Privacy Policy

Science Park publisher editorial policy

Science Park Publisher is a multidisciplinary research area of science, technology, medical, providing open-access publishing to avoid the restrictions of others. Science park publisher is guided by the policies that are carried out by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), Therefore, the authors should carefully and accurately introduce their results, content, and conclusion to help other researchers and develop ideas for advanced science and technology.  

Affiliation

The authors must clearly state their affiliations to clarify the institution and academic position of the researcher.  The affiliation approves and supports the location of scholarly work of the published research. If you moved to another institution during the publication process, you should update the workplace of the published article and note your current affiliation.

• The full name of the institution.
• Department or organizational unit (if applicable).
• Country and region.

For collaborations, all participating institutions should be clearly mentioned, reflecting the collaborative nature of the research.

Authorship

All persons who contributed to the scientific research should be listed as authors and mention their affiliation, if there are other individual contributors, you could mention them in the acknowledgment and write their roles and responsibilities to complete the article. Crediting the significant author who worked in the research is one of the most important processes of writing the article and reflects the honesty and transparency of coworkers in data analysis, editing, experimental work, designing, interpretation, comparative study, and other relative areas. They are responsible of reviewing and editing the final version before submission and answering any major or minor comments with solutions after the review stage until the proof stage.

The corresponding author is the only one of the authors who is responsible to submit the manuscript files to journals under the umbrella of Science Park Publisher, so editors of Science Park Publisher are accountable for contacting authors and sending Emails to them. The corresponding author should ensure that the accepted article has been approved by all co-authors. 

Authors should revise the order of names and accept the list, also if the corresponding author asked the editorial board to add or remove any author or rearrangement in the author list the coauthor should send permission and agreement letter of all changes before acceptance. Moreover, the person who is being added or removed should send an agreement of changes to the submitted article. 

Authors must confirm:

• All listed authors contributed significantly.
• The manuscript has been reviewed and approved by all authors before submission.
• Any conflicts regarding authorship are resolved before submission.

Citations

Citation and referencing of appropriate and relevant literature is a fundamental part of scholarly publishing and a shared responsibility among authors, editors, and peer reviewers. Authors are expected to accurately reference original research, review articles, and other sources, including datasets, software, and methodologies, using the citation format specified by the target journal. Excessive self-citation should be avoided to maintain the credibility of scholarly metrics. Each citation must include complete details such as author names, title, year of publication, and DOI (if available). Editors and peer reviewers should not request citations unless there is a clear and valid scholarly reason. Science Park Publisher strictly prohibits citation manipulation, including citation stacking, citation cartels, or coercive citation practices. This policy aligns with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which provides guidance on ethical citation behavior and how to handle citation abuse.

Complaints

Science Park publisher allows the author to appeal the decision of journal editors and complaint to the editorial management of the peer review operation. 

Science Park Publisher welcomes your opinion of the editor’s decision and introduces good evidence and response to the comments of the editor and peer reviewers.

• The appeal must be submitted within 30 days of receiving the decision.
• Clear evidence or justification for the appeal must be provided.
• The editorial board’s decision on the appeal is final.

Policy on Article Correction, Retraction, and Removal

Authors who identify an error in their published work should promptly reach out to the journal through the contact information available on its home page. Generally, it is the responsibility of the corresponding author to report the error to the journal.

The journal Editor or a designated representative with appropriate expertise will assess the correction request and review any relevant supporting data or information. If needed, the proposed correction may be subjected to further peer review. The final decision regarding the correction method will be made by the journal Editor.

Expressions of Concern Policy

Journal editors or appointed representatives, such as members of the journal's Ethics Committee, may issue an Expression of Concern under certain circumstances. These include cases where there is insufficient but concerning evidence of research or publication misconduct that remains unresolved and requires notifying readers. An Expression of Concern may also be considered if there are doubts about the fairness, impartiality, or thoroughness of an investigation into alleged misconduct or if an investigation is ongoing, but its conclusion is expected to take a significant amount of time. Such notices can be temporary or permanent. If temporary, they are generally followed by an additional notice that outlines the investigation's outcome, which may result in a permanent Expression of Concern, a retraction or removal, or an Editor's Note indicating exoneration. This policy, established by Science Park Publisher, aims to uphold the integrity and transparency of the publication process.

Policy on Withdrawing Articles

At Science Park Publisher, Articles-in-Press are early versions of accepted articles that have not yet been published in their final form. In certain situations, these articles may be withdrawn before official publication—but only under specific conditions.

Withdrawal by Publisher

Science Park Publisher may withdraw an Article-in-Press in the following cases:

• If the article was published prematurely due to editorial or production errors.

• If the article is found to be a duplicate of another published work because of a processing mistake.

In such cases, both the HTML and PDF versions will be removed from public access and replaced with a formal withdrawal notice. This notice will explain the reason for the withdrawal and refer to Science Park Publisher’s Article Withdrawal Policy.

Author-Initiated Withdrawal Requests

Authors cannot directly withdraw a submission through the platform. However, if they wish to request withdrawal, they must:

• Send a formal email request to the journal’s editorial office.
• Provide a clear explanation and justification for the withdrawal.

Article Retraction Policy

At Science Park Publisher, article retractions are occasionally necessary, either requested by the authors or initiated by the journal editor based on feedback from the academic community. Retractions occur when errors significantly impact the validity of the research, making standard corrections insufficient, or if there are violations of the publisher’s ethical standards, such as multiple submissions, false authorship claims, plagiarism, or data manipulation.

Journal editors or assigned representatives, like members of the Ethics Committee, will consider retracting an article under the following conditions:

• There is clear evidence that the research findings are unreliable due to significant errors, fabricated data, or falsification (e.g., manipulated images).
• Instances of plagiarism are detected.
• The article has been previously published elsewhere without proper acknowledgment, permission, or justification (redundant publication).
• The work contains unauthorized or improperly obtained material or data.
• Copyrightviolations or other serious legal issues, such as defamation or privacy breaches, are identified.
• The research involved unethical practices or violated ethical standards for studies involving human participants or animals.
• There are indications of compromised peer-review processes or manipulation of the editorial system.
• Evidence shows that authorship was falsely claimed, sold, or manipulated.
• There are signs of deliberate citation manipulation to unfairly boost citations or metrics.
• Significant conflicts of interest that could affect the interpretation of the research were not disclosed.
• Any other substantial breach of the journal’s policies that compromises the article's credibility.

When an article is retracted, Science Park Publisher follows specific procedures to maintain transparency:

• A retraction notice titled “Retraction: [article title]” is published in a subsequent journal issue, signed by the editor and, when appropriate, the authors. It appears in the table of contents.
• In the online version, a link connects the retraction notice to the original article.
• Before accessing the online article, readers see a screen displaying the retraction note, ensuring they are aware of the retraction before viewing the article.
• The original article remains accessible but is marked with a visible “retracted” watermark on every page of the PDF.
• The HTML version of the retracted article is removed.

These measures ensure transparency and uphold the integrity of the publication process.

Competing and Conflict of Interest

Conflict of Interest / Competing Interests

To maintain transparency and integrity in scientific publishing, authors must openly disclose any financial or personal connections that could influence the outcome or interpretation of their research. These may include funding from organizations with a vested interest in the study, personal relationships that could impact objectivity, or ownership of patents and company shares related to the work. Other examples of potential conflicts include employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership, paid expert testimony, patent applications, or any form of financial support. If any such relationships exist, they must be clearly declared when submitting the manuscript. If there are no competing interests to report, authors should simply state: "I have nothing to declare." Science Park Publisher follows COPE and WAME guidelines and will take appropriate action, such as issuing corrections or retractions, if a conflict of interest is identified after publication.

Misconduct

Science Park Publisher is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics. Any form of misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, improper authorship practices, duplicate publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or manipulation of the peer review process, is strictly prohibited. If misconduct is suspected, the editorial team will conduct an initial investigation and may request explanations or evidence from the authors. Confirmed cases of misconduct may lead to actions such as rejection of the manuscript, retraction of the published article, notification to the author’s institution, and a ban on future submissions. All cases are handled in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Action steps:

• Allegations of misconduct will be investigated thoroughly.
• Authors will be contacted for clarification and defense.
• Proven cases of misconduct may lead to retraction and notification of the authors’ institution.

Plagiarism

As a member of Crossref and its Similarity Check initiative, Science Park Publisher is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics by actively screening all submitted manuscripts for plagiarism. Plagiarism is defined as the use of another person’s work including text, data, images, tables, or theories without appropriate citation, while self-plagiarism refers to republishing one’s own previously disseminated content as new without acknowledgment. Both forms are considered unethical and unacceptable. Authors are required to cite original sources accurately, avoid duplicate publication, obtain permission for any reused or third-party content, and clearly acknowledge the contributions of other works. Science Park Publisher strictly opposes all forms of plagiarism and duplicate submissions; any suspected misconduct will be handled in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. Confirmed violations may lead to manuscript rejection, retraction of published articles, and notification of the authors’ affiliated institutions.

Using Inclusive Language in Research

Inclusive language in scientific research ensures respect for diversity, sensitivity to differences, and equal opportunities for all. It is important to avoid assumptions about readers’ beliefs or values and to refrain from language that implies superiority based on factors such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, culture, sexual orientation, disability, or health status. Research writing should be free from bias, stereotypes, and cultural assumptions. Where possible, gender-neutral language should be used, for example, using plural nouns such as “clinicians” or “patients/clients” instead of gendered pronouns like “he” or “she.” References to personal attributes should only be included when relevant to the research. In technical terminology, it is recommended to replace terms such as “master” and “slave” with “primary” and “secondary,” and “blacklist” and “whitelist” with “blocklist” and “allowlist” to ensure neutral and inclusive language. While these guidelines provide general recommendations, they are not exhaustive or prescriptive but serve as a foundation for fostering inclusive and respectful scientific communication.

Funding sources

At Science Park Publisher, we value honesty about how research is supported. Authors must clearly state any funding they received for their work. This includes money, equipment, materials, or other help.

Please include: