Publication Ethics and Malpractice Guidelines
Table of Contents
Ethical Guidelines for Authors
Editorial Processes and Conflicts of Interest
Conflict and Bias Prevention within Peer Review
Copyright, Intellectual Property and Acknowledgment of Sources
Fundamental Errors in Published Works: Retractions and Corrections
Data and Reporting
Data and Image Falsification
Research Ethics
Ethical Research Practices
Plagiarism and Redundant Publications
Ethical Business Practices
Important Contacts
Publisher’s Statement
The Begell House Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement is based on the guidelines developed by the Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE)(open in a new tab)
It is the intent of Begell House to publish original research articles of the highest quality using fair and ethical procedures in screening and peer-reviewing submitted manuscripts.
Misconduct or Fraudulent Research
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors-in-chief, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.
Discrimination
The publisher and the journal(s) do not discriminate on the basis of age, color, religion, creed, disability, marital status, veteran status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier status, or sexual orientation in its publishing programs, services and activities.
Complaints and Appeals
Editors make the final decision about the acceptance or rejection of any manuscript. If an author wishes to appeal such a decision, they may contact the editor of the journal directly. Complaints about coauthors, reviewers or editorial board members should be directed to the editor-in-chief.
Ethical Guidelines for Authors
Authorship
The definition of authorship can differ depending on scientific discipline; authors are expected to be aware of and abide by the standards within their research field, such as the American Psychological Association’s statement on Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship(open in a new tab).
Begell House publications follow the guidelines set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)(open in a new tab) that authorship on a manuscript should be reserved for those who meet the following criteria:
When reviewing manuscripts for publication, editors should refer to the Council of Scientific Editors (CSE) standards on authorship(open in a new tab). The order in which authors are listed can quantify their contribution to the article; for example, the author who contributed the most work may be listed as the first author.
In any cases of uncertainty, authors can refer to the COPE discussion on ‘what constitutes authorship’(open in a new tab). Authors should include their ORCID IDs(open in a new tab) on their manuscript to ensure they are properly credited for their publication.
Contributorship
If someone has participated in the study but does not meet the requirements for authorship stated above, they should be listed as a contributor. Contributors should be mentioned in the acknowledgements with an explanation of their involvement. Some examples of Contributor roles may include:
A statement clearly explaining each author’s role in the research should be submitted along with the manuscript. We encourage authors to familiarize themselves with CRediT(open in a new tab) (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) and use these standard definitions in the statement.
Responsibilities of Corresponding Author
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. The corresponding author is required to affirm that all authors have contributed to, read, and approved the submission of the manuscript in its current form at the time of submission.
Changes to Authorship
Authors should finalize and confirm all authorship and contributorship before submitting a manuscript for review. Minor corrections to spellings of names can be made at the discretion of the editor. If any changes are needed to the order or listing of authors, our Production Department must receive written communication signed by all authors, stating they have been notified and agree to the change. In this case, the journal would issue a correction stating the change and update the version of record. We agree with COPE’s stance on promoting inclusivity in scholarly publishing;(open in a new tab) if an author wishes to change their name due to gender identity change or other reasons, they should send their request to journals
Authorship Disputes
COPE provides guidance for editors and reviewers on how to identify potential authorship problems or manipulation on a manuscript#%pdf_file%#(open in a new tab) and flowcharts(open in a new tab) on handling concerns and disputes that arise during the peer review process, as well as after publication. If the authors, editor and publisher cannot resolve a dispute on authorship, they may defer to the author-in-questions’ institution for clarification.
Affiliations
All authors are required to list their affiliation as the institution where the research in their manuscript took place, or the institution where they are currently affiliated. Anyone with concerns regarding potential affiliation manipulation should contact the journal’s Editor or the publisher at ethics
Artificial Intelligence and Large Language Models
Begell House’s stance aligns with COPE(open in a new tab) and WAME (World Association of Medical Editors)(open in a new tab) policies, stating that artificial intelligence chatbots such as ChatGPT and other Large Language Models (LLMs) cannot be listed as authors on research manuscripts, as they cannot make substantial original contributions to the research and cannot be culpable for published data. If any AI programs or tools were used in the generation of a manuscript, this should be clearly explained in the body of the manuscript, including the names of any programs or tools, how they were used and the identification of any content created by them.
Deceased Authors
If a manuscript is submitted after one of the authors passes away, a footnote should be added to the version of record stating this. If an author of a submitted manuscript passes away during the peer review process, the remaining authors should notify the journal’s Editor or our Production Department at journals. If the deceased was the corresponding author, all remaining authors must agree on a new corresponding author and a footnote regarding this change must be added to the manuscript.
Editorial Processes and Conflicts of Interest
Publication Decisions
The editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published and shall not be directly influenced by the publisher or any other outside entities. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair Play
An editor will at any time evaluate manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. for any special issues published in Begell House journals, we do not request or accept payment from third party institutions such as societies or conference organizers in exchange for publishing the issue. We do not publish articles or special issues from commercial entities.
Begell House refers editors to the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors#%pdf_file%#(open in a new tab).
Conflict and Bias Prevention within Peer Review
When authors suggest reviewers, the suggestions are vetted by the editor or associate editor handling the article to ensure the author and the reviewer are not from the same institution, laboratory or have any other potential connections. The authors’ information is also closely reviewed so that any potential manipulation can be identified early (for example: an author listing an affiliation that does not match their institutional email address).
If authors suggest anyone who they may know or with whom they have connections, or who is from the same institution, that reviewer will be disqualified from the review. If there is any potential bias based on the topic of the manuscript, it will be assigned to reviewers in different research areas.
When a person is invited to review an article, the editor requests that they disclose any potential conflicts or bias. When conflicts of interest do arise, or when a conflict is not disclosed but later becomes apparent, Begell House follows the COPE flowchart guidelines for undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted manuscript#%pdf_file%#(open in a new tab). If the conflict-containing manuscript has already been published, we refer to the COPE flowchart for undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article(open in a new tab).
If any fraudulent peer review practices are discovered to have taken place, or if the authorship of the paper has been manipulated to either conceal the author’s real affiliation or be otherwise dishonest, the paper will no longer be considered for publication and the authors will be notified of this decision, with full explanation as to the reason.
If an author believes that bias or conflict of interest has influenced the decision on their manuscript, they can communicate with the journal’s editor-in-chief or editorial office to address their concerns and provide additional information. The journal’s reviews and reviewers are monitored regularly to ensure ethical standards and guidelines are strictly adhered to.
All 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 their manuscript, such as personal or professional relationships. All sources of financial support and funding for the project should be disclosed including grant numbers and other verification details, as well as any other potential conflicts. Anyone who suspects a competing interest in any work published by Begell House should contact the journal’s editor or the publisher at ethics.
Copyright, Intellectual Property and 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.
Authors should acknowledge the source(s) of any figures, photos or tables included in their manuscript that have been previously published or are not the authors’ original works. Begell House requires authors to assert the originality of their manuscripts, including figures and tables, and to acquire explicit permission from the copyright holder of any reproduced material.
Depending on the publication model chosen, authors are required to sign and submit the following documents with their manuscript materials:
If authors choose to publish in Green or Gold Open Access, they will sign copyright transfer agreement as well as the appropriate agreement below and retain certain rights as stated in the prospective agreement:
Citations and Manipulation
It is unethical for editors and authors to engage in citation manipulation or any other practices that aim to deceptively increase the number of citations an article receives. COPE discusses how to identify citation manipulation#%pdf_file%#(open in a new tab) and suggests best practices:
COPE also recognizes certain cases in which self-citations may be valid, such as a follow-up study on a previous article or if the author is researching a very niche topic. Any such cases will be reviewed by the Editor to determine if any unethical behavior has taken place, and if deemed necessary, an article may be rejected.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works: Retractions and Corrections
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. Journals will publish retraction notices and errata in cases where such corrections are deemed justified by the editors. We follows COPE guidelines for handling post-publication changes and critiques(open in a new tab).
Corrections
If authors or readers detect incorrect data or other errors in a manuscript after publication, they should contact the journal editor or the publisher at journals. Reasons for corrections could be a prominent (but not substantial) error in the data or figures or changes to authorship.
Editors should refer to the COPE flowchart on handling post-publication critiques#%pdf_file%#\(open in a new tab) for guidance; for “early release” articles, the version of record may be updated directly on the publisher’s website. For published articles, a formal correction statement will be issued and added to the version of record.
Retractions
A retraction of a published manuscript may be appropriate in the most severe cases, if:
When considering whether an article should be retracted, we adhere to COPE’s retraction guidelines(open in a new tab). The complaint is first investigated by the journal’s editor. Editors then discuss their findings with the publisher to determine whether a retraction will be issued. During this process, we notify all authors of the concern, and maintain frequent and transparent communication with them during the investigation.
Data and Reporting
Data Sharing
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with manuscript for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases#%pdf_file%#(open in a new tab)), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Begell House follows the FORCE11 principles on data sharing(open in a new tab). Authors should include a data availability statement in their manuscript, after the acknowledgments and before the references list; this statement should state what information is included in their dataset, whether the data is publicly available or not, and if so, where it is located (in a database, within the manuscript, or in supplemental materials). All data used in scholarly research should adhere to FAIR standards (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable). Authors can refer to FAIRSharing.org for a list of open data repositories(open in a new tab).
Reporting Standards and Guidelines
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as 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.
Because reporting standards differ by scientific discipline, authors should ensure they’re aware of and abide by reporting standards for their specific discipline. Failure to adhere to these standards could significantly affect the impact colleagues’ ability to interpret or reproduce the data.
SPIRIT’s Guidance for Clinical Trials Protocols(open in a new tab) provides researchers with a 33-point checklist to follow for the registration and reporting of clinical trials.
Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) Guidelines(open in a new tab) should be followed for any studies where animals are involved. Authors are encouraged to submit the completed checklist with their manuscript for verification of ethical research practices.
Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) Guidelines(open in a new tab) includes explicit definitions of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ as separate terms and how these should be referred to in a manuscript to avoid confusion.
Data and Image Falsification
Begell House, its editors and production staff publicly condemn the creation and use of fake or false data, and carefully screen manuscripts for any evidence of misconduct through rigorous peer review.
Creating and knowingly disseminating false data, images, research findings or reports is one of the highest ethical violations in scientific research. It violates every core principle of research integrity. If a manuscript is proven to contain falsified data or images, it may be retracted after investigation by the editor and publisher.
If an editor or reviewer suspects that parts of or entire data sets in a submitted manuscript have been fabricated during peer review, they should refer to the COPE flowchart on fabricated data in a submitted manuscript(open in a new tab); if concerns arise post-publication, they should refer to the COPE flowchart on fabricated data in a published article(open in a new tab).
Research Ethics
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
Human Participants
Begell House encourages authors submitting manuscripts covering experiments on human subjects to indicate that the process followed was in accordance with the ethics committee from the institution where the work was undertaken and the Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association(open in a new tab). If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of both of these committees, the authors must describe the reason for their method, and show that the institutional review group clearly approved the unsure parts of the study. All photographs of human subjects must be cropped sufficiently to prevent the subjects from being recognized. No photographs of human subjects will be published without a signed consent form from the subject. Patient anonymity should always be preserved.
Clinical Trials Registration
According to the World Health Organization(open in a new tab), a clinical trial is defined as a research project that designates individuals or groups for future participation in one or more treatments related to their health in order to evaluate the outcomes and validity of the treatment.
To be considered for publication, all clinical trials included in an author’s research must be registered with a World Health Organization Primary Registry(open in a new tab). Authors should follow the WHO Trial Registration Data Set (Version 1.3.1)(open in a new tab) instructions while completing their application to ensure their trial meets the minimum requirements.
Animals in Research
Begell House supports the humane and ethical treatment of animals in scientific research. When manuscripts include experiments on animals, authors should indicate if they followed the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals. For additional information see Animal Welfare Act and Regulations “Blue Book” (September 2013)#%pdf_file%#(open in a new tab). Authors should also refer to the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) Guidelines(open in a new tab) checklist and are encouraged to submit the completed checklist with their study. In studies where animal subjects may need to be euthanized, authors should follow the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals(open in a new tab). Begell House retains the right to reject any manuscript on the basis of unethical conduct of either human or animal studies.
Research Funding
If authors received funding for their research, this should be stated in the manuscript’s acknowledgments, including all pertinent details such as the funding body’s name and funding ID numbers.
Ethical Research Practices
Begell House promotes ethical research practices in accordance with COPE(open in a new tab) core practices. Any concerns regarding ethical research methods, data gathering or reporting practices should be communicated to the journal’s editor or to the publisher at ethics.
Peer Review
Begell House strongly advises reviewers to adhere to COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers(open in a new tab). The review methods used may change based on the journal and are clearly stated in the author instructions on the journal’s homepage.
We engage in two standard types of peer review:
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
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.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention 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 Interests
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 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. Reviewers should follow policies stated in the World Association of Medical Ethics’ ‘Conflict of Interest in Peer-Reviewed Medical Journals’(open in a new tab). If a review does not disclose a conflict of interest that is later discovered, they will be barred from further peer review opportunities with Begell House. Journal editors carefully vet and regularly monitor reviewers’ qualifications for any potential conflicts of interest and to ensure competency in their reviewing skills.
Articles Authored/Coauthored by Editorial Members
Begell House’s policy regarding those who author or coauthor articles for a journal in which they are also involved in the editorial process is based on Committee on Publication Ethic (COPE) standards(open in a new tab). Editorial board members recuse themselves from the decision-making process for articles for which they have financial or non-financial competing interests and the editor delegates the responsibility to another member of the editorial team with appropriate expertise. When an editorial board member submits an article they have coauthored, the members’ articles are handled entirely by another associate editor (or special issue guest editor).
When an editorial board member submits an article, the associate editor assignment is made by the editor-in-chief to ensure that the relationship between the authors and associate editors meets ethical standards in that they have not collaborated, are at the same institution, do not have a financial interest, etc. In the case that the editor-in-chief is a coauthor on an article, that assignment is made by the senior associate editor. Further, Begell House’s online system operates on a “possession” basis and the editor or associate editors cannot view documents including reviews, reviewer identity, decision letters, etc. for manuscripts to which they are not assigned as the designated associate or guest editor. Guest editors have full editorial control over their issues and the regular associate editors are not involved in the decision-making process.
Peer Review Manipulation
COPE provides extensive guidance for editors on how to recognize potential manipulation of the peer review process(open in a new tab). Begell House follows COPE best practices in minimizing peer review manipulation:
If an editor suspects that any manipulation has taken place during peer review of a manuscript, they should refer to COPE’s flowchart on peer review manipulation suspected during the peer review process(open in a new tab). If the manuscript in question has already been published, editors should refer to COPE’s flowchart on peer review manipulation suspected after publication(open in a new tab).
Plagiarism and Redundant Publications
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. According to COPE’s flowchart on plagiarism, it may be defined as:
Begell House uses iThenticate plagiarism detection software to screen manuscripts immediately following submission to help ensure authors’ contributions are original. Editors will review plagiarism reports and may request additional revisions based on the results, following COPE’s flowchart on plagiarism in a submitted manuscript(open in a new tab). In excessive cases, editors may reject manuscripts solely based on the results.
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 redundant publication (according to the COPE definition#%pdf_file%#(open in a new tab)) and is unethical publishing behavior. Authors are required to affirm that their manuscript has not been concurrently submitted elsewhere during the initial submission process. Begell House also requires authors to sign a copyright transfer agreement, which again states that all work within the manuscript should be original.
An author who is discovered to have concurrently submitted a manuscript to more than one publication will be made aware of the duplicate submission and will automatically have their manuscript rejected. The editor(s) of all other affected publications will also be notified. After review, additional steps may be taken, including preventing the author from submitting future manuscripts to Begell House and notifying the author’s institution of the concurrent submissions. Editors should refer to COPE’s guidelines on duplicate and redundant publications(open in a new tab).
In some cases, prior publication of the research is not considered redundant, such as a dissertation or abstract that was presented at a conference. In this case, Begell House requires authors to change the title and full text of the manuscript by at least 30% and must seek proper permission from the previous publisher (if applicable). The new publication should also reference the prior publication.
Ethical Business Practices
Reporting, Metrics and Usage
Begell House is a member of Project COUNTER and follows the COUNTER Code of Practice(open in a new tab) for recording and reporting usage metrics. The publisher’s website is updated as soon as possible with each new release, and every year compliance is verified through an independent third party audit. Begell House also supports statistics harvesting via SUSHI(open in a new tab) and maintains its Librarian’s Page(open in a new tab), where administrators can run and download usage reports as needed. The publisher works with other organizations like Crossref(open in a new tab) and NISO(open in a new tab) to help support standards in metrics reporting. Begell House does not modify or influence the metrics produced by these services in any way.
Marketing & Public Relations Practices
Begell House regularly uses email and social media to communicate with authors, editorial staff, customers and the general public. Email communications are sent only to those who have agreed to be part of one of its mailing lists, and each mailing includes an ‘unsubscribe’ link. Begell House maintains an up-to-date email suppression list to ensure those unsubscribed contacts are excluded from future mailings.
Advertising
Begell House does not permit any third-party advertising on its website; select third party advertisements are permitted in print publications, provided they meet the following criteria:
Any advertisements received are vetted thoroughly to ensure they meet these standards. Print advertisements will appear on the last page of the journal issue.
Libel, Defamation & Freedom of Expression
Begell House will never knowingly participate in or perpetuate libelous statements or publish slanderous claims about individuals or entities. Any statements that could be considered as libel or defamation should be brought to the attention of the journal’s editor or the publisher at ethics.
Important Contacts
General enquiries related to content published on the Begell House website or in the publisher’s print publications can be submitted via Begell House’s Contact Form(open in a new tab) or sent to Orders.
Comments, questions, or critiques related to published manuscripts or manuscripts currently in peer review should be directed to the Begell House Production Department at Journals.
Most of Begell House’s permission requests are now handled via the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC). Permission requests through the CCC may be initiated by clicking on the “Get Permissions” link from a given article on the Begell House website. Requests not covered by the CCC should be sent to Permissions.
Comments or questions about Begell House marketing or social media communications should be sent to Begell House’s Marketing Department at Meghan.