Research Integrity
Publication Ethics
We expect all participants in the publishing process to uphold originality, transparency, fairness, and accountability across the full editorial lifecycle.
IORO Publications is committed to rigorous and fair scholarly publishing. Our ethics framework is aligned with internationally recognized guidance, including COPE principles and standard editorial best practices.
Principles of Transparency and Best Practice
IORO Publications adheres to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing — the joint standard of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association), and WAME (World Association of Medical Editors). In practice:
- Ownership & management: every journal is owned and published by IORO Publications (Texas, USA); ownership, editorial team, and contact details are stated on each journal's page.
- Editorial board & governance: each journal lists a named editorial board with institutional affiliations.
- Journal name & ISSN: each journal has a unique title and, once issued, its ISSN is shown on the journal page and in article metadata.
- Peer review: all research articles undergo independent peer review; the process is described in our Peer Review Policy.
- Access: all content is fully open access and free to read immediately on publication — no subscriptions, no reader charges, no embargoes.
- Copyright & licensing: articles are published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) licence, stated on every article; authors retain copyright.
- Author fees: any article-processing charges — and available waivers — are stated clearly on each journal's APC page before submission.
- Revenue & advertising: revenue derives solely from article-processing charges; IORO Publications carries no advertising, and editorial decisions are never influenced by revenue.
- Archiving & preservation: every published article receives a permanent DOI via Crossref and is archived in Zenodo for long-term preservation.
- Publishing schedule: each journal publishes on a stated, regular schedule.
- Research misconduct: allegations are identified and handled under COPE guidelines (see Misconduct Handling below).
Authors' Responsibilities
- Submit only original work with accurate attribution and complete references.
- Avoid duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous submission across journals.
- Ensure all listed authors made substantial scholarly contributions.
- Disclose conflicts of interest, funding sources, and relevant affiliations.
- Preserve and provide underlying data/materials when requested for validation.
- Promptly notify editors if serious errors are discovered post-submission or post-publication.
Reviewers' Responsibilities
- Treat all manuscripts as confidential and never use unpublished information for personal advantage.
- Declare conflicts and recuse where objectivity could be compromised.
- Provide constructive, evidence-based, respectful feedback within agreed timelines.
- Flag suspected plagiarism, image manipulation, data irregularities, or ethical red flags.
Editors' Responsibilities
- Decisions are made on scholarly merit, scope, and integrity—not commercial or personal interests.
- Maintain fair process, confidentiality, and transparent editorial communication.
- Manage reviewer selection for expertise, diversity, and conflict-free assessment.
- Issue corrections/retractions when required to protect the scholarly record.
Research Integrity & Human/Animal Ethics
Where applicable, manuscripts must include ethics-approval details, informed consent statements, trial registration identifiers, and adherence to discipline-specific reporting standards.
Misconduct Handling
Allegations are evaluated using structured editorial procedures, which may include author contact, data requests, expert consultation, and institutional notification. Outcomes may include rejection, correction, expression of concern, retraction, or sanctions.
Post-Publication Updates
- Correction: for substantive but non-invalidating errors.
- Expression of Concern: when an investigation is ongoing and risk is credible.
- Retraction: for unreliable findings or serious ethical breach.
Appeals & Complaints
Authors may appeal editorial outcomes by submitting a detailed rationale and supporting evidence. Appeals are assessed independently and may involve additional editorial review.