---

Allegations of Misconduct

Publication Policies and Procedures

Tulpar Academic Publishing is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and addressing allegations of misconduct with the utmost seriousness. Our policies and procedures for the identification and handling of allegations, including plagiarism, falsification, and fabrication of data, are comprehensive and align with the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Identification Process

• Authors: Manuscripts undergo rigorous peer review, plagiarism checks, and editorial scrutiny.
• Reviewers: Reviewers are instructed to report any ethical concerns.
• Editors: Editors are vigilant in identifying and addressing misconduct.

Dealing with Allegations

• Thorough Investigation: Allegations are investigated promptly and impartially.
• Informed Decision-Making: Decisions are based on evidence, and involved parties are informed transparently.
• Correction or Retraction: Appropriate actions, including correction or retraction, are taken if misconduct is substantiated.

Preventive Measures

• Awareness: Authors, reviewers, and editors are educated about ethical standards.
• Clear Guidelines: Policies on authorship, citation, and data integrity are communicated clearly.

---

Appeals Process

Author Appeal Mechanism

We understand the importance of providing a fair and transparent process for authors who may wish to appeal editorial decisions. Tulpar Academic Publishing has established a robust appeals mechanism to address author concerns and ensure a thorough and impartial review of any appeal.

Submission of Appeals

• Authors dissatisfied with editorial decisions may submit an appeal.
• Appeals must be submitted in writing, outlining the grounds for reconsideration.

Review of Appeals

• Appeals are reviewed by an independent editorial committee.
• The committee assesses the validity of the appeal and reviews the original decision.

Communication of Findings

• Authors are informed of the outcome of the appeal in a timely manner.
• The decision of the appeals committee is final.

Confidentiality

• The appeals process maintains the confidentiality of all parties involved and ensures impartiality.

---

Complaints Process

Author Complaint Mechanism

At Tulpar Academic Publishing, we are committed to addressing author concerns through a transparent and effective complaints process. Our goal is to ensure that any complaints raised by authors are handled with the utmost care and attention.

Submission of Complaints

• Authors may submit a complaint if they have concerns regarding editorial processes or decisions.
• Complaints should be submitted in writing, clearly outlining the nature of the issue.

Review of Complaints

• A designated complaints committee, separate from the editorial team, will review the submitted complaints.
• The committee will conduct an impartial investigation into the concerns raised.

Communication of Findings

• Authors are informed of the findings and outcomes of the complaints review process.
• The journals are committed to resolving complaints in a fair and timely manner.

Confidentiality

• The complaints process maintains the confidentiality of all parties involved and ensures impartiality.

---

Conflicts of Interest

Journal Policies and Transparency

At Tulpar Academic Publishing, we prioritize transparency and integrity in scholarly publishing. To address potential conflicts of interest involving editors, authors, and reviewers, we have established clear policies and guidelines.

Editorial Team

• Editors involved in the decision-making process must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may compromise objectivity.
• The journals prohibit editors from handling submissions where they have a personal, professional, or financial connection to the author(s).

Authors

• Authors are required to disclose any financial or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation.
• The editorial teams assess these disclosures to ensure a fair and unbiased review process.

Reviewers

• Reviewers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest that may affect their ability to provide an impartial review.
• The journals ensure that reviewers are not assigned to manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

---

Authors’ Commitments

Content of the Submission

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial ‘opinion’ or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the Submission

All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims. It is important to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Conflicts of interest on the Research

Authors must declare all potential interests in a ‘Conflicts of interest’ section, which should explain why the interest may be a conflict. If there are none, the authors should state “The author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.” Submitting authors are responsible for co-authors declaring their interests. Declared conflicts of interest will be considered by the editor and reviewers and included in the published article.

Funding Sources on the Research

Authors must declare current or recent funding (including for article processing charges) and other payments, goods or services that might influence the work. All funding, whether a conflict or not, must be declared in the ‘Acknowledgments’.

Review Requirements for the Submission

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “revisions necessary”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

Erratum on the Publication

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

---

Reviewers’ Commitments

Contribution to the Decision-making Process

Reviewers are expected to contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner. Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor.

Confidentiality of the Review

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author, and not retain or copy the manuscript. Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Conflicts of interest on the Review

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Reviewers should be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and should immediately alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

---

Editors’ Commitments

Independence of the Editorial Process

Editors will act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Confidentiality of the Submission

Editors and editorial staff will 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.

Conflicts of interest on the Submission

Editors handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Decision on the Submission

Editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo double-blind peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Editors will adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature, in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Society where appropriate. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.

Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

---

Publisher’s Commitments

Tulpar Academic Publishing shall ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards outlined above. For recent and future journals, more detailed ethical procedures will be set out and brought to the attention of journal editors and editorial boards in the process of time.

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.  The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

In the event that there are documented violations of any of the above mentioned policies in any journal, regardless of whether or not the violations occurred in a journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing, the following sanctions will be applied:

• Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript.
• Immediate rejection of every other manuscript submitted to any journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing by any of the authors of the infringing manuscript.
• Prohibition against all of the authors for any new submissions to any journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing, either individually or in combination with other authors of the infringing manuscript, as well as in combination with any other authors. This prohibition will be imposed for a minimum of 36 months.
• Prohibition against all of the authors from serving on the Editorial Board of any journal published by Tulpar Academic Publishing.

In cases where the violations of the above policies are found to be particularly egregious, the publisher reserves the right to impose additional sanctions beyond those described above.