Publication Ethics

Our Commitment to Ethical Publishing

SENTAM Journals is unwavering in its commitment to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity. We recognize that ethical publishing forms the foundation of credible scientific communication and serves the broader goals of advancing knowledge while protecting the interests of authors, reviewers, editors, and the global research community.

Our ethical framework is built upon internationally recognized principles and guidelines established by leading organizations in scholarly publishing. We strictly adhere to standards set by:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) - Following comprehensive guidelines for handling ethical issues in publishing
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) - Implementing recommendations for authorship, conflicts of interest, and editorial independence
• World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) - Upholding editorial policies and publication ethics standards
• Council of Science Editors (CSE) - Following best practices for scientific publishing
• Declaration of Helsinki - Ensuring ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects

Our commitment extends beyond mere compliance with these standards. We actively promote ethical awareness, provide educational resources, and continuously work to strengthen the integrity of the scholarly record through transparent policies and rigorous enforcement procedures.

Core Ethical Principles

Integrity in Research and Publishing

Integrity forms the cornerstone of all academic endeavors. At SENTAM Journals, we define integrity as the honest and accurate representation of research processes, findings, and interpretations. This includes ensuring that all reported data is authentic, methodologies are accurately described, and conclusions are appropriately supported by evidence.

Transparency and Accountability

We believe that transparency in the research and publication process is essential for maintaining trust in scientific literature. This encompasses clear disclosure of funding sources, potential conflicts of interest, research methodologies, data sources, and any limitations or uncertainties in the research. Authors, reviewers, and editors must be accountable for their contributions and decisions throughout the publication process.

Respect for Intellectual Property

Proper attribution and respect for intellectual property rights are fundamental to ethical publishing. This includes appropriate citation of sources, acknowledgment of contributions, and respect for copyright and licensing agreements. We strictly prohibit plagiarism in all its forms and require authors to demonstrate the originality of their work.

Fairness and Non-Discrimination

Our publication decisions are based solely on scientific merit, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal's scope. We do not discriminate based on authors' institutional affiliation, nationality, ethnicity, gender, political beliefs, or religious views. Our peer review process is designed to be fair, unbiased, and focused exclusively on the quality and significance of the research.

Author Responsibilities and Ethics

Research Integrity and Originality

Original Research Requirements

All manuscripts submitted to SENTAM Journals must represent original research that has not been previously published in any form, including conference proceedings, book chapters, or other journals. Authors must ensure that their work makes a novel contribution to the existing body of knowledge and clearly articulates how it advances understanding in their field.

Authors are required to conduct a comprehensive literature review to position their work within the existing scholarly context and to demonstrate familiarity with relevant prior research. Any preliminary reports, such as conference abstracts or preprints, must be clearly disclosed during submission.

Plagiarism Prevention and Detection

Plagiarism, defined as the unauthorized use of someone else's work, ideas, or expressions without proper attribution, is strictly prohibited in all forms. This includes:

• Verbatim plagiarism: Copying text word-for-word without quotation marks or proper citation
• Paraphrasing plagiarism: Restating someone else's ideas in different words without attribution
• Self-plagiarism: Reusing one's own previously published work without proper disclosure and citation
• Mosaic plagiarism: Combining phrases and sentences from multiple sources without attribution
• Idea plagiarism: Using someone else's original ideas or concepts without acknowledgment

We employ sophisticated plagiarism detection software to screen all submissions and maintain a zero-tolerance policy toward any form of plagiarism. Authors found to have engaged in plagiarism may face immediate rejection of their manuscript, notification to their institutional authorities, and potential exclusion from future submissions.

Data Integrity and Reproducibility

Research data must be collected, analyzed, and reported with the highest standards of accuracy and honesty. Authors are responsible for:

• Accurate data collection: Using appropriate methodologies and maintaining detailed records of all data collection procedures
• Honest reporting: Presenting all relevant findings, including negative results and unexpected outcomes
• Statistical integrity: Using appropriate statistical methods and reporting effect sizes, confidence intervals, and p-values accurately
• Data availability: Making raw data available for verification and replication when possible and appropriate
• Methodology transparency: Providing sufficient detail about methods to allow independent replication

Authors must not engage in data fabrication (creating false data) or falsification (manipulating or omitting data to support desired conclusions). Any errors discovered after submission must be promptly reported to the editorial team.

Authorship Ethics and Criteria

Determining Authorship

Authorship carries significant professional credit and responsibility. To qualify as an author on a SENTAM Journals publication, individuals must meet ALL of the following criteria established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE):

1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
3. Final approval of the version to be published
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved

All authors must participate sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section rather than listed as authors.

Authorship Order and Contribution

The order of authors should reflect their relative contributions to the research and manuscript preparation. The first author typically makes the largest contribution, while the corresponding author takes responsibility for communication during the submission and review process. Senior or supervisory authors often appear last, though this may vary by discipline.

Authors must discuss and agree upon authorship order before manuscript submission. Any changes to authorship after submission require written agreement from all authors and must be justified to the editorial team.

Prohibited Authorship Practices

• Gift authorship: Including individuals as authors solely based on their position, reputation, or funding contribution without substantial intellectual contribution
• Ghost authorship: Failing to include individuals who meet authorship criteria, often those who contributed to writing but are not acknowledged
• Guest authorship: Including prominent researchers as authors to increase the likelihood of publication without their substantial contribution
• Coercive authorship: Forcing inclusion or exclusion of authors based on power dynamics rather than contribution

Conflicts of Interest and Financial Disclosure

Understanding Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest occurs when financial, professional, or personal relationships could inappropriately influence (or appear to influence) an author's research or its presentation. Conflicts may be actual, potential, or perceived, and all must be disclosed regardless of whether the authors believe they influenced the research.

Financial Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all financial relationships that could be perceived as relevant to the research, including:

• Research funding: All sources of funding for the research, including grant numbers and funding agency names
• Employment relationships: Current or recent employment by organizations with financial interests related to the research
• Consulting arrangements: Paid consulting relationships with companies or organizations relevant to the research
• Stock ownership: Financial stakes in companies whose products or services are discussed in the research
• Patent applications: Any patents filed or pending related to the research topic
• Speaking fees: Honoraria received for presentations related to the research topic
• Board memberships: Service on advisory boards or committees of relevant organizations

Non-Financial Conflicts of Interest

Non-financial conflicts can be equally important and must also be disclosed:

• Personal relationships: Family members or close personal friends who work for organizations relevant to the research
• Professional rivalries: Competitive relationships with other researchers in the field
• Academic interests: Career advancement opportunities that might be enhanced by specific research outcomes
• Ideological commitments: Strong personal beliefs that could influence research design or interpretation
• Editorial relationships: Service as an editor or reviewer for journals publishing related research

Disclosure Requirements and Process

All conflicts of interest must be disclosed at the time of submission through our online submission system. Authors should err on the side of over-disclosure rather than under-disclosure. The editorial team will evaluate disclosed conflicts and determine whether they represent significant concerns that require additional review or disclosure to readers.

When no conflicts exist, authors must explicitly state "The authors declare no conflicts of interest" in their disclosure statement.

Research Ethics and Compliance

Human Subjects Research Ethics

Institutional Review Board Approval

All research involving human participants must receive approval from an appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB), Ethics Committee, or equivalent body before data collection begins. Authors must provide evidence of this approval in their manuscript and be prepared to provide documentation upon request.

Studies that appear to involve human subjects but lack evidence of ethical approval will be immediately returned to authors without review.

Informed Consent Procedures

Participants must provide informed consent before participating in research, with rare exceptions for minimal-risk studies that may qualify for waived consent. The consent process must include:

• Clear explanation of the research purpose, procedures, and duration
• Description of risks and benefits associated with participation
• Assurance of confidentiality and data protection measures
• Right to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty
• Contact information for the research team and ethics committee

Privacy and Confidentiality Protection

Authors must implement appropriate measures to protect participant privacy and maintain confidentiality of personal information. This includes:

• De-identification of all personal information in publications
• Secure data storage using encryption and access controls
• Limited data sharing only with authorized research team members
• Compliance with regulations such as HIPAA, GDPR, or other applicable privacy laws

Special Populations and Vulnerable Groups

Research involving vulnerable populations requires additional ethical considerations and protections:

• Children and adolescents: Parental consent plus age-appropriate assent
• Individuals with cognitive impairments: Assessment of decision-making capacity and appropriate surrogate consent procedures
• Prisoners or detained individuals: Additional safeguards to ensure voluntary participation
• Economically disadvantaged populations: Careful attention to potential coercion or undue inducement

Animal Research Ethics

Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Approval

All research involving animals must be approved by an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or equivalent body. Authors must confirm compliance with institutional and national guidelines for animal care and use.

Ethical Principles in Animal Research

Animal research must adhere to the "3 Rs" principle:

• Replacement: Using alternative methods when possible to reduce animal use
• Reduction: Minimizing the number of animals used while maintaining scientific validity
• Refinement: Modifying procedures to minimize pain, distress, and lasting harm

Animal Welfare Standards

Authors must ensure that animal research meets appropriate welfare standards:

• Appropriate housing and environmental enrichment
• Veterinary care and health monitoring
• Humane endpoints to minimize suffering
• Pain management using appropriate analgesics and anesthetics
• Euthanasia procedures following accepted guidelines

Environmental and Safety Considerations

Risk Assessment and Management

Authors must conduct appropriate risk assessments for research involving:

• Hazardous materials: Chemicals, biological agents, or radioactive substances
• Environmental impact: Potential effects on ecosystems or communities
• Biosafety concerns: Research with infectious agents or genetically modified organisms
• Field work risks: Safety considerations for research conducted outside laboratory settings

Regulatory Compliance

Research must comply with all applicable local, national, and international regulations, including:

• Environmental protection laws and regulations
• Occupational safety and health standards
• Import/export regulations for research materials
• Biosafety and biosecurity requirements

Reviewer Responsibilities and Ethics

Fundamental Reviewer Obligations

Confidentiality and Manuscript Security

Reviewers serve as trusted guardians of unpublished research and must maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process. This responsibility includes:

• Complete confidentiality: Never discussing manuscript content with anyone not authorized by the editor
• Secure handling: Storing manuscripts and related materials securely and deleting them after the review is complete
• No unauthorized sharing: Prohibition against sharing manuscripts with colleagues, students, or other researchers
• Limited access: Ensuring that only the reviewer has access to the manuscript unless explicit permission is granted by the editor for consultation with specific experts

Breach of confidentiality is a serious ethical violation that can result in exclusion from future review opportunities and notification of the reviewer's institution.

Objectivity and Bias Prevention

Reviewers must provide fair, unbiased, and constructive evaluations based solely on scientific merit. This requires:

• Evidence-based assessment: Critiques must be supported by specific evidence and reasoning
• Constructive feedback: Comments should help authors improve their work rather than simply criticize
• Professional tone: Reviews should be respectful and professional, avoiding personal attacks or inappropriate language
• Cultural sensitivity: Avoiding bias based on authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, or English language proficiency

Conflict of Interest Recognition and Management

Reviewers must identify and appropriately handle conflicts of interest that could compromise their objectivity:

• Personal relationships: Declining to review work by family members, close friends, or recent collaborators
• Professional conflicts: Avoiding review of work by current or recent competitors, students, or supervisors
• Financial interests: Declining review when the reviewer has financial stakes in the research outcomes
• Intellectual conflicts: Stepping aside when the reviewer has strong personal or professional disagreements that would prevent fair evaluation

Review Quality Standards and Expectations

Comprehensive Manuscript Evaluation

Reviewers should provide thorough assessment of all manuscript components:

• Scientific soundness: Evaluating methodology, experimental design, and analytical approaches
• Data quality: Assessing the adequacy and appropriateness of data collection and analysis
• Statistical accuracy: Reviewing statistical methods and interpretation of results
• Literature coverage: Ensuring adequate coverage of relevant prior research
• Novelty and significance: Evaluating the originality and importance of the contribution
• Clarity and presentation: Assessing the quality of writing and organization

Constructive and Actionable Feedback

Reviews should provide specific, actionable guidance for manuscript improvement:

• Detailed comments: Specific suggestions for addressing weaknesses or concerns
• Balanced assessment: Recognition of both strengths and areas needing improvement
• Priority guidance: Clear indication of major versus minor issues
• Methodological suggestions: Specific recommendations for improving research design or analysis
• Writing guidance: Suggestions for improving clarity, organization, and presentation

Timely Review Completion

Reviewers commit to completing reviews within agreed timelines:

• Prompt acceptance: Only accepting review invitations when adequate time is available
• Timeline adherence: Completing reviews within the specified timeframe
• Communication: Promptly notifying editors of any delays or problems
• Quality maintenance: Ensuring that time constraints do not compromise review quality

Editorial Responsibilities and Standards

Editorial Independence and Decision-Making

Commitment to Academic Freedom

SENTAM Journals maintains complete editorial independence from commercial, political, and institutional pressures. Our editors make publication decisions based solely on:

• Scientific merit: The quality, rigor, and validity of the research
• Methodological soundness: Appropriateness and execution of research methods
• Significance and novelty: The importance and originality of the contribution
• Relevance to journal scope: Alignment with the journal's aims and readership
• Clarity and presentation: Quality of writing and organization

Bias Prevention and Fairness

Editors implement multiple strategies to ensure fair and unbiased evaluation:

• Diverse reviewer selection: Choosing reviewers from different geographic regions, institutions, and career stages
• Conflict management: Systematic identification and management of editorial conflicts of interest
• Standardized criteria: Consistent application of evaluation standards across all submissions
• Anonymous review: Maintaining double-blind review to minimize bias based on author characteristics

Transparency in Decision-Making

Editorial decisions are communicated clearly with:

• Detailed feedback: Comprehensive explanation of decision rationale
• Reviewer synthesis: Integration of reviewer comments with editorial assessment
• Constructive guidance: Specific suggestions for manuscript improvement when appropriate
• Clear expectations: Explicit requirements for revision when manuscripts are not rejected

Quality Assurance and Process Management

Peer Review Oversight

Editors ensure the integrity and quality of the peer review process through:

• Reviewer qualification: Selecting reviewers with appropriate expertise and experience
• Review quality monitoring: Assessing the quality and usefulness of reviewer feedback
• Timeline management: Ensuring timely completion of the review process
• Conflict resolution: Mediating disagreements between reviewers or addressing problematic reviews

Editorial Decision Consistency

Consistent editorial standards are maintained through:

• Regular calibration: Periodic review and discussion of decision criteria among editorial team members
• Documentation: Detailed records of decision rationale for future reference
• Appeal processes: Fair procedures for authors to request reconsideration of editorial decisions
• Continuous improvement: Regular evaluation and refinement of editorial procedures

Editorial Conflict of Interest Management

Identification of Editorial Conflicts

Editors must identify and appropriately manage conflicts of interest including:

• Personal relationships: Manuscripts from family members, close friends, or intimate partners
• Professional relationships: Submissions from current or recent collaborators, students, or supervisors
• Financial interests: Research that could affect the editor's financial interests
• Institutional conflicts: Manuscripts from the editor's own institution or closely affiliated organizations

Conflict Resolution Procedures

When conflicts are identified, editors must:

• Immediate recusal: Step aside from all aspects of the editorial process for the conflicted manuscript
• Alternative handling: Arrange for the manuscript to be handled by another qualified editor
• Documentation: Record the conflict and management approach in editorial files
• Transparency: Disclose significant conflicts to other editorial team members when appropriate

Misconduct Detection and Response Procedures

Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research Misconduct Categories

We recognize several categories of research misconduct that warrant investigation and potential sanctions:

• Data fabrication: Creating false or non-existent data or research results
• Data falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes to alter data or results inappropriately
• Plagiarism: Appropriating another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without appropriate credit
• Image manipulation: Inappropriate alteration of research images to misrepresent findings
• Duplicate publication: Publishing the same research findings in multiple venues without proper disclosure

Publication-Specific Misconduct

Additional forms of misconduct specific to the publication process include:

• Authorship manipulation: Inappropriate inclusion, exclusion, or ordering of authors
• Citation manipulation: Excessive self-citation or inappropriate citation practices to manipulate impact metrics
• Peer review manipulation: Suggesting false reviewer contact information or other attempts to compromise the review process
• Undisclosed conflicts: Failure to reveal significant conflicts of interest
• Protocol violations: Failure to follow established research protocols or ethical guidelines

Investigation Procedures and Due Process

Initial Assessment and Screening

When allegations of misconduct are received, we conduct a preliminary assessment to determine:

• Credibility of allegations: Whether the claims are specific, credible, and warrant investigation
• Jurisdiction: Whether SENTAM Journals has authority to investigate the alleged misconduct
• Severity assessment: The potential impact of the alleged misconduct on the scientific record
• Evidence availability: Whether sufficient evidence exists to conduct a meaningful investigation

Formal Investigation Process

When formal investigation is warranted, we follow established procedures:

• Investigation committee formation: Assembly of qualified individuals without conflicts of interest
• Evidence collection: Systematic gathering of relevant documents, data, and testimony
• Stakeholder notification: Informing relevant parties including authors, institutions, and funding agencies
• Due process protection: Ensuring fair treatment and opportunity for response from all parties
• Expert consultation: Seeking specialized expertise when technical issues are involved

Resolution and Sanctions

Investigation outcomes may result in various sanctions proportionate to the severity of misconduct:

• Correction or clarification: For minor errors or omissions
• Expression of concern: When serious questions exist about the integrity of published work
• Retraction: For severely flawed or fabricated research
• Editorial sanctions: Restrictions on future submissions or editorial service
• Institutional notification: Informing authors' institutions of serious misconduct findings

Retraction Policies and Procedures

Grounds for Retraction

Articles may be retracted when:

• Unreliable findings: Clear evidence that findings are unreliable due to misconduct or honest error
• Ethical violations: Serious breaches of research ethics that compromise the validity of the work
• Legal issues: Copyright infringement, lack of proper permissions, or other legal concerns
• Duplicate publication: Publication of substantially similar work in multiple venues
• Compromised peer review: Evidence that the peer review process was compromised

Retraction Process and Communication

When retraction is warranted:

• Stakeholder consultation: Discussion with authors, institutions, and relevant authorities
• Clear documentation: Detailed explanation of retraction reasons
• Prominent notice: Conspicuous retraction notice linked to the original article
• Database notification: Alerting indexing services and databases
• Preservation of record: Maintaining access to retracted articles with clear retraction notices

Reporting Mechanisms and Support Services

Confidential Reporting Systems

Anonymous Reporting Options

We provide multiple mechanisms for reporting ethical concerns:

• Online reporting portal: Secure web-based system for submitting concerns
• Email reporting: Dedicated email address for ethics-related reports
• Telephone hotline: Confidential phone line for reporting serious concerns
• Written correspondence: Postal mail option for those preferring traditional communication

Whistleblower Protection

We are committed to protecting individuals who report misconduct in good faith:

• Confidentiality protection: Strict maintenance of reporter confidentiality when requested
• Anti-retaliation policies: Prohibition against retaliation for good faith reporting
• Anonymous options: Systems that allow completely anonymous reporting
• Legal protection: Support for reporters facing retaliation or legal challenges

Support Services and Resources

Ethics Consultation Services

We provide expert consultation on complex ethical issues:

• Pre-submission consultation: Guidance for authors facing ethical dilemmas
• Institutional support: Resources for institutions developing ethics policies
• Educational workshops: Training programs for researchers, editors, and reviewers
• Case consultation: Expert advice on specific ethical situations

Educational Resources and Training

Our commitment to ethics education includes:

• Online training modules: Comprehensive ethics training for all stakeholders
• Best practice guidelines: Detailed guidance documents on specific ethical topics
• Case study databases: Real-world examples of ethical decision-making
• Regular webinars: Educational presentations on emerging ethical issues

Dispute Resolution Services

When conflicts arise, we offer:

• Mediation services: Neutral assistance in resolving disputes between parties
• Expert arbitration: Binding resolution of complex disputes by qualified experts
• Appeal procedures: Fair processes for challenging editorial or ethical decisions
• Counseling support: Assistance for individuals affected by misconduct or ethical violations

Continuous Improvement and Innovation

Regular Policy Review and Updates

Annual Ethics Assessment

We conduct comprehensive annual reviews of our ethics policies and procedures:

• Effectiveness evaluation: Assessment of policy implementation and outcomes
• Stakeholder feedback: Input from authors, reviewers, editors, and the broader research community
• Emerging issues: Identification of new ethical challenges and opportunities
• Best practice integration: Incorporation of new developments in publication ethics

International Standards Alignment

We continuously align our policies with evolving international standards:

• COPE guideline updates: Implementation of new Committee on Publication Ethics recommendations
• ICMJE revisions: Adoption of updated International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines
• Professional society standards: Integration of relevant discipline-specific ethical guidelines
• Regulatory compliance: Adaptation to new legal and regulatory requirements

Technology and Ethics Innovation

Advanced Detection Systems

We invest in cutting-edge technology to enhance misconduct detection:

• AI-powered plagiarism detection: Advanced algorithms for identifying various forms of plagiarism
• Image forensics: Sophisticated tools for detecting image manipulation
• Statistical analysis: Automated detection of statistical irregularities or impossible results
• Pattern recognition: Systems for identifying suspicious submission patterns

Ethical AI and Automation

As we integrate artificial intelligence into our processes, we maintain ethical oversight:

• Bias mitigation: Careful attention to preventing algorithmic bias in automated systems
• Transparency requirements: Clear disclosure when AI systems are used in editorial processes
• Human oversight: Maintaining human review and decision-making authority
• Ethical guidelines: Development of specific policies for AI use in publishing

Global Collaboration and Community Engagement

International Partnership and Cooperation

Cross-Publisher Collaboration

We actively participate in collaborative efforts to strengthen publication ethics:

• Information sharing: Coordination with other publishers on misconduct cases
• Best practice development: Collaborative development of industry standards
• Educational initiatives: Joint training and awareness programs
• Technology sharing: Collaborative development of detection and prevention tools

Professional Organization Engagement

Our involvement in professional organizations includes:

• COPE membership: Active participation in Committee on Publication Ethics activities
• International conferences: Regular participation in ethics and publishing conferences
• Standards development: Contribution to the development of international ethical standards
• Advocacy efforts: Support for policies that strengthen research integrity

Community Education and Outreach

Researcher Education Programs

We support the broader research community through:

• Ethics workshops: Educational programs for early-career researchers
• Institutional partnerships: Collaboration with universities and research institutions
• Disciplinary outreach: Specialized programs for specific research fields
• Global accessibility: Programs designed to reach researchers in all geographic regions

Public Engagement and Transparency

Our commitment to transparency includes:

• Public reporting: Annual reports on ethics activities and outcomes
• Open access resources: Free availability of ethics education materials
• Community forums: Platforms for discussion of ethical issues and challenges
• Transparency initiatives: Clear communication about our policies and procedures

Contact Information and Resources

Ethics Support Contacts

Primary Ethics Contacts

For immediate assistance with ethical concerns:

• Editor-in-Chief: editor@sentam.org">editor@sentam.org
• Confidential Hotline: +254 716 188 311 (WhatsApp - Available 24/7 for urgent matters)
• Response Commitment: Within 24 hours for urgent matters, 48 hours for routine inquiries

External Resources and Partners

International Organizations

Key external resources for ethics guidance:

• Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): publicationethics.org
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): icmje.org
• World Association of Medical Editors (WAME): wame.org
• Council of Science Editors (CSE): councilscienceeditors.org

---

Document Information:

• Last Updated: August 15, 2025
• Policy Version: 1.0
• Next Review Date: August 15, 2026
• Approval Authority: SENTAM Journals Ethics Committee

Questions about publication ethics?

Contact our Ethics Officer at ethics@sentam.local">ethics@sentam.local

Related Policies and Guidelines

• Author Guidelines - Comprehensive submission and preparation guidelines
• Peer Review Process - Detailed review procedures and standards
• Editorial Policies - Editorial independence and decision-making processes
• Open Access Policy - Our commitment to open access publishing