Code of publishing ethics

The code of publishing ethics of “Annales Academiae Medicae Silesiensis”

The Editorial Office of “Annales Academiae Medicae Silesiensis” (hereinafter AAMS) shall follow the principles of publication ethics in line with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

I. Editorial policy
1. The editorial policy of AAMS is independent of commercial influences and the Publisher.
2. The members of the Editorial Office and the Scientific Council follow high ethical standards in their work. They are free from any influence and financial relations with companies or other individuals who might influence the publishing process.
3. The Editor-in-Chief, his/her deputy and content editors read the submitted articles and make decisions using their knowledge and experience, in accordance with the principles of impartiality, objectivity and concern for the high quality of published materials. Moreover, they promote freedom of expression and exclude business benefits that may violate ethical standards.
4. The Editorial Office adheres to the principles embodied in the Declaration of Helsinki on medical research involving human subjects and the principles contained in the “Interdisciplinary Principles and Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research, Testing and Education” in the case of research using animal models.
5. In the case of research involving human or animal subjects, the Editorial Office shall require the authors to obtain favourable opinions from relevant ethics committees. In the event that an ethical problem arises, the Editorial Office shall follow the COPE guidelines on “What to do if you suspect an ethical problem with a submitted manuscript”*.
6. When deciding whether to accept or reject an article, the Editorial Office takes into account the innovative presentation of the topic, its significance for the further development of scientific research, as well as its importance for clinical management. The aim of the Editorial Office is to provide articles of the highest quality both in scientific and ethical terms.
7. The Editorial Office evaluates publications solely in terms of their merits, regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, degree of physical fitness, or political views of the authors.
8. The Editorial Office shall pay particular attention to whether authors observe the rules concerning reference to other sources, the use of citations as well as the provision of full bibliographic data of the cited publications in the bibliography. In the event of any irregularities, the Editorial Office shall follow the COPE guidelines of on “What to do if you suspect redundant (duplicate) publication”.
9. The rules for accepting articles, preparing manuscripts and publishing are described in the Regulations for publishing works in “Annales Academiae Medicae Silesiensis” journal and posted on the website of the journal.
10. To prevent plagiarism, all works submitted to the Editorial Office are verified by an anti-plagiarism system. In the event of suspected plagiarism, the Editorial Office shall follow the COPE guidelines on “What to do if you suspect plagiarism”.
11. The phenomena of ghostwriting and guest authorship shall be exposed. In the case of suspected fraudulent practices, the Editorial Office shall follow the COPE guidelines on “Changes in authorship” and “What to do if you suspect ghost, guest or gift authorship”.
12. The Editorial Office uses all means at their disposal to prevent the abuse and publication of false data. In the event of any irregularities, the Editorial Office shall follow the COPE guidelines on “What to do if you suspect fabricated data”.
13. The Editorial Office applies procedures ensuring high content and editorial quality of the published articles.
14. The Editorial Office eliminates any conflicts of interest among the members of the office, authors, and reviewers. If any irregularities are detected, the Editorial Office shall follow the COPE guidelines on, respectively “What to do if a reviewer suspects undisclosed conflict of interest (CoI) in a submitted manuscript” and “What to do if a reader suspects undisclosed conflict of interest (CoI) in a published article”.
15. The Editorial Office is prepared to post negative comments on the published articles to encourage discussion. The authors of the disputed materials have the opportunity to respond to the content of the comment. In the event of any errors, appropriate explanations and corrections are provided.
16. The Editorial Office has the right to withdraw the publication after it has been issued if there are reasons proving a lack of credibility of the research results and/or data falsification, as well as unintentional errors, e.g. in the calculations or methodological errors, or if there are signs of plagiarism or if the work violates the rules of publishing ethics.
17. The Editorial Office complies with the rules of publishing confidentiality, i.e. it shall not disclose information about the submitted publications to any individuals unrelated to the publishing process. It ensures confidentiality and security of the personal data of the authors, reviewers and all individuals participating in the publishing process. Detailed information on the collected and processed data categories is provided in the “Privacy policy” available at https://www.editorialsystem.com/Polityka-prywatnosci/, and there is additional information on the processing of the personal data in the Cover Letter (Author/Co-author declaration) addressed by the authors to the Editorial Office.

II. Guidelines for authors
1. The rules concerning the acceptance of articles, manuscript preparation and publication are available on the website of the journal.
2. The author makes a declaration that the article is an original work, it has not been submitted to any publisher of another journal, and it does not infringe the copyrights of third parties.
3. The author shall disclose the sources of funding for the research as well as the contribution of any institutions, organisations and other entities.
4. All citations, borrowings, tables, and comments should be accompanied by appropriate footnotes.
5. The author using third party research and/or information in his/her work shall indicate the authorship and provide the original sources.
6. If the work includes illustrations, photographs or any other materials protected by copyright, the author shall obtain consent from the previous publisher or the owner of the proprietary rights to use such materials in the publication.
7. In the case of joint authorship, the author submitting the publication shall disclose the contribution of individual authors to its creation, indicating the authors of the concept, assumptions, employed methods, conducted research, data analysis, literature review, etc.
8. The Editorial Office requires authors who are research workers to use the ORCID identification code, which must be provided when submitting the manuscript through the Editorial System.
9. The copyrights are clearly defined in accordance with the act on copyrights and related rights. The author shall submit a declaration (available on the website of the journal) on granting the publisher of AAMS a free and non-exclusive CC BY-SA license to the article. The author shall retain the copyright to the article.

III. Rules for reviewing papers
1. The rules for reviewing works, together with the relevant form, are available on the website of the journal.
2. The Editorial Office shall accept original articles only, i.e. ones that have never before been published or submitted to any publisher of another journal.
3. Articles submitted to the Editorial Office are subject to a two-stage review procedure. They are initially assessed by the Editor-in-Chief. If the conditions for publication are not met or if the manuscript is incomplete, the article shall be rejected. If accepted, the document is registered and submitted for evaluation by an external reviewer.
4. Each text is assessed by two independent, reviewers, whose identity shall remain hidden. In the event of conflicting opinions, a third reviewer may be appointed.
5. The double-blind review process is used to assess the works, i.e. the data of the authors and the reviewers are confidential, and the article is processed based on a previously assigned registration number.
6. In the event of a suspected conflict of interest with the author, the reviewer shall notify the Editorial Office.
7. The reviewer shall maintain confidentiality and not disclose information about the reviewed works to any individuals unrelated to the publishing process.
8. The reviewer shall remain objective in his/her assessment, supporting comments with justified arguments, and avoid personal criticism. The reviews are to be constructive; they shall contain a detailed assessment of the work compared to other publications on the subject.
9. The reviewer shall have the knowledge necessary for a reliable evaluation of the article.
10. The reviewer may not use the reviewed work for personal needs
or benefits.
11. Any scientific misconduct by the author or any similarities to other works which may be considered as plagiarism shall be reported by the reviewer to the Publisher of AAMS.
12. A list of the reviewers for a given year is published annually on the website of the journal.

IV. Publishing ethics and intellectual property
1. The Editorial Office shall supervise the compliance with the Code of publishing ethics by authors, reviewers and members of the Editorial Office.
2. The ethical and intellectual standards are maintained.
3. The Editorial Office ensures high content and editorial quality of the published texts, ensures compliance with copyright laws, and, in the event of any irregularities in the published articles, it provides appropriate explanations and corrections.

*The English version of COPE guidelines is available here.