Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Annals of Proteomics and Bioinformatics (APB) maintains the highest standards of publication ethics and strictly adheres to international guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). This statement defines the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher to ensure integrity, transparency, and accountability in scientific publishing.

Upholding research ethics is a shared responsibility — APB expects all contributors to comply with the ethical codes outlined below to preserve the credibility of scholarly communication.

1. Duties of Authors

Authors are expected to present original research results accurately and objectively. Misrepresentation of data or fabrication of results constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

  • Originality: All submissions must be original and not under consideration elsewhere.
  • Authorship: All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study.
  • Plagiarism: Manuscripts will be screened using plagiarism detection software. Plagiarized content will result in rejection or retraction.
  • Conflict of Interest: Authors must disclose all financial or personal relationships that could influence their work.
  • Data Access: Authors must make raw data available for editorial or peer-review verification when requested.

Authors must cite relevant prior publications, avoid redundant submission, and follow ethical guidelines for studies involving humans or animals, including informed consent and institutional approvals.

2. Duties of Editors

The editorial team of APB ensures that all manuscripts are evaluated based solely on academic merit, free from discrimination or bias.

  • Fairness and Impartiality: Editors evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors’ nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs.
  • Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript beyond those directly involved in its processing.
  • Conflict Management: Editors will recuse themselves from handling papers in which they have a personal or professional conflict of interest.
  • Decision Transparency: Editorial decisions are made objectively, guided by reviewers’ recommendations and journal policies.

Editors have the authority to investigate ethical concerns and take corrective actions such as issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern when necessary.

3. Duties of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a critical role in ensuring the quality and credibility of published research. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, timely, and unbiased feedback.

  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are confidential documents and must not be shared or discussed with others.
  • Objectivity: Critiques should be objective and supported by clear arguments, focusing on academic quality rather than personal judgment.
  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and decline to review if they have a competing interest.
  • Plagiarism Notification: Reviewers should alert editors to any suspected plagiarism, data duplication, or ethical violations.

4. Duties of the Publisher

The publisher, Heighten Sciences Publication Incorporation (HSPIOA), ensures that all publishing processes adhere to ethical and professional standards. The publisher supports editorial independence, implements best practices for data security, and provides resources to handle ethical concerns in accordance with COPE guidelines.

In cases of alleged misconduct, the publisher collaborates with editors to conduct impartial investigations and take appropriate corrective actions.

5. Research Ethics and Integrity

Authors must comply with international research ethics standards. For human or animal studies:

  • Research must have prior approval from an institutional review board or ethics committee.
  • Informed consent must be obtained from all human participants.
  • Animal studies must follow recognized ethical frameworks such as the ARRIVE guidelines.

APB promotes data transparency and reproducibility; thus, authors must clearly describe methodologies and provide access to data upon reasonable request.

6. Misconduct Handling Procedures

The journal applies a structured approach to investigating allegations of ethical misconduct, guided by COPE flowcharts. Steps may include:

  1. Initial assessment by the editor-in-chief upon receiving a complaint.
  2. Requesting explanations or supporting evidence from the author(s).
  3. Consultation with reviewers or independent experts if needed.
  4. Taking corrective action, such as rejection, retraction, or notification to relevant institutions.

All investigations are handled confidentially, and authors are given the opportunity to respond before a final decision.

7. Retraction, Correction, and Withdrawal Policy

When significant errors or misconduct are identified post-publication, the journal may:

  • Issue a correction or corrigendum for minor factual inaccuracies.
  • Publish an expression of concern during ongoing investigations.
  • Retract the article in cases of proven data falsification or ethical violation.

All corrections and retractions remain permanently linked to the original publication to preserve the integrity of the scientific record.

8. Data Privacy and Confidentiality

APB complies with GDPR and other global privacy standards. Personal data collected through submissions or peer review is used solely for editorial purposes and never shared beyond authorized parties.

9. Statement on Publication Malpractice

APB defines publication malpractice as any act that compromises the scientific or ethical standards of the journal. This includes plagiarism, duplicate publication, falsification, unethical experimentation, or undisclosed conflicts of interest. Such cases lead to formal investigations and, where necessary, sanctions or institutional reporting.

10. Transparency and Accountability

The journal maintains transparent communication with authors, reviewers, and readers. All editorial and ethical policies are publicly accessible, and editorial decisions are documented for accountability. APB regularly reviews its ethical framework to align with the latest COPE and ICMJE recommendations.

11. Appeals and Complaints

Authors or readers may raise ethical concerns or appeal editorial decisions by contacting the editorial office. Appeals are reviewed independently to ensure fairness and due process.

12. Contact Information

For reporting ethical concerns, suspected misconduct, or inquiries regarding this policy, contact:

© 2025 Annals of Proteomics and Bioinformatics (APB) · Heighten Sciences Publication Incorporation

Source Reference: Based on COPE Core Practices, ICMJE Recommendations, and WAME Ethical Principles.