Guidelines
for Ethical Publication and Presentation of Scientific Information
and Data
Members
of the Teratology Society subscribe to the Code of Ethics adopted
by the Society membership on June 8, 1990. These guidelines for
publication and presentation are complementary to the Code of
Ethics and are an extension of the philosophy embodied in the
Code as it applies specifically to publication and presentation
of information by members of the Teratology Society as they function
as authors, reviewers, editors, consultants and experts to government,
universities, industry and the courts.
| Responsibilities
for Authors |
|
- Avoid
the following unethical practices, which are unacceptable
in publications or presentations:
a. Plagiarism-presenting the work of others, in whole or in
part, as one’s own.
b. Fraud-fabrication of results or reports, in whole or in
part.
c. Suppression or distortion of data.
d. Submission of the same data simultaneously to more than
one journal unless it has been justified openly to both editors
or upon request of an editor as in a review article.
- Co-authors
should have full knowledge of and agreement with the contents
and conclusions of the paper and have made a substantial contribution
to the work.
-
Manuscripts should reference published preliminary accounts
or abstracts from the same work to permit association of preliminary
and full reports of studies.
- “Personal
communication” citations or references (oral presentations)
should have the approval of the cited individual.
-
The author must cite fairly the work of others. Appropriate
citations are an important component of scholarship.
-
For all studies involving human subjects or tissues, the following
conditions should be met:
a. The principles in the Declaration of Helsinki must be followed.
b. These studies must have received formal approval from the
appropriate institutional review board, ethical review committee
or equivalent, and such approval should be indicated in the
manuscript.
c. If there is significant risk or discomfort to subjects,
the manuscript must indicate that informed consent was obtained.
d. Photographs of patients’ faces should be included
only if there is scientific relevance, and written consent
should have been obtained for the publication of such photographs.
-
For all studies involving the use of animals, the following
conditions should be met:
a. All research animals must have been obtained and used in
compliance with federal, state, and local laws and institutional
regulations.
b. The Society recommends that animals be maintained in accordance
with the guidelines of the NIH (Guide for the Care and Use
of Laboratory Animals, 1996). Any veterinary accreditation
should be noted in the manuscript.
c. The author must have received permission from their institutional
Animal Care and Use Committee, and the manuscript must indicate
that such approval was received.
-
Authors must specify all sources of funding for the submitted
work and must also indicate any potential financial or other
interests that might be perceived to bias the research. Some
examples include, but are not limited to:
a.
The author acknowledges that he/she (or spouse or dependent)
is employed by a company which owns the patent on the
compound that appears in the manuscript.
b. The author acknowledges that he/she (or spouse or dependent)
do(es) consulting work for an organization that competes
with the organization that holds the patent on the compound
that appears in the manuscript.
c. The author acknowledges that he/she has a grant from
a company to do this research; the funding organization
does not have control over the resulting publication.
d. The author acknowledges his/her professional affiliation,
whether it be academia, government, industry or special
interest group. If the paper is the result of work-for-hire,
the sponsor of the research is acknowledged.
- For
reports of original data, at least one author (e.g., the corresponding
or principal investigator) is expected to have full access
to all of the data in the study and to take responsibility
for its accuracy.
| Responsibilities
of Reviewers |
|
- Reviewers
are obligated to make expert, critical, and unbiased scientific
and literary appraisals of reports of research, or other publications
as requested, in the fields of the reviewers’ knowledge.
-
Reviews should be done in a timely manner to not impede release
of information. If a colleague of the reviewer is asked to
review the paper, the person must be qualified in the opinion
of the editorial staff of the journal, and the colleague’s
name must be identified for the Editor as the actual reviewer
prior to the review.
-
A reviewer should not review a paper if:
a. The reviewer does not feel it his or her area of expertise.
b. The reviewer feels there may be a conflict of interest,
or,
c. The reviewer feels that a close personal, professional
or competitive relationship with the author or one of the
co-authors might bias the review.
-
Reviewer’s criticisms must be sufficiently detailed
to justify the conclusion and should be referenced if necessary
to help the author.
- The
reviewer should assess whether the work of others is properly
cited.
-
If the paper substantially resembles a published paper or
another paper under review, this should be reported to the
editor.
-
Unpublished contents of a paper under review must be considered
privileged information and must not be disclosed to anyone
outside of the review process.
| Responsibilities
of Editors |
|
- The
editor manages and implements the policies of the journal
and is responsible for the scientific and literary quality.
-
The editor, to the best of his/her ability must assure that
all authors receive confidential, expert, critical and unbiased
reviews of their work in a timely fashion.
-
An editor may not take part in the editorial management of
the review of the editor’s own papers. The editor also
should avoid conflict of interest in the review of papers
closely related to the editor’s own work or organizational
affiliation.
-
If an editor becomes aware that the main substance or conclusion
of a paper published in the editor’s journal may be
erroneous, the editor should communicate such to the original
author, if possible, and facilitate publication of a correction.
-
If an editor becomes aware of scientific misconduct related
to a manuscript published or about to be published in the
editor’s journal, the editor should consult with Chair
of the Publications Committee concerning the appropriate course
of action.
| Responsibilities
of the Publications Committee |
|
The
Teratology Society Publications Committee will investigate
any breach of these policies and make recommendations to
Teratology Society Council.
|
rev. 16-Jun-2006
© Copyright Teratology Society 1998-2005,
2006.
Please read our disclaimer.
|
Membership
