Publication Ethics and Malpractice State

Common Ground Research Networks takes intellectual integrity very seriously. The publisher, editors, reviewers, and authors all agree upon the following standards of expected ethical behavior, which are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices.

Duties of Publisher

Publication Decisions
Common Ground's editorial team, in consultation with the journal or journal collection’s editor(s), is responsible for deciding which submitted articles should be published. The editorial team may confer with the journal editor and will strongly consider peer reviewers' comments and recommendations as part of this decision-making process.

Fair Play
Submitted articles will be evaluated according to their intellectual merit, without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation of the author(s).

Confidentiality
Editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, or other editorial advisers.

Disclosures of Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished material must not be used in an editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Recommendations by peer reviewers are the single most important determining factor in whether a manuscript is accepted for publication. They may also help the author improve a manuscript that has been accepted pending revisions.

Promptness
Peer reviewers are asked to complete their reviews within two weeks of receiving a peer review assignment. If they cannot complete the report within two weeks, they may ask for an extension. If a peer reviewer feels unqualified to review a particular manuscript, he or she may notify a member of Common Ground’s editorial team to be excused from the assignment.

Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review will be treated as confidential. It must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by Common Ground’s editorial team.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources and Identification of Possible Plagiarism
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Reports of statements, observations, or arguments that have been noted elsewhere should be accompanied by a relevant citation. A reviewer should also call the editor's attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
If a peer reviewer feels unqualified to review a particular manuscript, he or she must notify a member of Common Ground Research Networks' editorial team to be excused from the assignment. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not be used for personal benefit. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers under review.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

Data Access and Retention
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with the paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data whenever possible. In any event, authors should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable amount of time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original work, and if they have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited and quoted. Articles found to have plagiarized material will be withdrawn from publication consideration. If plagiarism is found after an article is published, the publisher will contact the author for a response to the allegations. In cases of proven plagiarism or nonresponse/inadequate response, the offending article will be retracted and a statement from the publisher will be inserted in its place in the relevant journal issue.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and it is unacceptable. Manuscripts must only be peer reviewed by one journal at a time. Common Ground Research Networks will consider publishing articles that have been published elsewhere previously, provided that they have undergone substantial revision or reworking. In such cases, 70 percent of the article must consist of new or significantly revised material.

 

Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

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 reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as coauthors. Where there are others who participated in certain substantial aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and no inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the publisher and cooperate with Common Ground’s editorial team to correct or retract the article.

Informed Consent for Human and Animal Rights

Statement on Human and Animal Rights

For research studies using human or animal subjects, the trial’s design, conduct, and reporting of results must conform to Good Clinical Practice guidelines (such as the Good Clinical Practice in Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-Regulated Clinical Trials (USA) or the Medical Research Council Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice in Clinical Trials (UK)) and/or to the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki.

Any work describing a study that used human subjects must include a statement that affirms the experiments were performed with prior informed consent (written or verbal, as appropriate) from each participant.

Humans: When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5). If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the author(s) must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.

Animals: When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed. Experimental research on vertebrates or any regulated invertebrates must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines, and where available should have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing compliance with guidelines and/or ethical approval must be included in the work. For studies involving client-owned animals, author(s) must document informed client consent and adherence to a high standard (best practice) of veterinary care.

Statement on Informed Consent

Consent: For all research involving human subjects, informed consent to participate in the study should be obtained from participants (or their parent or guardian in the case of children under 18 and a statement to this effect should appear in the work.

Patients have a right to privacy that should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information, including patients’ names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that a patient who is identifiable be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should identify individuals who provide writing assistance and disclose the funding source for this assistance. Identifying details should be omitted if they are not essential. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve, however, an informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity.

If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, author(s) should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning and the author(s) are responsible to notify the editor(s) in such instances and editor(s) should so note accordingly. The requirement for informed consent should be included in the journal’s instructions for authors. When informed consent has been obtained it should be indicated in the published work.

Official Ethical Approval and Informed Consent Form

For Studies Involving Human, Animal, or Plant Biological Samples and Pharmaceutical Substances

Ethical Considerations Approval

 

Click here to download application form

 

Manuscript Title (MS):

Author(s) Name(s):

Affiliation / Institution:

 

Project Title (if applicable):

Ethics Approval Number (if available):

 

The author(s) hereby declare that the manuscript submitted to the Tikrit Journal of Pure Sciences (TJPS) involves human biological samples (such as blood and/or urine) and/or pharmaceutical substances and/or experimental animals and/or plant studies. All research procedures were conducted in full compliance with internationally recognized ethical standards and principles governing scientific research.

 

 

 

First: Research Involving Human Participants

The authors confirm that the research was conducted in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (the Code of Ethics) and in line with international recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly research. The study aimed to include representative human populations in terms of sex, age, and ethnicity, and the terms sex and gender were used accurately and appropriately.

The authors further confirm that biological samples were collected only after obtaining written informed consent from all participants. Participants were clearly and comprehensively informed, in appropriate and understandable language, of the following:

1. The purpose of sample collection and its current and/or future use in scientific research.
2. The type of analyses or procedures to be performed on the samples.
3. The expected outcomes of the study.
4. Their full right to access the final results and conclusions of the research.
5. That data or results would not be used or published for purposes outside the scope of the research without their explicit consent.
6. The protection of personal data, privacy, and confidentiality, and that participant identities would not be disclosed in any form.

Ethical approval for all research protocols was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee / Institutional Review Board (IRB) or other relevant competent authority. Details of the approving institution, committee name, and ethics approval number were provided. The authors confirm that ethical approval was obtained before the commencement of the research, noting that retrospective approval is not acceptable.

 

 

 

Second: Research Involving Experimental Animals

The authors declare that all animal experiments were conducted in accordance with principles of animal welfare and in compliance with ARRIVE guidelines, as well as applicable national and/or international regulations, including but not limited to:

1. The U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986.
2. EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes;
3. The National Research Council’s Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.

The authors further confirm adherence to the following:

1. Use of scientifically approved methods to minimize pain, distress, or harm.
2. Avoidance of unnecessary suffering during experimental procedures.
3. Clear justification for the use of animals and the selected species.
4. Description of housing conditions, feeding, and environmental enrichment.
5. Specification of anesthesia and euthanasia methods, where applicable.
6. Implementation of all possible measures to reduce animal suffering, with details provided.

Ethical approval was obtained from the relevant authority, with the ethics committee name and approval or license number stated where applicable.

 

Third: Research Involving Plants

The authors confirm that studies involving plants were conducted in accordance with institutional guidelines and applicable national and/or international regulations. Where required, official permissions or licenses were obtained and documented.

The authors also comply with the provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), where applicable.

Fourth: Institutional and Ethical Approvals

1. Where an institutional ethics committee exists within the university, research institution, or medical organization, official approval was obtained and documented, including the committee’s name and approval number.
2. In cases where no formal ethics committee is available, the corresponding author undertakes this ethical declaration, duly endorsed by the scientific department and research center where the study was conducted, confirming that all collected samples and data comply with accepted research ethics and standards.

 

Fifth: Consent for Publication

All necessary consents for publication were obtained from participants, particularly in cases involving personal information or sensitive data, in accordance with approved ethical standards.

 

Principal Investigator Signature:

Name:

Date:

Affiliation / Scientific Department:

Official Stamp (if available):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ethical Considerations Approval

Title of manuscript (MS):

Author/s name:

Name of Organization:

Name of project and version of  work part of project:

 Author(s)  is / are responsible for the content and the content  in no way represents the views of the publisher.

I / We declare that the above research got the approval from the Medical Research Ethics Committee of …(Ministry of Health or Hospital administration / (name of country). The author/s are responsible for the following  considerations:

1. All the needed information for patients or their parents should  be  presented    by using  local and simplified terms for a disease  in their common  language  and invite them  to be part of this 
2. The patients have enough time to decide whether or not they will participate in the research.
3. Any patient can talk to anyone he/she feel comfortable with about the research, ask researcher or physician or medical staff  any   question about research work sample, way to gain sample and the purpose of using the sample in the  present time or future..
4. I/We confirm as author/s that our signing of this form is to guarantee that the submitted manuscript is in accordance with the Ethical approval

 

1-Name with position ---------------------  Signature ------------

 

2- Name with position --------------------- Signature ------------

 

3- Name with position --------------------- Signature-----------

 

Stamp of Authorized instit