Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Engineering of Biomaterials and its Publisher, the Polish Society for Biomaterials, are following guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
General instructions are listed below, but one should always refer also to the COPE’s website for full guidance.

DUTIES OF EDITORS

Fair play and editorial independence
Submitted manuscripts are assessed by the Editors based purely and exclusively on their research merit and integrity, and its relevance to the scope of the journal. Authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation are irrelevant in the process. Editorial decisions are not influenced by external institutions nor government policies. The entire editorial process and the journal content are directed by the Editor-in-Chief, who has the full authority.

Confidentiality
Any information regarding a submitted manuscript will only be disclosed to the people involved in the editorial process, i.e. corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own research without the written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in case of a conflict of interest.


DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer reviewers aid editors in making editorial decisions and may assist authors in improving their manuscripts through their comments and revision suggestions. Peer review is an essential component of the manuscript evaluation and the scientific process.

Promptness
It is expected that the manuscript will be handled by the referee without a delay. Thus, any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or has limited time/other obligations that would hinder a prompt review, should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such. They must not be discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline to review.

Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted with objectivity, with no bias. Any comments and amendment suggestions should be fair, clearly formulated and supported with appropriate justification. The authors should be able to use them for improving their manuscript.

Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been previously reported should be cited appropriately. A reviewer should also notify editors about any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest


DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Reporting standards
Authors of original research papers should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. Information in the manuscript and references should be detailed enough to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and that the work and/or words of others, as well as the publications that influenced the shape of the authors research work were appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication
Papers describing the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal.

Authorship of the manuscript
One can be listed as an author in a manuscript if he/she fulfils following authorship criteria:
(i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.
All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section. The corresponding author should ensure that the authors list is accurate (refer to criteria above) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list. The corresponding author has to make sure that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).

Acknowledgement of sources
Proper 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.

Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.

Peer review
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

Fundamental errors in published works
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 journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.