Publication Ethics

The GMB Case Reports is committed to upholding the highest standards of ethical behavior in the publication of medical and biomedical case reports. All parties involved in the publishing process—authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—are expected to adhere to the principles of integrity, transparency, and accountability. This policy outlines the ethical responsibilities of all contributors and establishes procedures for addressing ethical issues, including misconduct and conflicts of interest.

1. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors who submit manuscripts to GMB Case Reports must comply with the following ethical standards:

1.1 Originality and Plagiarism

Original Work: Authors must ensure that their submission is an original piece of work and has not been previously published or under consideration by another journal.
Plagiarism: Authors should avoid plagiarism in all its forms, including self-plagiarism. All sources, including previous work by the authors, must be properly cited, and direct quotations must be clearly indicated. GMB Case Reports uses plagiarism detection software to verify the originality of submitted manuscripts.

1.2 Data Integrity

Accuracy of Data: Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the data and results presented in their manuscript. Falsification, fabrication, or manipulation of data is considered unethical and unacceptable.
Data Sharing: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data supporting their findings for editorial or peer review and should be prepared to make their data available if necessary, while respecting patient confidentiality.

1.3 Authorship Criteria

Contribution: All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported research.
Acknowledgment: Those who have contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the manuscript with their consent.
Corresponding Author: One author should be designated as the corresponding author, who takes responsibility for the manuscript and its communication with the journal.

1.4 Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper Citation: Authors must give proper credit to the work of others and cite all relevant sources that have influenced or contributed to the manuscript.

1.5 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Financial and Non-Financial Interests: Authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could be perceived as potential conflicts of interest. This includes funding sources, employment, consultancies, or personal relationships that could affect the research outcomes or interpretation.

1.6 Ethical Approvals

Research Ethics: For any research involving human participants or animals, authors must provide evidence of approval from an appropriate ethics review board (IRB) and confirm that all ethical guidelines have been followed, including informed consent from patients when applicable.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

The editorial team at GMB Case Reports is responsible for ensuring the integrity, fairness, and quality of the journal’s content. Editors must adhere to the following ethical guidelines:

2.1 Fair Play and Impartiality

Objective Evaluation: Editors must evaluate all submissions based on their academic and scientific merit, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, or political beliefs of the authors.

2.2 Confidentiality

Manuscript Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Manuscripts should not be shared with anyone outside of the editorial team and assigned reviewers, unless authorized by the authors.

2.3 Conflict of Interest

Recusal: Editors should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest (e.g., manuscripts authored by close colleagues or personal connections) and assign the manuscript to another editor.

2.4 Decision Transparency

Editorial Decisions: Editors are responsible for making publication decisions based on the reviewers' recommendations, scientific rigor, and ethical standards. The decision-making process should be transparent and documented.

2.5 Handling Misconduct

Investigation of Misconduct: Editors are obligated to take action if they suspect misconduct, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research. This may include contacting the authors, conducting an investigation, and, if necessary, retracting or correcting published articles.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality and integrity of published research. Reviewers are expected to follow these ethical guidelines:

3.1 Confidentiality

Confidential Review: Reviewers must treat the manuscripts they receive as confidential and must not share the manuscript or discuss it with others, except with the editor's permission.

3.2 Objective and Constructive Feedback

Unbiased Review: Reviewers should provide an objective, unbiased, and constructive assessment of the manuscript, focusing on its scientific quality, clarity, and contribution to the field.
Avoiding Personal Criticism: Reviews should be written respectfully and without personal or derogatory comments about the authors.

3.3 Acknowledgment of Sources

Identifying Missing Citations: Reviewers should identify any relevant work not cited by the authors. If any form of plagiarism or overlap with previously published work is suspected, it should be reported to the editor.

3.4 Conflicts of Interest

Recusal for Conflict: If reviewers have any conflicts of interest, such as personal or professional relationships with the authors, they should recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript.

4. Procedures for Handling Ethical Misconduct

GJMBC takes allegations of misconduct seriously and follows a systematic process to address them. Misconduct includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, data falsification, redundant publication, and undisclosed conflicts of interest.

4.1 Initial Investigation

Reporting Misconduct: Any allegations of misconduct can be reported to the Editor-in-Chief by authors, reviewers, or readers. The journal will conduct an initial investigation to gather relevant information.

4.2 Actions in Case of Misconduct

Minor Violations: For minor ethical issues (e.g., missing citations), the authors may be asked to correct the manuscript before publication.
Serious Violations: In cases of serious misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data manipulation), the journal may take the following actions:
- Reject the manuscript if it is under review.
- Retract the published article with a public retraction notice.
- Notify the authors’ institution, funding bodies, or regulatory authorities as necessary.

4.3 Retraction and Corrections

Retraction Policy: Articles may be retracted if there is clear evidence of misconduct or major errors. A retraction notice will be published explaining the reason for retraction.
Corrections: If a significant error is identified after publication that does not amount to misconduct, the authors may be asked to publish a correction or erratum.

5. Ethical Guidelines for the Publisher

The publisher of GMB Case Reports is committed to ensuring that the journal adheres to ethical publishing practices and works closely with editors to uphold these standards.

Support for Ethical Standards: The publisher ensures that editorial decisions are free from external influence and supports the journal’s efforts to detect and prevent misconduct.
Long-Term Preservation: The publisher is responsible for ensuring the long-term preservation and accessibility of published content through digital archiving and backup systems.

By following this publication ethics policy, GJMBC aims to foster a culture of integrity, respect, and excellence in medical and biomedical research. All contributors are encouraged to uphold these standards, ensuring that the journal continues to contribute positively to scientific advancement and clinical practice.