
All sources of funding must be declared as acknowledgments at the end of the text. Projects and grants, as well as the institutions through which funding for the research was obtained, must be explicitly noted. Authors should disclose the role of the research sponsors.
Copyright
All abuses related to determining authorship status are ethically unacceptable.
Acknowledgment of authorship is based on direct involvement and a substantial intellectual contribution to the research, and it entails full responsibility for the content of the published manuscript by each co-author.
Attributing co-authorship to someone without actual creative involvement (imposed or “honorary” authorship), as well as failing to acknowledge deserving co-authorship and minimizing significant contributions, are serious violations of good authorship practice.
Only those who have made significant contributions to the development of the concept, design, and conduct of the study, data collection, obtaining, analyzing, and interpreting results, as well as writing and critically revising the manuscript, and who have given their consent for its publication, should be listed as co-authors.
Individuals who provide only technical, financial (sponsorship or donations), or other support, but do not participate in the actual creative process, are not considered co-authors.
Support from other departments and individuals, as well as from members of the leadership of the scientific organization, should be reflected in an acknowledgment note, not in the authorship list.
The order of authors should be a joint decision made by the entire author team at the beginning of the study. In collaborative research, it is ethical to determine each researcher’s actual contribution based on their work.
Any form of intellectual exploitation is unacceptable, regardless of the relationship between co-authors and their administrative or academic positions.
Unpublished materials from the research team should not be presented as the author’s own research without the consent of the other team members.
The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors and collaborators are included in the manuscript. They must guarantee that the co-authors have accepted the final version of the article and agree to its submission for publication.
Authors are responsible for the content of the publications, as well as for the personal contribution of the included co-authors.
Authors must submit a declaration that the study has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee.
Copyrights for publications with open access must comply with the public license Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Ethical Aspects of Scientific Research on Humans and Experimental Animals
The presented materials and the studies described within them must comply with established ethical standards regarding research involving humans and experiments on experimental animals.
Reports on the results of experimental studies involving humans or animals must include written confirmation that the requirements of the relevant official documents in this area have been met (e.g., the Declaration of Helsinki for scientific research involving humans; the European Commission Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, etc.).
Authors of clinical studies must declare that they have the necessary registration and/or authorization, in accordance with regulatory requirements and specific to the research.
When publishing scientific research involving humans, it is necessary to confirm that the study has been approved by the relevant ethics committee at the institution where the study was conducted and that the participants have provided their written informed consent to participate. Participants’ names, initials, images, or any other information that could identify them should not be mentioned.
When publishing studies involving experiments on experimental animals, it is necessary to confirm that the care for the animals met the relevant requirements and that prior permission for the experiments was obtained from the Ethics Committee for Animals—an advisory body to the executive director of the Bulgarian Food Safety Agency (BFSA).
Conflict of Interest
Each author is required to disclose any financial or personal relationships (if such exist) with other individuals or organizations that could influence the accurate representation or distortion of the study’s results or their interpretation (particularly in studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies).
Examples of potential conflicts of interest include: employment, consulting services, fees, paid expert advice, patent registration, provision of materials, grants, or other types of funding.
There should be no uninvited participants in the studies, interference in experiments, or conflicts of interest among the authors of the publication.
It is not permitted to publish or use part of the material without prior consent from the other co-authors.
Errors in Publication and Corrections
The author must agree with all co-authors on the corrections suggested by reviewers and the editorial board.
In case of significant errors or inaccuracies in a published work, the author is required to notify the editor or publisher in a timely manner for corrections to be made.
If the editor or publisher receives information from third parties about a significant error, it is the author’s responsibility to correct the error or provide evidence of the accuracy of the original article.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EDITORS
Basis for Publication
The proposed scientific materials are published only after being reviewed and approved by the Editorial Board.
The Editorial Board supports the principle of “editorial freedom and independence” by preventing interference from the publisher regarding thematic selection and publication decisions.
The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for making the decision to publish a particular scientific work. In making the decision to publish, the editors consult with the members of the editorial board and with the reviewers.
The decision should be based on the work’s alignment with the publication criteria of the specific edition, the aims, and the scope of the journal. The primary criterion for publishing submitted materials is their significance for the development of scientific knowledge and their academic contribution to the scientific field, rather than the career development of the publishing author.
Editors must avoid publishing meaningless, duplicate, or non-compliant submissions that do not meet the established criteria.
It is the responsibility of the editorial board to organize a prompt review and to consider the author’s work within the shortest possible time, providing a clear stance and informing the author in the fastest possible manner.
The editorial board is tasked with making the final judgment regarding the merits and flaws of a manuscript. It has the duty to assist the author in presenting the results of their research in the best possible way, so the work can be as beneficial as possible to the scientific community.
The Editorial Board is obliged to notify the author of all weaknesses and errors, without whose removal and correction the article will not be published. These include technical deficiencies, factual and methodological errors, improper, insufficient, or unethical citation, etc.
It is the editors’ responsibility to ensure that all published materials have been previously evaluated by reviewers with appropriate qualifications and competence in the subject matter being reviewed.
Objectivity
Editors evaluate submitted materials objectively, without being influenced by the authors’ gender, sexual orientation, religious affiliation, ethnic origin, citizenship, political affiliation, administrative position, or academic rank.
No discrimination is applied based on gender, ethnicity, nationality, religious or demographic background, either for authors or members of the editorial board.
Transparency and Sustainability
Publications follow a transparent editorial policy.
It is the editors’ duty to develop, establish, systematically update, and promote publication criteria, author guidelines, and reviewer instructions.
Editors are responsible for actively seeking feedback from authors, readers, and reviewers to improve the editorial process.
The editorial board is responsible for supporting initiatives to prevent misconduct in academic publishing and authorship and for combating plagiarism.
Confidentiality
Editors and members of the editorial board may share information related to a submitted manuscript only with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and, if necessary, the publisher.
Ideas or information obtained during the evaluation process of a submitted manuscript are strictly confidential and cannot be used for personal gain.
Conflict of Interest
Unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript cannot be used by editors for their own research without the author’s explicit written consent.
Editors must decline to review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, sponsors, or institutions associated with the publication.
Editors should require all contributors to promptly disclose any competing interests and publish corrections if such conflicts are identified after the article has been published.
The acceptance, review, and evaluation process for sponsored supplements to the journal is based on their scientific merit and is not influenced by commercial factors.
Sections of the journal that are not subject to peer review must be clearly indicated.
Self-Citation of the Journal
Editors must not require authors to cite the journal as a condition for publication.
Recommendations for citing other articles should be based on a direct connection to the submitted manuscript, aimed at advancing research and scientific knowledge.
An editor may guide authors toward relevant literature, but without exceeding the formal citation requirements for specific journals.
Complaints
The editor is responsible for taking appropriate action in response to complaints related to ethical aspects of a submitted manuscript or a published article. This includes contacting the author and thoroughly investigating the complaint.
If a complaint is upheld, it is advisable to publish corrections, clarifications, rebuttals, or other necessary statements.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REVIEWERS
Supporting Editorial Decisions
Peer review is a key aspect of scientific communication and an essential element of the scientific method. The review process helps both the author improve the quality of their manuscript and the editorial team in making a publication decision.
Ensuring Sufficient Qualification
The reviewer must be one of the most competent scholars in the relevant scientific field.
They are required to inform the editor if they feel insufficiently qualified to review a particular manuscript or if they are unable to provide an accurate assessment.
Delays in the review process after accepting the commitment are unacceptable.
Confidentiality
Any manuscript under review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be discussed or shared with third parties unless authorized by the journal editor and agreed upon with the author(s).
Objectivity
The reviewer is obligated to evaluate the submitted manuscript objectively, without personal bias or influence from relationships with the author(s).
The reviewer must clearly express their opinion, support it with objective arguments, and provide constructive criticism.
Personal criticism or attacks directed at the author by the reviewer are unacceptable.
Accuracy of Citations
The reviewer must ensure the correctness of citations. If they identify improper citation practices or duplication of content from previously published articles, they must promptly inform the editor.
Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials contained in a submitted manuscript must not be used by the reviewer for their own research without the explicit written consent of the author.
Ideas and information obtained during the review process are strictly confidential and must not be used for personal benefit.
A reviewer must decline to review a manuscript if they have an established collaboration or any relationship with members of the authoring team or affiliated institutions that could compromise the objectivity of their evaluation.
Ideally, the reviewer should not have ongoing or completed research that overlaps with the subject of the reviewed manuscript.
Publishing a review or commentary on the submitted material without prior consent from the authors and reviewers is unacceptable.
This document was approved at a meeting of the Research Ethics Committee of the Medical University of Varna, as per Protocol No. 126/02.02.2023.