Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The TMP Universal Journal of Dental Research and Health is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in the publication of research. We follow best practices as outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure that all parties involved in the publication process—authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers—adhere to ethical guidelines. This statement outlines our policies on ethical behaviour and our response to unethical practices.

Duties of Authors

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and properly cites the work of others. Any form of plagiarism, including copying text, data, or ideas from other sources without proper attribution, is unacceptable and will lead to rejection or retraction of the manuscript.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of all data sources and contributions must be provided. Authors must accurately credit all co-authors, collaborators, and funding bodies that contributed to the research.

Multiple or Concurrent Submissions

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously or submit previously published work to the journal unless explicitly agreed upon with the editor. Such behavior constitutes unethical publishing and will result in rejection.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be required to provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if possible. Authors should retain data for a reasonable time after publication for verification purposes.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All those who contributed significantly should be listed as co-authors, while others who contributed in minor ways should be acknowledged in the manuscript.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the results or interpretation of their work. This includes employment, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, or patent applications related to the research.

Ethical Approval

Research involving human subjects, animals, or hazardous materials must comply with ethical standards. Authors must provide a statement of ethical approval from relevant ethics committees or institutional review boards, including the informed consent of participants where applicable.

Duties of Editors

Fairness and Impartiality

Editors must evaluate manuscripts based solely on their academic merit (importance, originality, validity) and relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality

Editors must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and any communication with authors, reviewers, and editorial staff. Editors must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the author’s express written consent. They must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with any of the authors.

Decision on Publication

Editors are responsible for making decisions on which articles will be published in the journal, following the peer-review process. Editors should be guided by the journal’s editorial policies and by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions and may provide authors with feedback to improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should strive to provide clear, constructive, and unbiased feedback in a timely manner.

Promptness

Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or knows that they cannot provide a timely review should notify the editor and decline the review invitation.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or discuss them with others, except with the permission of the editor. Reviewers must not use any information gained during the review process for their own research or personal advantage.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively, with clear and supportive arguments for their opinions. Reviewers should avoid personal criticism of the authors and focus on the manuscript’s content.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers must identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. They should inform the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published work of which they are aware.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should disclose any conflicts of interest before accepting an assignment and must not review manuscripts in which they have competing interests arising from collaborations, financial interests, or personal relationships with the authors.

Ethical Standards in Publishing

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research should present accurate and objective reports of their work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable. Review articles and opinion pieces must be clearly identified as such.

Retraction of Articles

Articles may be retracted in cases of misconduct such as plagiarism, falsification of data, or unethical research practices. A retraction notice will be published, and the reasons for retraction will be clearly stated.

Corrections

When errors are discovered in published works, it is the author’s responsibility to notify the journal promptly and cooperate with the editor to publish an erratum, addendum, or retraction, depending on the nature of the error.

Handling of Unethical Behaviour

Reporting Unethical Behaviour

Anyone who suspects ethical misconduct is encouraged to report it to the editor. Allegations should include sufficient information and evidence to initiate an investigation. The journal will respond to all reports and take appropriate action.

Investigation and Response

The editor will investigate claims of misconduct or unethical behavior, consulting with the author, reviewers, or institutional authorities as needed. Where evidence of misconduct is confirmed, the journal will take action, which may include retraction, notifying institutions, or banning the authors from future submissions.

Appeal Process

Authors may appeal editorial decisions or investigations related to ethical concerns. Appeals should be submitted in writing, and the editor will review the case and, if necessary, seek further peer review or institutional input.