PSM holds the ethics of publication as one of its core values and as such, adheres strictly to internationally accepted publication ethics. To ensure compliance, PSM employs the double-blinded peer-review process for all articles she reviews. The rationale for the double-blind peer-review process is to validate the integrity and novelty of the research work. The peer-review process adopted by the journal acts as a filter and increases the quality of research submitted for publication. This process also helps the authors to remove any errors or gaps in the manuscript mistakenly overlooked and assists in making the research more applicable in real-time.PSM adopts the following guidelines on publication ethics.
PSM author(s) are required to hold fast to the moral benchmarks and behavior that stay compulsory in scientific/ academic publishing. At the time of submission of articles, authors need to express that their work has not been submitted somewhere else, examples (if any) & conflict of interest should be specified and written falsification must be entirely cross-checked. For Animal/Human models, moral leeway duplicate should be submitted.
Plagiarism is duplicating the precise of publishing information. PSM cross-checks each submitted manuscript that is been submitted to any of its associate publishing journals using Turnitin. Any article that has incompletely/totally with plagiarized information will be dismissed promptly.
Conflict of Interest
PSM follows the double-blind peer-review process. The author(s) ought to hold an obligation in giving conflicts any to stay away from further conflicts.
Editor(s), Reviewer(s) should be deliberately taking care of the work of the author(s). It is morally not acknowledged to utilize/disperse the unpublished work.
Human and Animal Rights
Clear proclamations and ethical clearance statements should be provided while submitting an article if it requires. The work including animal models and human volunteers needs to submit the essential proclamations.
The author needs to specify consents and instances if any to keep away from further commitments. Clear proclamation with signature must be given by the author while presenting his/her work.
Civility & Misconduct Allegations
Editor(s), Reviewer(s), Author(s), and the Journal staff are relied upon to stick to the essential expert civility. Any verbal manhandle, level headed discussions, and affront is exceptionally offended by PSM.
Editor/Associate Editors/Editorial Members Responsibilities
Editors (chief editor, associate editor, or member of the editorial board) are experts in the field and play central roles in the peer-review process. Editors are selected based on their excellent scientific qualifications, and reputation in the field. They are expected to strictly follow guidelines to not only maintain the quality of publications but also to ensure the best possible publication ethics.
Editors shall only access the submitted manuscripts for evaluation of quality and peer-review process. They shall not disclose any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) before the publication of the material or without prior written consent of the authors. Any idea or concept generated through the submitted manuscript shall not be used for personal benefits or financial gain.
Assessment of Manuscripts
Editors shall evaluate contents purely based on the scientific quality and advancement in the existing understanding. Decisions shall not be based on race, gender, geographical origin, religion, and ethnicity, and on any other personal or commercial interests.
Flexibility and Cooperation
Editors are required to suggest and support the ethical standards, be willing to consider retractions, rectifications, and erratum and cooperate with authors to improve the quality of publications.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Editors shall not consider any submitted manuscript for the review process himself/herself where there is conflict of interests. In such situations, an alternative associate editor or member of the editorial board shall be considered.
In case the publisher suspects any form of misconduct, malpractice, or unethical act, the matter shall be investigated promptly in agreement with the authors and would be solved with diligence.
Reviewers are an essential part of the peer-review process and are important benchmarks for quality publications. Although sometimes tedious and time-consuming, reviewing a manuscript is also a privilege.
Reviewers are expected to only accept to review the manuscript when the scope of the research/study falls within his/her areas of expertise and that they have sufficient time to submit the report timely.
Conflict of Interest and Willingness
Reviewers shall decline to review the manuscript if there is any conflict of interest, the study is beyond the ken of knowledge or they are unable to submit the evaluation in time. They shall notify the editors at their earliest convenience and can/shall suggestive alternative reviewers.
Reviewers shall only access the submitted manuscripts for evaluation of quality and peer-review process. They shall not disclose any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) before the publication of the material or without prior written consent of the authors. Any idea or concept generated through the submitted manuscript shall not be used for personal benefits or financial gain.
Reviewers are requested to comments on scientific contents, appropriateness of the study, and value of the outcome. They are requested not to assess the manuscripts based on race, gender, geographical origin, religion, and ethnicity, and on any other personal or commercial interests.
Reviewers shall adhere to the criteria set by the journal in the online portal. Any comments on competing interests, duplication of publication, unethical practice, or dubious act shall be conducted to the editor in the “confidential comments to the Editor” section in the online submission system.
Involvement and Cooperation in the Peer-Review Process
We are committed to bridge all components of the peer-review process for the delivery of quality publications and benefiting researchers. Our all advertisements, reprinting, or other commercial interests shall not affect the decision of the editors, associate editors, and reviewers.
Article Withdrawal and Corrections to the Record
The published articles may be considered for withdrawal if proven to be plagiarised, presenting fake, duplicate or fraudulent data, or showing clear evidence of infringements of ethical codes. Such articles (html, pdf, epub, eflip) will be replaced by the content stating the withdrawal of the manuscripts. Minor errors such as typos, textual changes, or clearer statements on the existing contents will be published as corrections.
Integrity and Quality of Services
We will ensure that all contents are confidential before publication, meeting the standard of archiving and abstracting and timely publication of the accepted manuscripts.