ISSN - 2790-9778
Our Journal recommends the use of Creative Commons licenses to inform readers how published content can be used. We do not specify which license should be used. You may select the Creative Commons license that best meets the needs of the journal, or give authors the option to choose a license for their paper.
You may not add to or adapt the terms of a Creative Commons license. This means you cannot impose restrictions on authors or users that conflict with the provisions of the license. Creative Commons licenses state clearly that "For the avoidance of doubt, where Exceptions and Limitations apply to Your use, this Public License does not apply".
In some cases, we will accept a publisher's own license if it is broadly equivalent to one of the Creative Commons licenses.
The initial copyright of a paper is held by the authors. When publishing that paper the copyright may continue to be held by the author, or can be licensed or transferred to the publisher.
IJMHC recommends that allow authors to retain the copyright of their papers without restrictions. Authors will then grant the publisher the right of first publication,
and other non-exclusive publishing rights.
Even when the author retains copyright, restrictions may sometimes be imposed by the publisher:
Copyright terms must not contradict the licensing terms or the terms of the open access policy.
“All rights reserved” is never appropriate for open access content.
"Fair use" is not open access and we do not accept journals with these restrictions.
The terms of the Creative Commons (or other) license do not apply to the copyright holder. This means that when the author retains copyright without restrictions, the license applies to the readers and the publisher.
But the license applies to the readers and the author when:
The journal is a Internal peer reviewed journal. This statement spells out ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article for this journal, i.e., the author, the editors, the peer-reviewers, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
The Editor of journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles accepted for publication after undergoing double blind peer review should be published. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the journal subject to such legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. However, Editor does not have the authority to influence the reviewers who are conducting the blind review of the articles submitted for peer review.
Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
The Editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.
Internal Peer review assists the reviewers in making editorial decisions, while editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. The reviewers don't know the author's identity, as any identifying information will be stripped from the document before review. Reviewers' comments to the editors are confidential and before passing on to the author will be made anonymous. The names of the reviewers remain strictly confidential; with their identities known only to Editor.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the Editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, or discussed with, others except as authorized by the Editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain enough detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and is unacceptable.
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
As defined by the World Association of Medical Editors (http://www.wame.org/resources/publication-ethics-policies-for-medical-journals):
Plagiarism is the use of others' published and unpublished ideas or words (or other intellectual property) without attribution or permission, and presenting them as new and original rather than derived from an existing source. The intent and effect of plagiarism is to mislead the reader as to the contributions of the plagiarizer. This applies whether the ideas or words are taken from abstracts, research grant applications, Institutional Review Board applications, or unpublished or published manuscripts in any publication format (print or electronic).
IJMHC is a member of CrossCheck by CrossRef and quilbot - a plagiarism screening service that verifies the originality of content submitted before publication. iThenticate checks submissions against millions of published research papers, and billions of web content. Authors, researchers and freelancers can also use iThenticate to screen their work before submission by visiting http://www.ithenticate.com.
Plagiarism is scientific misconduct and will be addressed as such. When plagiarism is detected at any time before publication, the Medicine® editorial office will take appropriate action as directed by the standards set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). For additional information, please visit http://www.publicationethics.org
The journal requires all procedures and studies involving human subjects
to have been carried out according to the ethical guidelines outlined in the
Declaration of Helsinki and have involved no illegal commercial
transactions, the use of organs or other material from executed prisoners,
or other unethical practices. For transplantation research, authors must
include a statement in their submission verifying the source of
The report of any research involving human beings or experimental subjects must be accompanied by a statement to be included in the Additional Information section of the submission process, indicating the mechanism used for reviewing the ethics of the research conducted.
Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
A brief acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
Sources of funding for the research reported in the article should be duly acknowledged at the end of the article.
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the Editor and cooperate with the editors to retract or correct the paper.
As IJMHC is an Open Access journal authors are entitled to make their article publicly available according to the terms of the CC BY licence:
When posting, distributing or reusing Open Access articles, the journal should be clearly attributed as the original place of publication and correct citation details should be given. Authors should also deposit the URL/DOI of their published article in any repository, in addition to the Version of Record.
Key Type of security: RSA, 2,048-bit