Publication Ethics Statement

To ensure that all processes of its publication remain fully adhered to Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Green Publishers directs all of Editors, Reviewers and Authors associated with it to fulfill the below mentioned principles while dealing with various steps of publication by it. We all aim to publish only high-quality articles so that authentic research is added to the existing pool of literature and below set rules help to achieve this aim. Despite our utmost efforts, if at any time some case of ethical issue arises, Green Publisher is committed to look into the matter and take actions deemed necessary to maintain the integrity of literature; while ensuring the safety of research community as well. DUTIES OF EDITORS: Every person associated with our Editorial office is supposed to maintain the honour of Green Publishers while performing their duties. Following ethical notes are to be given particular attention by the Editors and implied during the editorial processing of the submissions.

  • Unprejudiced evaluation process

While evaluating a submission for possible publication by the journals every decision should be made solely in the light of academic quality rather than on discriminatory basis regarding the gender, religious background, geographical or political affiliations of the authors.

  • Fulfillment of Legal Requirements:

Editors should pay particular attention that the requirements of copyright, ethical approvals from concerned committees, Disclosure of conflict of interest have been fulfilled in the submission.

  • Confidentiality:

All editorial members and technical staff are obliged to ensure the confidentiality of all submissions. Only potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and involved publishing team members may have approach to the concerned manuscript.

  • Decision Making:

Editorial decisions should be based on peer reviewers’ scholarly comments rather than on recommendations made by short, superficial peer reviewer reports not providing a rationale for the recommendations.

  • Respecting Authors’ Work:

No piece of unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript is supposed to be used by anyone who has sighted the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without a clear written consent obtained by the author. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS:

  • Constructive Evaluation:

Reviewers are instructed that a productive critical evaluation of the authors’ work must be provided, particularly regarding the appropriateness of methods used, accuracy of the results, and whether the conclusions are supported by the results presented in the article. Short, superficial peer reviewer reports which do not provide a good rationale are highly discouraged.

  • Availability Acknowledgement:

If the selected referees is not available for review of the assigned submission in the provided time frame or the submission lies outside of their field of expertise they, should inform the Editorial office immediately after receiving the submission.

  • Proper Citation:

If reviewers identify any previously published work that has been used by the authors but not properly cited, they should mention it in their report. Also, a reviewer should draw the Editor’s attention towards any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper under their personal knowledge.

  • Prompt Reporting of Conflicts:

Reviewers are requested to inform the journal editor in case of any possible conflict of interests that may positively or negatively prejudice the review report. Usually the Editorial Office keeps an utmost check over this before inviting the reviewers; however, in case of any overlook we appreciate the cooperation of reviewers in this matter. However, conducting a review of a particular submission to Green publishers which they had evaluated before, but for another journal is not regarded as a Conflict of interest.

  • Confidentiality :

Reviewers must keep all contents of the manuscript confidential. If they like a student or colleague to complete the review on their behalf, they are obliged to ask for editor’s permission to do so prior to the evaluation.

  • Concealed Identity:

All Green Publishers journals work according to the policy of double-blind peer review. Reviewers therefore, should practice extreme caution not to reveal their identity to the authors in any way in their comments.

  • Objectivity:

All reviews should be objectively and professionally conducted without any sort of personal criticism to the author. Reviewers are requested to express their analysis and comments clearly with supporting arguments. DUTIES OF AUTHORS:

  • Declaration of Conflicts of Interest:

Any possible conflict of interest of the author(s) must be clearly disclosed in the paper prior to submission.

  • Authorship of Submission:

Authors list provided with the very first submission are considered final, any subsequent change to this list will require written consent sought from all co-authors including those who have been removed.

  • Reporting Details:

Data and methods used in the research article should be presented in sufficient detail unless there is compelling justifications otherwise, such as concealing the identity of study subjects/patients.

  • Parallel Submissions:

No Simultaneous/concurrent submission of manuscripts submitted to the Green Publishers should be made to any other journal.

  • Originality of Work:

Green Publishers discourages the practice of plagiarism exceeding the generally accepted range. Submissions with more than acceptable plagiarized content may be rejected out rightly during the initial scrutiny.

  • Submission of Translations:

If the submitting author desires to publish translations of the previously published articles by some other publisher, the submission should include a suitable statement clearly indicating that the material has been translated and re-published, and be accompanied by the written permission(s) from the previous publisher and, the primary source of the material as well. If the Editor-in-Chief senses some /overlap, he/she may request the related publications to be provided to the publisher.

  • Recommendation of Reviewers:

In case Author want to suggest some reviewer for their submission, they should not recommend collaborators or colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves as peer reviewers. Recommended reviewers should have no conflicts of interest that may include (but not limited to) the below:

  1. That the reviewer is aware of your submission
  2. There has been some recent collaboration between

suggested reviewer and any of the co-authors. The suggested reviewer’s institutional email address and ORCID or Scopus ID will be required to help the Green Publishers editors verify the identity and expertise of the reviewer.

  • Permission for Copy-righted Content:

For any previously published content (including quotations, figures or tables), it is necessary to take permission to publish must be obtained from the copyright holder and provided to the publisher.

  • Identification of Post-Publication Errors:

If authors discover any error/inaccuracy in their published manuscript, the corresponding author of the manuscript should immediately contact the Editorial Office for this. The above list is subject to further inclusions; all team members are suggested to keep them updated with their local regulations and currently accepted criteria practiced in academic publishing.