Principal and Practice of Publication Ethics

Principal and Practice of Publication Ethics for International Journal of Occupational Safety and Health (IJOSH)

International Journal of Occupational Safety and Health (IJOSH) follows a double-blind peer-reviewed model for an article to publish in this journal.

For this, we need to accept the standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, and the publisher.

Our ethic statements are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) for Journal Editors.

ICMJE Responsibilities in the Submission and Peer-Review Process

ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Policies prepared by the WAME Ethics and Policy Committee (formerly the Publication Ethics and Editorial Policy Committees)

In order of implementing these principles, we strongly uphold some criteria for all levels of Stakeholders.

  1. Role of Editor
  2. Role of Reviewers
  3. Role of Authors
  4. Plagiarism and possible misconduct

Role of Editorial Board

Decision Making: The Chief Editor of the journal is responsible for deciding and directing the strategies of the journal. S/he reviews and decides upon submitted manuscripts to ensure sustainable and timely copy flow. S/he is also ultimately the final decision maker for acceptance or rejections for the articles submitted to the journal, The managing editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board. The managing editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. The Chief Editor also plays a pivotal role to bring together a range of experts within the field in order to make important decisions on journal strategies, select and ensure a smooth peer-reviewing process, achieve and uphold the quality of the journal, and ultimately oversee that the journal is able to maintain and fulfill its scope and objectives.

Rationality: The editorial board should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Privacy: The editorial board should ensure not to disclose any information of the author or reviewer’s names or email addresses to each other.

Conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by any editor's own research in any condition.

Peer review: Peer reviewers are experts chosen by editors to provide a written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of written research, with the aim of improving the article and modifying it in the most appropriate and highest mode for the journal.

Role of Reviewers

Punctuality: The reviewers who feel unable to review the research or know that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor.

Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

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

Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research in any condition. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Peer reviewers are requested to go through the ICMJE and COPE guidelines for peer reviewers below:

ICMJE Responsibilities in the Submission and Peer-Review Process

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers are requested to submit their feedback based on the IJOSH peer review format below:

Originality, Scientific rigor (Clearly Described, up-to-date and relevant experimental procedures and study design), Adequacy of data (Relevant, complete, well-defined data presentation), Organization and readability (Clear and Concisely written paper, Evidence supported conclusion (Validity of the conclusion reached), Adequacy of Literacy Review (Completeness of the literature cited), Contribution to the existing knowledge (Contribution of significant new information or concept not already available in the literature), and Overall Significance (Interest to the journal readership)

Role of authors

Reporting standards: An accurate account of the implemented work and results should be presented, along with an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention: Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

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 Paper: 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 co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

Authorship credit should be based on:

  • Substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data
  • Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
  • Final approval of the version to be published.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Ethical considerations: Article reporting experiments on human subjects should disclose whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional or regional) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 1983.

Subject / Patient consent: Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the submitted manuscript.

Do not use patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers, especially in illustrative material.

IJOSH Plagiarism Policy


Plagiarism is the use of others' published and unpublished ideas or words (or other intellectual property) without attribution or permission, and presenting them as new and original rather than derived from an existing source. This applies whether the ideas or words are taken from abstracts, research grant applications, Institutional Review Board applications, or unpublished or published manuscripts in any publication format (print or electronic).

Self-plagiarism: The author's copying of her or his own previously published material: duplicate publication or "self-plagiarism." If an author has published an article in Journal A, she or he may not send the same article with a few minor adjustments to Journal B. Nor may she or he take verbatim portions of the first article without quotation marks for use in a second article. Each publication should contain fresh writing, even if there is nothing new to report on the topic.

Inadequate acknowledgment of data or ideas: Most writers rely on the ideas and data of others, but doing so without naming the source is a form of plagiarism.

Copyright infringement: Occurs when an author copies (with or without attribution) significant portions of a published work, including tables and figures, without having obtained the permission of the person or publisher holding the copyright. When this plagiarized "writing" is published, the new publisher is guilty of violating the copyright held by the original publisher.

Policy for misconduct: IJOSH policies towards plagiarism are.

  1. When plagiarism is detected, by either reviewers or editors, before or after acceptance, during editing, or at any time before publication, the IJOSH editor office will alert the author, asking her or him to rewrite or quote exactly and to cite the original source.
  2. If the plagiarism is extensive ‐ the article may be rejected and the author's institute may be notified about the violation.
  3. If plagiarism is detected after publication, the editors will notify readers of the infraction through an editor's note in the journal.
  4. In any condition, if plagiarism is found and author(s) failed to provide a suitable explanation, the IJOSH Plagiarism Committee can take further action.

IJOSH Plagiarism Committee:

  • Editor-in-chief, IJOSH
  • Managing Editor, IJOSH
  • Executive Editors, IJOSH