Publication Ethics

Editorial Policies

Journal of Pierre Fauchard Academy is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record, Publication Ethics, and Publication Malpractice Statement. It is based on the Code of Conduct and Best Publishing Practice in scientific publications, which includes the Recommendations for the Conduct Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journal (ICMJE) and Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (joint statement by COPE, WAME, and OASPSA). Journal of Pierre Fauchard Academy encourages its editors to follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) “Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors”.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the false depiction of others’ words, ideas, or expressions as one's unique work. It happens when someone uses someone else's thoughts or creations without properly citing them which can happen with or without the original author's consent. Journal of Pierre Fauchard Academy also considers “self-plagiarism” as plagiarism. When an author uses a passage from their previously published work without properly citing it in their recently submitted manuscript, that is an example of self-plagiarism. iThenticate software is provided to our editors and reviewers as part of manuscript submission system.

Peer Review

Journal of Pierre Fauchard Academy relies on double-blind Peer review to assess the quality of the manuscript to be published. Independent researchers in the relevant research areas assess submitted manuscripts for originality, validity, and significance to help editors determine whether a manuscript should be published in the journal. Journal follows a double-blind review process, in which the author identities are undisclosed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. The journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on the Peer Review Process and Ethical Guidelines for the reviewers.

Conflicts of Interest

Journal of Pierre Fauchard Academy requires the authors to sign a disclosure form at the time of manuscript submission. Authors are expected to disclose any conflict or financial interest impacting the outcome of the study in which authors or any employment, consultation, ownership, honorarium, patent application, testimony, etc. are involved. Any project funded by the industry must pay special attention to the full declaration of funder involvement. In case there’s no role, please state that sponsors have no role in the design, execution, recognition, or writing of the study. Once the manuscript is accepted, the Conflict-of-interest information will be communicated in a published statement. Please visit the COPE guidelines on Conflict of Interest/Competing Interests for more details.

Retraction Policy

Journal of Pierre Fauchard Academy requires identifying the retracted article, including the title and authors in the retraction heading or by citing the retracted article. Journal follows the COPE Retraction guidelines.

Journal policy on In-House Manuscript Submissions

The in-house manuscript submission process contains the work of any editorial board member, is not allowed to be reviewed by that editorial board member, and all decisions regarding this manuscript are assigned by an independent editor. Furthermore, these manuscripts are reviewed by the two external reviewers as well.

Patient Consent Forms

Concerned participants should make their decision whether they want to participate or continue participating in the research. It should be done through a patient consent form process of an informed patient in which personal details are accurately informed of the purpose, methods, benefits, risks, and alternative information about the research. Understand this information and how it relates to their clinical situation in research or interests, and make a voluntary decision about where to participate or not. A statement to the effect that such consent had been obtained must be considered in the Materials and Methods section of your manuscript. If required, the Editors may request a copy of consent forms.

Ethics Committee Permission

Every research and studies involving humans need to have approval for the study from the respective Institutional Review Board (IRB) for human studies. These guidelines may vary from country to country, and specific guidelines need to be followed. The IRB number and protocol number should be stated in the manuscript.

In case the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki’s ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects were followed, they should be stated in the methodology section of the manuscript. One can visit the WMA Declaration Policy for more details.

The latest Core Practices have been followed, which apply to publishing scholarly studies for editors, journal publishers, and institutions, as outlined by the COPE Core Practices.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Editor Responsibilities

Publication Decisions: The editors are liable for the decision on accepting, rejecting, or modifying requests to the manuscript. In some instances, editors may require multiple rounds of review and modification. The editors communicate review comments promptly and are always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions, and maintain the integrity of the academic record. The editor reserves the right to edit, clarify, or precise the manuscript as deemed necessary.

Fair Review Process: The editor's decisions to accept or reject a manuscript for publication should be based solely on the manuscript's significance, authenticity, clarity, and the study's relevance to the journal. The editor must ensure that each manuscript submitted to the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content, regardless of the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality: The editor and editorial staff always ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor and editorial board members of the journal shall not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her research without the author’s explicit written consent.

Relations with Authors: Editors should implement all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the content they publish, recognizing the journals and sections within journals with different aims and standards. The guideline should be regularly updated. Editors should not reverse decisions to accept manuscripts unless serious issues are identified related to the submission.

Authors Responsibilities

Publication guidelines: Authors must follow the Submission Guidelines of the journal.

All authors must contribute significantly to the research, and statements of all data in the articles must be authentic. Authors must ensure that the research work they are submitting is entirely original. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere. They must appropriately cite the work. Authors sign a declaration stating that the manuscript and the illustrations within are authentic, or that he/she has taken all necessary steps to avoid breach of copyright.
Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Submission of the same paper to more than one journal constitutes an unethical publishing practice. All authors who contributed to the manuscript must have significantly contributed to the research. The author submitting the manuscript to the journal ensures that all contributing co-authors are included in the author list, except those who didn’t contribute.
Authors must notify the editors about any conflicts of interest that may influence the manuscript. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes at any point if the author(s) find a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript.

Reviewers Responsibilities

Confidentiality: Reviewers must keep all received manuscripts confidential. Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be disclosed to others, and manuscripts should be treated confidentially.
Objectives and Standards: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should not review manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, and other relationships or connections with any of the authors, associated institutions, and companies with the paper(s).
Promptness: In case a reviewer is unable to review the manuscript within the stipulated time, they should notify the editor promptly and withdraw from the review process.
Acknowledgment of sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have cited all relevant published work referred to in the paper in the endnotes and bibliography. Reviewers will bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published or unpublished content. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in the review.
Review evaluation: Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on content regardless of the authors’ race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious belief, citizenship, political orientation, or social class.

Publisher Responsibilities

Publishers should provide practical support to the editor and executive editorial board, so they can follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal, ensure the autonomy of editorial decisions, and protect intellectual property and copyright.
Always be willing to publish rectifications, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
Maintain the integrity of the academic record and preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
Committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensuring accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our digital archives. One can visit for more details on the Innovative archiving policy.
Ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards defined above.

Each research manuscript and other types are subjected to thorough peer review, usually by at least two external peer reviewers. Once the initial scrutiny by the journal editors for suitability in the journal is done, the editor will invite appropriate independent reviewers with specific expertise. The editor's decision is made based on these reviewer reports, which are available to the authors upon decision. In case the editor of the journal is an author who submitted, adequate steps are taken to ensure blinding of the editor from the submission during peer review. Detailed information about the journal's specific Peer Review Model is available on the journal’s information pages.

Penalty

Duplicate Submission: In case a duplicate submission is found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. On confirmation of the duplicate submission as an internal thing, the following actions must be imposed. The review process will be terminated, the reason must be notified to reviewers, the editorial board, authors, and corresponding authors, and all the authors will be marked as blacklisted, and these authors won’t be able to submit any manuscript to these journals for the next three years.

Duplicate Publication: In case a duplicate publication is found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. Once the duplicate publication is confirmed as intentional, it should be reported to editors, authors, etc.