We at BOHR Publishing are committed to upholding standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process and we follow the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics COPE. We expect strict adherence to standards of ethical practices from all the parties involved, i.e., expert reviewers, editors, and authors. Our prime objective is to educate researchers, authors, contributors, reviewers, and editors on understanding and delivering those standards, in partnership with others.

Authorship

By an author we mean an individual who has made considerable academic contributions to a scientific investigation. For example, one who contributes significantly to the conception, design, execution, analysis and interpretation of the data, participates in drafting, reviewing or revising the manuscript for intellectual content and approves the manuscript for publication.

Corresponding Author

One author should be designated as a corresponding author if there are multiple authors in a research paper. The corresponding author assumes overall responsibility for the manuscript by providing significant contribution to the research effort, and may not necessarily be the principal investigator or project leader.

Co-authors

All the co-authors of a research paper are responsible for providing consent authorship to the corresponding author. They should contribute to the research work, take responsibility for appropriate portions of the content, acknowledging that they have reviewed and approved the manuscript. They are also responsible for the content of all appropriate portions of the manuscript including the integrity of any applicable research.

Contributorship

In the Acknowledgement section, corresponding author should also specify individuals or institutions who have also contributed to the article but are not its authors. All acknowledged individuals should agree to be acknowledged. Besides, an editor may ask the corresponding author to provide the written consent from all acknowledged individuals for being mentioned in the Acknowledgement.

According to CRediT (https://casrai.org/credit/) contributors’ roles are defined as follows:

1. Conceptualisation: Ideas; formulation or evolution of research goals and aims.
2. Data curation: Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub and maintain research data (including software code for interpreting the data itself).
3. Formal analysis: Application of statistical, mathematical, computational or other formal techniques to analyse or synthesise study data.
4. Funding acquisition: Acquisition of financial project support.
5. Investigation: Conducting research, performing experiments, collecting data.
6. Methodology: Development or design of methodology; creation of models.
7. Project administration: Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and implementing.
8. Resources: Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, laboratory samples, computing resources, other analysis tools.
9. Software: Programming, software development; designing computer programs; implementation of computer code and supporting algorithms; testing of existing code components.
10. Supervision: Leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and implementing.
11. Validation: Verification of the overall research.
12. Visualisation: Preparation, creation and presentation of the published work.
13. Writing – original draft: Preparation, creation and presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft.
14. Writing – review & editing: Preparation, creation and presentation of the published work by those from the original research group (critical review, commentary or revision for pre- or post-publication stages).

Duties of Authors

• Authors should not submit the same manuscript in the same language simultaneously to more than one journal. The rationale for this standard is the potential for disagreement when two (or more) journals claim the right to publish a manuscript that has been submitted simultaneously to more than one journal, and the possibility that two or more journals will unknowingly and unnecessarily undertake the work of peer review, edit the same manuscript, and publish the same research paper.
• Manipulation of data and results, intellectual property theft, and plagiarism are highly unacceptable, as it is beyond the ethics of an author. Information obtained from various media can be provided in the manuscript only with prior permission from the owner of the source of information or data.
• Authors and co-authors are requested to review and ensure the accuracy and validity of all the results prior to submission. Any potential conflict of interest should be informed to the editor well in advance.
• All authors are requested to submit the copyright transfer form without failure once they receive the acceptance of their research paper for publication.
• Manuscripts should include a signed statement of informed consent to publish (in online) patient descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees from all persons (parents or legal guardians for minors) who can be identified in such written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees. Such persons should be shown the manuscript before its submission.
• Sharing with public media, government agencies, or manufacturers the scientific information described in a paper or a letter to the editor that has been accepted but not yet published violates the policy of our journals.
• Authors should declare that all work in their submitted paper is original, and cite content from other sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.
• Authors must ensure their contribution does not contain any defamatory matter or infringe any copyright or other intellectual property rights or any other rights of any third party.
• Authors should ensure that their manuscript as submitted is not under consideration (or accepted for publication) elsewhere. Where sections of the manuscript overlap with published or submitted content, this should be acknowledged and cited. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should declare any potential conflicts of interest relating to a specific research paper. Authors should inform the editor or publisher if there is a significant error in their published piece, and work with the editor to publish an erratum, addendum, or retraction where necessary.

The authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.

In accordance with the position statement of the Committee on Publication Ethics, the policy with regard to artificial intelligence (AI) tools and large language models such as ChatGPT is as follows:

• An AI tool cannot be listed as an author of a paper as they are not legal entities
• Authors who use AI tools in the writing of a manuscript, production of images or graphical elements, or collection and analysis of data must disclose this use in the Methods or Acknowledgments section of the paper
• This disclosure must transparently and specifically state how the AI tool was used, which tool was used, and which sections of the paper are affected. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscripts, even the parts produced by an AI tool, and are therefore liable for any breach of publication ethics and for any inaccuracies

Duties of Reviewers

• Reviewers should follow the review guidelines and decide on the articles with special reference to originality and novelty,
• Reviewers should understand that the peer review process is confidential and the information should not be used for personal advantage.
• Reviewers should clearly understand that the review process should be unbiased and the authors deserve full credit for their work. There shall be no personal criticism of the author.
• 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.
• Reviewers should submit a comprehensive and substantial peer review report in a timely manner. If there is any delay, it should be communicated to the editor.
• Reviewers should identify the mention of published work in an article that has not been cited by the authors
• Reviewers should also bring to the editorial committee's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the article under consideration and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.
• Reviewers should have a look at the assigned manuscript and arrive at a decision regarding whether the paper fits within the stated scope of the journal or not. They should evaluate the manuscript within the provided timeline in order to facilitate timely completion of the review process.
• Confidential remarks to be done and the reviewer can advise the editor for acceptance, rejection, or modification. Their comments and reviews must never be influenced by race, religion, nationality, ethnicity, language, origin, gender, or any political agencies.

Duties of Editors

• Editors should look for the views of associate editors, authors, readers, reviewers, and editorial board members regarding ways of improving their journal's content. They also must endeavour to set higher standards for the journal whenever possible.
• If the author has used information of certain individuals, specifically in any of his or her medical or scientific records, the editorial team must look for written consent from the individual for the record to qualify for publishing
• The editors need to check the validity of the scientific facts stated
• The editorial board members must assure that published content is original. The reliability of the author's work is a must, so there must be proper citation and the original source of the content should be named.
• The final decision regarding modification, acceptance, or rejection of a manuscript rests solely with the editor.
• The comments that are given by the peer reviewers will be strictly followed after which the authors will be requested to modify their manuscript according to the reviewer’s suggestions.
• Editorial decisions should be objective, autonomous, and non-discriminatory to meet the Diversity Equity and Inclusion Principles for nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, gender, and religion of the authors.
• Editors should understand that the peer review process is confidential. The review process should not be shared with anyone outside the peer review process.
• Editors should automatically reject manuscripts that are inappropriate or out of scope of the journal.
• Editor-in-Chief should discuss all matter regarding publication with the editorial board members before making a final decision.
• Editors must investigate and report to the Editor-in-Chief if they receive information that a manuscript is plagiarized, under consideration elsewhere, or has already been published.
• Editorial staff must not disclose any information related to a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and other editorial staff.
• Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed
• Editors should not reverse their decisions, not overturn the decisions of previous editors without serious reasons
• Editors should ensure all research materials to be published conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines
• Any suspicion of misconduct should be immediately acted upon by the editor, and make full efforts in resolving the problem
• Editors should not reject papers based on suspicion. They should have proof of misconduct
• Editors should not allow any conflict of interest between journal management staff, authors, reviewers, and editorial board members

Duties of Publisher

• As the publisher of this journal, we offer editors a contract outlining their responsibilities, rights, and power. We use mutually agreed-upon metrics to evaluate the editor's performance, such as but not limited to readership, manuscript submission and handling times, and different journal metrics.
• As the Publishers of this Journals, we do not directly or indirectly influence decisions on the evaluation, selection, scheduling, or editing of specific articles
• As Publishers of this journals, we give our editors direct access to the highest level of ownership, rather than a delegated manager or administrative officer, to ensure editorial freedom in practice.

Ethical oversight

BOHR Publishers is is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. This policy encompasses various aspects of ethical oversight to ensure the protection of participants, and confidential data, as well as the ethical conduct of business and marketing practices. The journal follows the Core Practices outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Consent to Publication

BOHR Publishers requires authors to obtain appropriate consent from all individuals or entities mentioned in the research or involved in the study. This includes consent to publish identifiable information, images, or other personally identifiable data. Authors should provide documentation of consent when submitting their manuscripts.

BOHR Publishers is sensitive to research involving vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly individuals, mentally challenged individuals, or other marginalized groups. Authors should adhere to ethical guidelines when conducting research on such populations and should provide a clear justification for the inclusion of vulnerable participants.

Handling Confidential Data

BOHR Publishers ensures the confidentiality and security of any confidential data provided during the submission and review process. Reviewers and editorial staff are required to treat all submitted materials with confidentiality and must not disclose any information regarding the submitted manuscripts to any unauthorized individuals.

Ethical Business/Marketing Practices

BOHR Publishers is committed to ethical business and marketing practices. The journal does not engage in any practices that may compromise the integrity of the publishing process or mislead authors or readers. BOHR Publishers does not support any form of predatory publishing, non-standards, or unethical marketing strategies.

Compliance and Reporting

Authors should comply with all aspects of this ethical oversight policy and provide full disclosure of any potential ethical concerns during the submission process. Failure to adhere to ethical guidelines may result in rejection or retraction of the manuscript, as well as other appropriate actions.

Review of the Policy

BOHR Publishers will periodically review and update this policy to ensure its effectiveness and alignment with best ethical practices. Any revisions to this policy will be communicated to authors and made publicly available on the journal's website.

Conflict of Interest

• The editor should have systems for managing his own conflicts of interest as well as those of his staff, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Dealing with possible misconduct

• The editor has a duty to act if he/she suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is brought to him. This duty extends to both published and unpublished papers.
• The editor should not simply reject papers that raise concerns about possible misconduct. He/she is ethically obliged to pursue alleged cases.
• The editor should first seek a response from those suspected of misconduct. If he/she is not satisfied with the response, he/she should ask the relevant employers, or institution, or some appropriate body (perhaps a regulatory body or national research integrity organization) to investigate.
• The editor should make all reasonable efforts to ensure that a proper investigation into alleged misconduct is conducted; if this does not happen, the editor should make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem. This is an onerous but important duty.

Intellectual property

The editor should be alert to intellectual property issues and work with his publisher to handle potential breaches of intellectual property laws and conventions.

Best practice for the editor would include:

• Adopting systems for detecting plagiarism (e.g. software, searching for similar titles) in submitted items (either routinely or when suspicions are raised)
• Supporting authors whose copyright has been breached or who have been the victims of plagiarism.
• Being prepared to work with his publisher to defend authors’ rights and pursue offenders (e.g. by requesting retractions or removal of material from websites) irrespective of whether his journal holds the copyright

Plagiarism

BOHR Publishers is committed to publish original and unpublished material to maintain the integrity of the scientific record. The corresponding author must affirm that all of the other authors have read and approved of the manuscript. All research papers submitted BOHR Publishers are screened for plagiarism. If a research paper contains traces of plagiarism, BOHR Publishers will lead an investigation on the matter and will take further action depending on the type of plagiarism. Further, authors must assure that the manuscript is not being considered for publication in whole or in part elsewhere. Processing on manuscripts found to have been published elsewhere or under review will be suspended and authors will consequently suffer sanctions.

Citation Manipulation

Citation manipulation refers to the publication of a research paper primarily to increase an author's number of citations. This is against our ethical guidelines and we strongly advise authors not to indulge in similar activities.

Sanctions

In the case of a complaint of misconduct, BOHR Publishers will carry out an investigation following the COPE guidelines. All stakeholders will be given an opportunity to share their views on the matter. If the complaint raises valid concerns, the journal will implement sanctions on authors according to the severity of the breach.

Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript, (ii)Immediate rejection of every other manuscript submitted to any journal published by any of the authors of the infringing manuscript, (iii) Prohibition will be imposed for a minimum of 36 months against all of the authors for any new submissions to any journal, either individually or in combination with other authors of the infringing manuscript, and (iv) Prohibition against all of the authors from serving on the Editorial Board of any journal.

BOHR Publishers might find it compulsory in some cases to rectify certain pieces of literature. In such cases, BOHR Publishers will abide by the COPE retraction guidelines. An erratum, or correction of an article, should be issued if:

1. A small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of an honest error)
2. The author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e., a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included)

Manuscripts should be retracted if:

1. Journal editors have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or an honest error (e.g., miscalculation or an experimental error)
2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
3. It constitutes plagiarism
4. It reports unethical research

Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if:

1. They receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors
2. There is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors' institution will not investigate the case
3. They believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive, or an investigation is underway but a judgment will not be available for a considerable period of time.

Data Sharing and reproducibility

We require that authors make their data openly available and accessible to readers upon publication, either by depositing it in a recognized public repository or by including it as supplementary material to the article.

We encourage authors to use open data formats and to provide detailed metadata to enable data reuse and interpretation by other researchers.

We require that authors provide a data availability statement in the article, indicating where the data can be accessed and any restrictions or limitations on data sharing.

Reproducibility

We encourage authors to provide detailed descriptions of the methods used in their research and to make their code openly available to enable the reproducibility of their results.

We may require that authors provide access to raw data and analysis code upon request

Data Repository

BOHR Publishers encourage authors to select a data repository that issues a persistent identifier, preferably a digital object identifier.

We follow an open-access data repository mode. Furthermore, we follow a double-anonymous peer review policy and a data policy that mandates sharing. Hence, we request that authors deposit the data in a repository that preserves anonymity, i.e., blinds the details of the authors

Example repositories

• Figshare – allows authors to create a peer review link for uploaded files. Note that this link is only temporary and the full Digital Object Identifier (DOI) should be used in the regular version of the submission.
• Dryad – also offers ‘private for peer review link’ functionality ahead of data undergoing curation.
• Zenodo – allows files to be uploaded as a restricted record to create a link to share with reviewers. Files should then be made available once peer review is complete and the article is published.
• OSF – allows files stored in a project to have a view only link created to preserve the anonymity of the authors during peer review.

BOHR Publishers Journal has electronic backup and preservation of access to the content via PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN).

PKP has developed the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve OJS journals. The LOCKSS program offers decentralized and distributed preservation, seamless perpetual access, and preservation of the authentic original version of the content. The PKP PN ensures that journals that are not part of any other digital preservation service (such as CLOCKSS or Portico) can be preserved for long-term access.

Post Publication Discussion and Corrections BOHR Publishers encourages post publication debates by submitting a letter to the editor. Post-publication corrections will be published alongside the original article.

Corrected manuscripts will be published alongside the original manuscript, so readers can always find the most up-to-date version. All versions will be permanently available and linked to the same DOI.