COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS
All authors must comply to standard ethical policies and include statements in their manuscripts declaring whether there are any conflicts of interest with their paper. Medical research involving human subjects must be conducted according to the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. Abstracts or full papers will not be published in the abstract book or proceedings without these statements.
The scientific organizing committee (SOC) ask participants to present an accurate work performed as well as an objective discussion of significance of the work. The relevant data should be presented accurately in the presentation material and/or paper. The presentation material and/or paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Review and professional presentation material and/or manuscripts should also be accurate and objective.
The ethical standards are based on recommendations from international committees:
ICMJE — The International Committee of MEDICAL JOURNAL EDITORS http://www.icmje.org/
WAME — The WORLD ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAL EDITORS http://www.wame.org/
COPE — Committee on Publication Ethics http://publicationethics.org/
ORI — The office of Research Integrity http://ori.hhs.gov/
CSE — Council of Science Editors http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/
EASE — European Association of Science Editors http://www.ease.org.uk/
ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING
Submit abstracts (deadline 31.08.2021) according to template given in the above link .
All submitted abstracts will be peer reviewed and selected abstracts will be published as a special issue in Epiphany (e-ISSN 1840-3719; p-ISSN 2303-6850), Journal of Transdisciplinary Studies.
Epiphany - Journal of Transdiciplinary Studies has been enlisted in following
indexes and abstracting services:
Peer review policy
The role of the Scientific Organizing Committee (SOC) in the reviewing process may be described by the following steps making the process transparent strictly avoiding any unregulated actions:
1. The Scientific Organizing Committee (SOC) arrange the first line peer-review process by identifying the overall importance of the abstract/paper, the general quality of results and adequate presentation of the material.
2. The SOC chair select the peer-review committee (PC), i.e., appropriate members of its committee (in the most cases two members) as well as ad hoc reviewers (when necessary) and send them the submissions with some preliminary comments.
3. The SOC chair considers the replies from the PC and take the decision on acceptance, rejection or sending for the external review. In the last case SOC chair select two reviewers or ask members of SOC to provide them with appropriate reviewers.
4. SOC is responsible for the avoidance of conflict of interest in evaluation process. Attention is paid to avoid any situation when peer-reviewers may have connection (as former coauthors) with any authors of the manuscript under investigation. In case when a submission is going from a member of the SOC, the provisional role of the SOC chair/member transferred to the one of the SOC members. if authors declare they scientific contradictions with any members of the SOC, Editorial board of the proceedings or potential reviewers, SOC members take the responsibility to exclude these persons from the list of potential persons involved in the evaluation process of the submission.
5. SOC collect reviews and make preliminary decision. In case of contradictions of two reviewers they take the decision to send the manuscript for the 3rd review.
6. All manuscripts with the intramural and extramural reviews are subjected to the consideration on the SOC session which take place 3 weeks before the start symposium.
7. SOC members are responsible for evaluation of rebuttal letters from authors and evaluation of these letters as well as for evaluation of the second and 3rd rounds of review process after the presentation of additional set of information/data/experiments made by authors of the manuscript upon the request of reviewers. SOC members send the reviewer’s comments and editorial board members to the authors of the manuscript.