Statement on Ethics and Malpractice
The Journal of Epidemiology and Infection Control (RECI) follows the best practice guidelines on ethics and malpractice of the Committee on Publication Ethics and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and related organizations, as stated on the DOAJ pages under Transparency and Best Practices.
Publication Ethics and Publication Mispractice Policy
RECI is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publishing ethics and supporting ethical research practices by adhering to the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. Journal editors refer reviewers to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers as appropriate. Allegations of misconduct are investigated in accordance with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines to the extent possible.
RECI has adopted a comprehensive statement on publication ethics and publication malpractice, compiled using the publication ethics resources and in accordance with the recommendations and guidelines of COPE:
RECI Editors’ Duties
Fair play
Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content, regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.
Manuscripts submitted to RECI will be evaluated solely on the basis of their intellectual content, without any distinction or discrimination related to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality or political convictions of their authors.
Confidentiality
The Editor-in-Chief and/or any other member of the editorial team do not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors and the publisher, as appropriate.
The Editor-in-Chief and other members of the RECI editorial team undertake to maintain the confidentiality of all information related to submitted manuscripts, ensuring that such data is shared exclusively with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial consultants, and the publisher, as necessary and appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in the research of the Editor or Reviewers without the explicit written consent of the author(s).
Unpublished materials presented in manuscripts submitted to the journal will not be used in research conducted by the Editor or Reviewers, except with the explicit and formal written consent of the author(s).
Publication decisions
The RECI Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles will be published. The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board and limited by the legal requirements then in force regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
The Editor-in-Chief of RECI is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal will be selected for publication. This decision will be guided by the guidelines established by the Editorial Board and will be subject to current legal requirements, including, but not limited to, those related to defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. To support his/her judgment, the Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers.
Duties of peer reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists the Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with the author, can also assist him/her in improving the manuscript.
Peer review plays a fundamental role in supporting the Editor-in-Chief in the editorial decision-making process and, through editorial dialogue with the author, can significantly contribute to the improvement of the manuscript.
Promptness
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript submitted to RECI or who knows that a timely review will be impossible must immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research described in a manuscript submitted to RECI, or who knows that he or she is unable to review the research within the stipulated timeframe, must immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received by RECI for review are treated as confidential documents. They are not shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.
Manuscripts received by RECI for review are treated with the highest degree of confidentiality. These documents are not shared or discussed with third parties unless expressly authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Reviews should be conducted in a strictly objective manner, and personal criticism of the author is forbidden. It is essential that reviewers present their observations in a clear and well-founded manner, using solid and appropriate arguments to support their assessments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also draw the attention of the RECI Editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which he or she has personal knowledge.
Reviewers are responsible for identifying relevant previously published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. In addition, reviewers should inform the RECI Editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published materials of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating 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 associated with the submission.
Privileged information or ideas obtained during the peer review process should be treated with strict confidentiality and never used for personal advantage. Reviewers should refrain from evaluating manuscripts in situations where they have a conflict of interest, whether arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the submission.
Author Duties
Reporting Standards
Authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be accurately represented in the manuscript. An article should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to reproduce the work. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors reporting original research findings must present a faithful description of the work performed, accompanied by an objective analysis of its significance. The underlying data must be presented accurately in the manuscript. The article must provide sufficient detail and references to enable the work to be reproduced by other researchers. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are absolutely unacceptable.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work and, if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, they are responsible for ensuring that this has been properly cited or acknowledged. RECI systematically scans submitted articles using plagiarism detection software (using CrossRef Similarity Check software) to identify possible cases.
Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and, if they have used the work and/or words of others, they are responsible for ensuring that these sources are properly referenced in the text. RECI systematically checks submitted articles using the CrossRef Similarity Check plagiarism detection software to identify possible cases of plagiarism.
Multiple, redundant or simultaneous publication
In general, an author should not publish manuscripts that describe essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
In general, an author should not submit manuscripts that describe essentially the same research to more than one journal or primary publication. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is strictly unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources
Appropriate acknowledgement of the work of others should always be given by citation and/or footnotes. Authors should also cite publications that have influenced the nature of the work reported.
Authorship of a manuscript
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are other individuals who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be mentioned in the Acknowledgements section. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (as defined above) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the manuscript’s author list, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper, and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Authorship should be restricted to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All individuals who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors. Those who have contributed to specific aspects of the research project but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors (as defined above) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the manuscript's author list, and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the article and agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other material conflicts of interest that could be construed as influencing the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
All authors must declare in their manuscript any financial or other material conflicts of interest that could be construed as influencing the results or their interpretation. In addition, all sources of financial support for the project must be appropriately disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief of the journal and to cooperate with the Editor-in-Chief to retract the article or publish an appropriate erratum.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own previously published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief of the journal and to cooperate with the Editor-in-Chief to retract the article or publish an appropriate erratum.
Editor's Confirmation
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the Publisher (University of Santa Cruz do Sul), in close collaboration with the Editor-in-Chief of RECI, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the immediate publication of an erratum or, in the most serious cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.
The Publisher and the Journal do not discriminate on the basis of age, color, religion, creed, disability, marital status, veteran status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier status, or sexual orientation in their publishing programs, services and activities.
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the Publisher (University of Santa Cruz do Sul), in close collaboration with the Editor-in-Chief of RECI, will take the necessary measures to investigate the situation and amend the article in question. This may include the immediate publication of an erratum or, in the most serious cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.
The Publisher and the Journal ensure that there is no discrimination on the basis of age, color, religion, creed, disability, marital status, veteran status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier status, or sexual orientation in their publishing programs, services, and activities.
Scientific misconduct and violations of publication ethics
Scientific misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism by authors.
Violations of publication ethics include failure to disclose financial conflicts of interest; omitting a deserving author or adding a non-contributing author; misrepresenting the publication status in the reference list (falsely claiming that an article is “in press”); self-plagiarism without attribution; and duplicate or redundant publication.
Editorial action should be expected in cases of violations of publication ethics and cases of scientific misconduct. RECI has adopted the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Each and every author submitting a manuscript to RECI agrees to adhere to the ethical guidelines contained in the Notes to Authors and acknowledges that he or she is aware of the consequences that may result from violations of publication ethics. Consequences include notification of the violation to the journal, retraction of published articles, notification to institutional authorities, subsequent institutional investigation, and loss of publication privileges in the journal.
Redundant or duplicate publication is the publication of data, tables, figures, or any other content that substantially overlaps with other material that has been published previously or will be published in the future. This includes work published by third parties or by any author of the manuscript submitted to RECI. When submitting a paper, the corresponding author must make a full statement to the Editor-in-Chief in the comments section about all previous submissions and reports (in any language) that could be considered as redundant or duplicate publication of the same or very similar work. The corresponding author is also responsible for alerting the Editor-in-Chief if the work includes subjects on which a previous report has been published or a manuscript that is under review, submitted, in press, or will be submitted or published in another journal in the future. Any such work must be cited and referenced in the new article, and a copy of the material must be included in the submission as a supplementary file. Abstracts presented at scientific meetings (without press releases and not discussed in detail at a symposium) are not considered pre-published material.
Plagiarism is the use of third-party ideas or words without giving due credit to the source. If authors include one or more sentences verbatim from another source, the original source must be cited and the sentence(s) placed in quotation marks to avoid plagiarism. Authors must not use third-party materials (text, figures, images, tables) without permission and attribution, including their own published works.
Similarity detection technology has been implemented by RECI in the form of CrossRef Similarity Check, a software tool created by CrossRef to check for overlaps in submitted manuscripts. Similarity Check detects possible plagiarism in texts using an extensive database of published materials. Manuscripts with excessive duplication will be rejected.
Editorial action should be expected in cases of scientific misconduct and violation of publishing ethics. Editorial actions that may be taken include notification of the violation in the journal, retraction of published articles, notification to institutional authorities, and loss of publication privileges in RECI.
- Scientific misconduct includes practices such as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism by authors.
- Violations of publication ethics include, among others, the omission of financial conflicts of interest, failure to include a legitimate author or improper inclusion of a non-contributing author, distortion of a publication's status in references (such as claiming an article is "in press" when it is not), self-plagiarism without proper attribution, and redundant or duplicate publication.
- In the event of a violation of publication ethics or scientific misconduct, appropriate editorial action is expected. RECI adheres to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). By submitting a manuscript to RECI, the author undertakes to adhere to the ethical guidelines contained in the Notes to Authors and acknowledges the potential consequences of violations of publication ethics. These consequences include notification of the violation to the journal, retraction of published articles, notification to institutional authorities, a subsequent investigation, and loss of publication privileges in the journal.
- Redundant or duplicate publication refers to the publication of data, tables, figures or other content that substantially overlaps with previously published or future published material, whether by third parties or by the authors of the manuscript submitted to RECI.When submitting an article, the corresponding author must make a full statement to the Editor-in-Chief in the comments section about any previous submission or report (in any language) that could be considered as redundant or duplicate publication of the same or substantially similar work. The corresponding author must also alert the Editor-in-Chief if the manuscript includes topics that have been previously reported or are under review, submitted, in press, or about to be submitted to another journal. Work already submitted or published in other journals must be duly cited and referenced in the new article, and a copy of the relevant material must be included as a supplementary file. Abstracts presented at scientific meetings (without official publication and without detailed discussions at symposia) are not considered pre-published material.
- Plagiarism is the unauthorized use of third-party ideas or words without proper attribution of the source.If authors include sentences from other sources, these must be cited correctly and presented in quotation marks to avoid plagiarism. Authors should not use third-party materials (texts, figures, images, tables) without proper permission and attribution, including their own published works.
- RECI has implemented the use of similarity detection technology through CrossRef Similarity Check, a tool developed by CrossRef to identify overlaps in submitted manuscripts. This technology assists in detecting possible plagiarism, using a comprehensive database of published materials. Manuscripts with excessive duplication will be rejected.
- Editorial action should be expected in cases of scientific misconduct and violation of publishing ethics. Possible editorial measures include notification of the violation in the journal, retraction of published articles, notification to institutional authorities, and revocation of publishing privileges in RECI.
Complaints
Authors who may have a complaint about any aspect of their interaction with RECI should, in the first instance, write/email the Associate Editor. If this does not resolve the issue, the complaint should be forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief. The Associate Editor and the Editor-in-Chief aim to acknowledge the complaint within 7 days of receiving it. They should also explain to the author the procedure they will follow to resolve the matter.
Authors who have complaints related to any aspect of their interaction with RECI should, in the first instance, write or email the Associate Editor. If the issue is not resolved, the complaint should be forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief. The Associate Editor and the Editor-in-Chief undertake to acknowledge the complaint within 7 days of receiving it and to inform the author of the procedures that will be adopted to resolve the matter.
RECI Statement on Potentially Offensive Content
Content previously published in this journal may contain language, information or terms that are offensive, insensitive or unethical and may reflect attitudes, biases or conventions that may have been considered acceptable at the time of original publication. RECI regrets any offense or harm caused by any previous publication containing potentially offensive content or language that does not reflect the current core values of the Journal. RECI stands against all forms of racism and discrimination. With this commitment, this journal is actively addressing these and other concerns related to diversity, equity and inclusion.
Content previously published in this journal may contain language, information or terms that, although considered acceptable at the time of original publication, may today be interpreted as offensive, insensitive or unethical. RECI regrets any offense or harm caused by previous publications containing potentially offensive content or language that does not reflect the current core values of the Journal. RECI stands firmly against all forms of racism and discrimination.
In the context of epidemiology, the journal recognizes the importance of inclusive and sensitive approaches, especially when dealing with studies that involve public health issues, social determinants of health, and inequalities in access to care. In line with this commitment, the journal is taking active steps to address and correct any bias or insensitivity in content, promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion as fundamental principles for epidemiological research and practice. We believe that epidemiology, in seeking to understand and combat health disparities, should reflect these same values, ensuring that all populations are treated with respect, dignity, and consideration.
