Publication Ethics

Advances in BioScience is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in scientific publishing. The journal adheres to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and follows internationally accepted principles of integrity, transparency, and responsible conduct of research. This Publication Ethics Policy outlines the ethical expectations for authors, reviewers, editors, and all parties involved in the publication process, ensuring the credibility, reliability, and integrity of the scientific record.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit original manuscripts that have not been previously published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. Plagiarism in any form—including verbatim copying, paraphrasing without citation, and use of AI-generated content without proper attribution—is strictly prohibited.
• Authorship Criteria and Contributor Roles: Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the conception, design, execution, data analysis, or interpretation of the research. All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and share responsibility for its content. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately. The journal encourages the use of the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) system to clearly specify each author’s contribution.
• Data Accuracy and Research Integrity: Authors must present accurate, complete, and unbiased data. Fabrication, falsification, manipulation of data or images, and selective reporting of findings are unacceptable. Authors must retain raw data and provide it upon request for editorial or peer-review verification.
• Ethical Approvals: For research involving human participants, animals, genetically modified organisms, or hazardous materials, authors must obtain approval from appropriate institutional ethics committees. Manuscripts must clearly state the name of the approving body and approval reference number. Studies involving human subjects must include a statement confirming that written informed consent was obtained. Identifiable information or images must not be published without explicit permission.
• Data Sharing and Reproducibility: Authors are required to provide sufficient methodological detail to ensure the reproducibility of their findings. They must declare the availability of all underlying data, code, and materials and deposit them in recognized public repositories whenever possible, or provide clear instructions on how to access them upon reasonable request.
• Avoidance of Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Authors must not submit the same manuscript or substantially similar content to more than one journal at the same time. Redundant publication or “salami slicing” without proper justification is considered unethical.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial relationships and interests that could be perceived as influencing the research, the interpretation of results, or the peer review process. This includes funding sources, employment affiliations, patent holdings, and any other relevant interests.
• Citation of sources: Authors are responsible for accurately citing all sources of ideas, data, and previously published content used in their work and must properly acknowledge all relevant contributions.

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

• Fairness and Objectivity: Editors must ensure fair, objective, and transparent evaluation of all manuscripts, based solely on scientific merit, originality, quality, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Editorial decisions must be free from bias, discrimination, and undue commercial or personal influence.
• Confidentiality and Integrity: Editors must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts. They must not disclose or use unpublished information for personal gain or advantage.
• Conflict of Interest: Editors must recuse themselves from handling any manuscript in which they have a potential conflict of interest and ensure that it is reassigned to an independent, qualified editor.
• Handling Ethical Concerns and Misconduct: Editors must investigate all allegations of research or publication misconduct—including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, unethical research practices, and authorship disputes—in accordance with COPE guidelines, and take appropriate action in coordination with the authors’ institutions when necessary.
• Retraction and Correction: Editors must ensure the integrity of the scientific record by issuing corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions in cases of confirmed misconduct or significant publishing errors, in accordance with COPE guidelines and the journal’s Retraction and Correction Policy.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review must be treated as strictly confidential and must not be shared, discussed, or used for personal benefit outside the formal peer-review process.
• Objectivity and Constructive Feedback: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide clear, constructive feedback focused on scientific quality, avoiding personal criticism, bias, or inappropriate language.
• Recognition of Ethical Issues: Reviewers must report any suspected ethical issues identified in the manuscript—including plagiarism, data manipulation, redundant publication, or missing ethical approvals—to the editor.
• Timeliness and Expertise: Reviewers should accept review assignments only when they have the necessary expertise and can complete the evaluation within the agreed timeframe; if delays arise, they must promptly inform the editor.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any personal, financial, academic, or institutional conflicts that may affect their objectivity and should decline to review manuscripts where such conflicts exist.

Human and Animal Research Ethics and Compliance

Human Research Ethics

All studies involving human participants, human tissue, or human data must comply with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and must have received prior approval from a duly constituted Institutional Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board (IRB). Manuscripts must include a statement confirming that the research protocol was reviewed and approved, specifying the name of the committee, the approval reference number (if applicable), and the date of approval. If ethical approval or consent was deemed unnecessary, authors must provide a clear justification supported by relevant legislation or institutional policies. Manuscripts lacking an explicit ethical statement will not be considered for publication.

Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants before inclusion in the study. Participants should have been fully informed about the study’s purpose, procedures, potential risks and benefits, their right to withdraw at any time, and how confidentiality and privacy were protected. Special consideration must be given to vulnerable populations, such as minors or individuals with cognitive impairments, for whom consent should be obtained from a parent, guardian, or legally authorized representative. If identifying information (e.g., photographs or case details) is included, explicit consent for publication must be obtained and documented. The manuscript must include a statement describing how informed consent was obtained and recorded. If written consent was not possible, authors must justify the alternative procedure used.

Animal Research Ethics

All research involving animals must comply with internationally accepted ethical standards for animal welfare, such as the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (U.S. National Research Council), the EU Directive 2010/63/EU, the ARRIVE guidelines, or equivalent national regulations. Authors must confirm that the study protocol was reviewed and approved by an appropriate Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or equivalent body. Manuscripts must include the name of the approving committee, the approval code or number (if applicable), and the approval date. Authors must justify the use of animals, describe measures taken to minimize suffering, outline housing and care conditions, and confirm that the minimum number of animals necessary to achieve scientific objectives was used. Manuscripts without a valid ethical statement will not be considered for publication.

Data Availability and Transparency

Authors are encouraged to make the data underlying their research publicly available whenever possible and ethically appropriate. Manuscripts must clearly state where and how supporting data can be accessed—such as through public repositories, institutional databases, or upon reasonable request—and should include persistent identifiers (e.g., DOIs) when available. If data cannot be shared, authors must provide a justified explanation (e.g., privacy concerns or ongoing studies). A data availability statement must be included, describing access conditions and providing sufficient methodological detail for replication.

Conflict of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could influence the research, its interpretation, the peer-review process, or editorial decisions. Conflicts may arise from financial relationships such as employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership, patents, or research funding; personal or family relationships; academic competition; or institutional affiliations that may bias judgment. Authors are required to include a clear Conflict of Interest Statement in their manuscript and must explicitly declare if no conflicts exist. Reviewers must decline to evaluate manuscripts when personal, financial, or professional relationships could compromise impartiality, and editors must recuse themselves from handling submissions when conflicts may affect their independence. All disclosed conflicts must be transparently reported to maintain the integrity of the publication process.

Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose all sources of financial support for their research, including the names of funding organizations, grant numbers, and any roles funders played in the study’s design, data collection, analysis, or publication. If funders had no role in the research, this should be explicitly stated.

Originality and Plagiarism

Originality

Authors must submit only original manuscripts that have not been previously published, in whole or in part, in any language. Submission to the journal implies that the work is not under review elsewhere and has not been posted in venues that constitute prior publication, except for approved preprint servers. Any prior dissemination of the content (e.g., conference presentations, preprints, or theses) must be clearly disclosed in the manuscript.

Authors must properly acknowledge and cite all sources that have contributed to the research, including previously published data, methods, theories, or ideas. Any form of reused content—verbatim, paraphrased, or adapted—must be fully and accurately attributed.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism, including but not limited to verbatim copying, close paraphrasing, text recycling (self-plagiarism), unacknowledged use of AI-generated content, or the unattributed use of ideas, images, tables, figures, or data, is strictly prohibited. All submissions are screened using plagiarism-detection tools to ensure originality.

Suspected plagiarism will be investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines. If plagiarism is confirmed, the journal may reject the submission, request revisions, issue corrections, retract published articles, or notify the authors’ institutions, depending on the severity of the violation.

Permissions and Acknowledgements

Authors must ensure proper acknowledgment of all sources and obtain necessary permissions for any reused materials, including figures, tables, images, and datasets from previously published works. Any third-party content must be properly cited, and copyright permissions must be documented and submitted with the manuscript where required.

Policy on Research and Publication Misconduct

Advances in BioScience maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward research and publication misconduct. Allegations involving fabrication, falsification, plagiarism (including text and ideas), data or image manipulation, unethical authorship practices (e.g., ghost, guest, or gift authorship), duplicate submission, or undisclosed conflicts of interest will trigger a formal investigation following COPE best practices.

If misconduct is confirmed after due process, the journal will take appropriate corrective actions, which may include:

• Retraction of the article with a clear explanatory note
• Notification of the authors’ institutions and relevant funding agencies
• Implementation of sanctions against involved individuals (e.g., temporary or permanent submission bans)
• Publication of corrections, errata, or expressions of concern as necessary

Advances in BioScience is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record and will act decisively to address any confirmed breaches of ethical conduct.

Post-Publication Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Post-Publication Corrections

Purpose of Corrections: To maintain the accuracy, transparency, and integrity of the scientific record by formally correcting significant errors in published articles.

Scope of Corrections: Corrections apply to errors that affect the clarity, accuracy, or presentation of an article but do not invalidate the overall findings, interpretations, or conclusions.

Types of Corrections

• Erratum: An erratum is issued when an error is introduced by the journal during editorial handling, typesetting, or production.
• Corrigendum: A corrigendum is issued when authors identify an error in their published work. All authors must approve the corrigendum prior to publication.

Examples of Correctable Errors: Correctable errors include typographical mistakes, inaccuracies in author names or affiliations, errors in figure or table labeling, minor data inaccuracies, or formatting issues, provided these do not affect the scientific validity or conclusions of the article.

Initiation of Corrections: Corrections may be initiated by authors, editors, reviewers, or readers after publication. All requests must be submitted to the editorial office with clear documentation identifying the error and the proposed correction.

Editorial Review and Approval: All correction requests are assessed by the editorial office to determine the nature, extent, and impact of the error. Authors are consulted to verify accuracy and provide supporting information. Final approval for publication of a correction rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Correction Publication Method: Corrections are published as separate, citable notices and are permanently linked to the original article. The notice clearly identifies and explains the correction and is titled using the original article title prefixed with “Erratum:” or “Corrigendum:”, as appropriate. The original article remains part of the scholarly record and is clearly marked to indicate that a correction has been issued. Corrections are published without charge to authors.

Transparency and Version Control: The original article remains permanently accessible, with a prominent indication that a correction has been published, ensuring transparency of the publication record.

Indexing and Archiving: All correction notices are indexed and archived to ensure visibility and traceability in bibliographic databases.

Distinction from Retractions: Errors that compromise data integrity, ethical compliance, or the validity of conclusions are not addressed through corrections and are handled under the journal’s Retraction or Expression of Concern Policy.

Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern (EOC) is a formal notice issued to alert readers when there are serious, unresolved doubts regarding the integrity or reliability of a published article. It is used when an investigation is underway but has not yet reached a definitive conclusion, serving as a cautionary placeholder in the scholarly record.

Circumstances for Issuance: An EOC may be published when there are credible concerns related to data integrity or reliability, potential research misconduct, ethical approval or consent issues, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or authorship or publication ethics disputes.

Initiation: Concerns may be raised by authors, editors, institutions, reviewers, or readers.

Editorial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief evaluates the concerns and determines whether issuing an EOC is warranted while investigations are conducted.

Publication and Linking: The EOC is published as a separate, citable notice and is clearly linked to the original article. The notice briefly describes the nature of the concerns without drawing definitive conclusions.

Outcome and Follow-up: Following the completion of an investigation, an EOC may be removed if the concerns are resolved, or it may be replaced by a Correction or superseded by a Retraction, as warranted by the findings.

Retractions

A retraction is a formal notice that withdraws a published article from the scholarly record. It is issued when major errors, unethical practices, or compromised data render the work fundamentally unreliable, necessitating a correction of the scientific record to maintain academic integrity.

Grounds for Retraction

Retraction may be warranted for:

• Fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or misrepresentation of data.
• Plagiarism or redundant/duplicate publication.
• Ethical violations (e.g., human/animal ethics non-compliance).
• Major methodological or analytical errors invalidating conclusions.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest affecting the integrity of the work.
• Authorship fraud or disputes resulting in invalid authorship claims.

Initiation: Retractions may be initiated by authors, editors, institutions, or a third party.

Editorial Assessment and Investigation: The Editor-in-Chief evaluates reported concerns and, where necessary, initiates and oversees an investigation in consultation with the authors and relevant institution(s), in accordance with COPE guidelines. An Expression of Concern may be issued at this stage if the investigation is ongoing and unresolved. If the investigation confirms grounds for retraction, the Editor-in-Chief formally issues the retraction decision and implements the necessary publication updates to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record.

Retraction Notice: Retraction notices are published as distinct, citable records that clearly state the grounds for retraction, identify the initiating party (authors, editors, or the publisher), and ensure a permanent, bidirectional link to the original publication.

Article Status: Retracted articles remain accessible for the scholarly record but are clearly marked as retracted on all versions.

No refunds or APC reimbursements are issued for retractions.

Article Withdrawal (Pre-Publication)

Article withdrawal refers to the formal removal of a manuscript from the editorial or publication process prior to its official publication. Withdrawal is distinct from retraction, which applies only to published articles; once published, an article may generally be retracted but not withdrawn.

Stages of Withdrawal

Pre-Acceptance: Authors may request to withdraw their manuscript at any time prior to formal editorial acceptance. This requires a written request submitted to the Editorial Office, signed or confirmed by all co-authors, clearly stating the reason(s) for withdrawal.

Post-Acceptance: Withdrawal of a manuscript after formal acceptance but prior to publication is strongly discouraged. At this stage, significant editorial and production resources have already been invested. Such requests will only be considered under extraordinary circumstances and are subject to the final approval of the Editor-in-Chief.

Permissible Grounds for Withdrawal

Withdrawal is permitted only when a valid scientific or ethical justification exists, such as:

• Discovery of serious methodological errors that invalidate the study’s findings or conclusions
• Ethical violations (e.g., missing IRB/ethics approval, plagiarism, or consent issues)
• Duplicate or multiple submissions discovered
• Legal or copyright disputes or unresolved authorship conflicts

Unacceptable Grounds for Withdrawal

The journal reserves the right to reject withdrawal requests deemed unethical or administratively invalid. Unacceptable reasons include, but are not limited to:

• Dissatisfaction with peer-review comments, editorial decisions, or required revisions
• Withdrawal of a manuscript for the purpose of submission to another or higher-impact journal after it has already benefited from the journal’s peer review or editorial processes
• Dissatisfaction with the publication timeline or perceived delays in the editorial or production process
• Desire to conduct further experiments or incorporate additional data; such additions should be managed through the formal revision process and extension requests
• Failure to meet financial obligations, such as Article Processing Charges (APCs), once the manuscript has been accepted for publication

Handling of Ethical Issues

• Investigation of Allegations: All allegations of research or publication misconduct will be investigated promptly, fairly, and confidentially by the Editorial Board.
• Action on Misconduct: If misconduct is confirmed, the journal will take appropriate actions to uphold research integrity. These may include retracting the article, publishing a statement of concern, notifying affected parties, and restricting future submissions from the authors involved.

Ethical Guidelines for Research

To ensure ethical research practices, Advances in Bioscience requires all authors to comply with the following international guidelines:

• Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, established by the World Medical Association.
• Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals: A foundational document outlining internationally recognized ethical principles and standards for the care, use, and welfare of animals in research.
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations: Provides comprehensive guidelines for the conduct, reporting, editing, and peer review of biomedical research.

Publication Ethics Resources

Authors, reviewers, and editors are encouraged to refer to the following resources for more information on publication ethics:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): https://publicationethics.org/
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): https://www.icmje.org/
• World Conference on Research Integrity (WCRI): https://www.wcrif.org/

To ensure ethical publication practices, Advances in Bioscience requires that authors, reviewers, and editors adhere to these guidelines. Authors, reviewers, and editors are responsible for upholding the principles of publication ethics throughout their involvement with the journal. By submitting a manuscript to Advances in Bioscience, authors explicitly agree to abide by these ethical guidelines and to cooperate fully with any investigation of alleged misconduct. Violations of these guidelines may result in corrective actions, including retraction of published articles and restrictions on submission of future manuscripts.

For any questions or concerns regarding publication ethics, contact the Editorial Office at editor[at]sospublication.co.in.