Research and Publication Ethics
Research ethics
RIDE is an international journal that seeks to achieve scientific excellence. Its ethical code is supported by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and is directed to editors, reviewers and authors.
Duties of Authors
Originality and plagiarism: The authors of the submitted manuscripts guarantee that the work is original, that it does not contain parts from other authors or from other fragments of works already published by the authors. They also confirm the veracity of the data, that is, that the empirical data have not been altered to verify hypotheses.
Multiple Publications and /or repetitive: the author should not publish articles that repeat the same search results in more than a scientific journal. The simultaneous proposal of the same contribution to multiple scientific journals is to be considered ethically improper and reprehensible.
List of sources: the author should always provide the correct indication of the sources and contributions mentioned in the article.
Authorship: In terms of the authorship of the work, the authors guarantee that there is the inclusion of those individuals who have made a scientifically significant and intellectual contribution to the conceptualization and planning of the work, and have also made a contribution to the interpretation of the results and the actual writing of the article. At the same time, the authors have been hierarchically organized in accordance to their level of responsibility and their respective roles.
Access and Retention: if the editors deem it appropriate, the authors of the articles should make available also the sources or the data on which research is based, so that they can be kept for a reasonable period of time after the publication and possibly make it accessible.
Conflict of interest and disclosure: all authors are required to declare explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest that may have influenced the results obtained or the interpretations proposed. Authors must also indicate any research funding agencies and / or the project from which arise the article.
Errors in published articles: when an author in her/his article identifies a significant error or inaccuracy, it shall promptly inform the journal editors and provide them with all the information required to list the relevant corrections on the bottom of the article itself.
Responsibility: all the authors accept responsibility for what they have written. The authors pledge that they have revised the most up-to-date and relevant materials about the subject matter, thereby taking into account the dual nature of different currents of thought.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to the editorial decision: peer review is a procedure that helps editors to make decisions on the proposed articles and also allows the author to improve the contribution submitted for publication. The reviewers are committed to performing a critical, honest, constructive, and unbiased review of both the scientific and the literary quality of the written work, i.e. based on their individual skills and knowledge.
Respect of time: Any reviewer who does not feel competent in the subject matter to be reviewed or who cannot complete the evaluation within the scheduled time will immediately notify the editors. Reviewers undertake to evaluate the work in the shortest possible time to respect the delivery deadlines.
Confidentiality: each assigned reading manuescript should be considered as confidential. Therefore, these texts should not be discussed with other people without the explicit permission of the editors.
Objectivity: the peer-review will be conducted in an objective manner. No personal judgement of the authors of contributions is considered appropriate. Reviewers are obliged to give sufficient reasons for their assessments. Reviewers will provide a complete critical report with appropriate references according to RIDE's review protocol and the public guidelines for reviewers, especially if it is proposed that the work be rejected. They are obliged to advise the editors if substantial parts of the work have already been published or are under review for another publication.
Text display: the referees undertake to accurately indicate the bibliographical references of fundamental works possibly neglected by the author. The referee must also report to the editors any similarities or overlaps between the text received and other works known to her/him.
Conflict of interest and disclosure: confidential information or information obtained during the peer-review process must be considered confidential and may not be used for personal purposes. The referee shall not accept in reading articles for which there is a conflict of interest due to previous collaboration or competition with the author and /or her/his institution.
Duties of Editors
Decisions on publication: The editors ensure the selection of the most qualified and scientifically specialized reviewers to issue an expert critical aappreciation of the manuscript, with the least possible level of bias.
Honesty: the editors evaluate the articles submitted for publication only on the basis of the scientific merit of the content, without discrimination of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, political opinion of the authors.
Confidentiality: the editors and members of the working group undertake not to disclose information relating to the articles submitted for publication to other people other than the author, the referees and the editor. Editors and the Editorial Committee are committed to maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscripts, their authors and their reviewers, in such a way that anonymity preserves the intellectual integrity of the whole process.
Conflict of interest and disclosure: the editors undertake not to use in their research content of articles submitted for publication without the written consent of the author.
Respect of time: The editor are ultimately responsible for compliance with the time limits for reviews and publication of accepted papers, to ensure rapid dissemination of their results. They are fully committed to complying with the published deadlines (maximum 10 days for the estimation/rejection from receipt of the manuscript on the Review Platform) and maximum 120 days from the start of the scientific peer review process). Likewise, papers will not remain accepted without being published; RIDE adopts continuous publication.
Ethical code
Research Involving Human Subjects
When reporting on research that involves human subjects, human material, human tissues, or human data, authors must declare that the investigations were carried out following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/), revised in 2013. According to point 23 of this declaration, an approval from the local institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee must be obtained before undertaking the research to confirm the study meets national and international guidelines. As a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ of the article.
Example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."
For non-interventional studies (e.g. surveys, questionnaires, social media research), all participants must be fully informed if the anonymity is assured, why the research is being conducted, how their data will be used and if there are any risks associated. As with all research involving humans, ethical approval from an appropriate ethics committee must be obtained prior to conducting the study. If ethical approval is not required, authors must either provide an exemption from the ethics committee or are encouraged to cite the local or national legislation that indicates ethics approval is not required for this type of study. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee which provided this should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ with a full explanation regarding why ethical approval was not required.
A written informed consent for publication must be obtained from participating patients. Data relating to individual participants must be described in detail, but private information identifying participants need not be included unless the identifiable materials are of relevance to the research (for example, photographs of participants’ faces that show a particular symptom). Patients’ initials or other personal identifiers must not appear in any images. For manuscripts that include any case details, personal information, and/or images of patients, authors must obtain signed informed consent for publication from patients (or their relatives/guardians) before submitting to RIDE journal. Patient details must be anonymized as far as possible, e.g., do not mention specific age, ethnicity, or occupation where they are not relevant to the conclusions. A template permission form is available to download. A blank version of the form used to obtain permission (without the patient names or signature) must be uploaded with your submission. Editors reserve the right to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.
You may refer to our sample form and provide an appropriate form after consulting with your affiliated institution. For the purposes of publishing in RIDE, a consent, permission, or release form should include unlimited permission for publication in all formats (including print, electronic, and online), in sublicensed and reprinted versions (including translations and derived works), and in other works and products under open access license. To respect patients’ and any other individual’s privacy, please do not send signed forms. The journal reserves the right to ask authors to provide signed forms if necessary.
If the study reports research involving vulnerable groups, an additional check may be performed. The submitted manuscript will be scrutinized by the editorial office and upon request, documentary evidence (blank consent forms and any related discussion documents from the ethics board) must be supplied. Additionally, when studies describe groups by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, disease, etc., explanation regarding why such categorization was needed must be clearly stated in the article.
Ethical Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research
The editors will require that the benefits potentially derived from any research causing harm to animals are significant in relation to any cost endured by animals, and that procedures followed are unlikely to cause offense to the majority of readers. Authors should particularly ensure that their research complies with the commonly-accepted '3Rs [1]':
- Replacement of animals by alternatives wherever possible,
- Reduction in number of animals used, and
- Refinement of experimental conditions and procedures to minimize the harm to animals.
Authors must include details on housing, husbandry and pain management in their manuscript.
For further guidance authors should refer to the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Used in Scientific Procedures [2], American Association for Laboratory Animal Science [3] or European Animal Research Association [4].
If national legislation requires it, studies involving vertebrates or higher invertebrates must only be carried out after obtaining approval from the appropriate ethics committee. As a minimum, the project identification code, date of approval and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’. Research procedures must be carried out in accordance with national and institutional regulations. Statements on animal welfare should confirm that the study complied with all relevant legislation. Clinical studies involving animals and interventions outside of routine care require ethics committee oversight as per the American Veterinary Medical Association. If the study involved client-owned animals, informed client consent must be obtained and certified in the manuscript report of the research. Owners must be fully informed if there are any risks associated with the procedures and that the research will be published. If available, a high standard of veterinary care must be provided. Authors are responsible for correctness of the statements provided in the manuscript.
If ethical approval is not required by national laws, authors must provide an exemption from the ethics committee, if one is available. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee that provided this should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ with a full explanation on why the ethical approval was not required.
If no animal ethics committee is available to review applications, authors should be aware that the ethics of their research will be evaluated by reviewers and editors. Authors should provide a statement justifying the work from an ethical perspective, using the same utilitarian framework that is used by ethics committees. Authors may be asked to provide this even if they have received ethical approval.
RIDE endorses the ARRIVE guidelines (arriveguidelines.org/) for reporting experiments using live animals. Authors and reviewers must use the ARRIVE guidelines as a checklist, which can be found at https://arriveguidelines.org/sites/arrive/files/documents/ARRIVE%20Compliance%20Questionnaire.pdf. Editors reserve the right to ask for the checklist and to reject submissions that do not adhere to these guidelines, to reject submissions based on ethical or animal welfare concerns or if the procedure described does not appear to be justified by the value of the work presented.
- NSW Department of Primary Industries and Animal Research Review Panel. Three Rs. Available online: https://www.animalethics.org.au/three-rs
- Home Office. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Bred, Supplied or Used for Scientific Purposes. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388535/CoPanimalsWeb.pdf
- American Association for Laboratory Animal Science. The Scientific Basis for Regulation of Animal Care and Use. Available online: https://www.aalas.org/about-aalas/position-papers/scientific-basis-for-regulation-of-animal-care-and-use
- European Animal Research Association. EU regulations on animal research. Available online: https://www.eara.eu/animal-research-law
Research Involving Cell Lines
Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines the provenance should be stated and references must also be given to either a published paper or to a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin.
An example of Ethical Statements:
The HCT116 cell line was obtained from XXXX. The MLH1+ cell line was provided by XXXXX, Ltd. The DLD-1 cell line was obtained from Dr. XXXX. The DR-GFP and SA-GFP reporter plasmids were obtained from Dr. XXX and the Rad51K133A expression vector was obtained from Dr. XXXX.
Research Involving Plants
Experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild) including collection of plant material, must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. We recommend that authors comply with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
For each submitted manuscript supporting genetic information and origin must be provided. For research manuscripts involving rare and non-model plants (other than, e.g., Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Oryza sativa, or many other typical model plants), voucher specimens must be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum. Vouchers may be requested for review by future investigators to verify the identity of the material used in the study (especially if taxonomic rearrangements occur in the future). They should include details of the populations sampled on the site of collection (GPS coordinates), date of collection, and document the part(s) used in the study where appropriate. For rare, threatened or endangered species this can be waived but it is necessary for the author to describe this in the cover letter.
Editors reserve the rights to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.
An example of Ethical Statements:
Torenia fournieri plants were used in this study. White-flowered Crown White (CrW) and violet-flowered Crown Violet (CrV) cultivars selected from ‘Crown Mix’ (XXX Company, City, Country) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX (XXX Institute, City, Country).
Arabidopis mutant lines (SALKxxxx, SAILxxxx,…) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX, institute, city, country).
Clinical Trials Registration
Registration
RIDE follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines which require and recommend registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment as a condition of consideration for publication.
Purely observational studies do not require registration. A clinical trial not only refers to studies that take place in a hospital or involve pharmaceuticals, but also refer to all studies which involve participant randomization and group classification in the context of the intervention under assessment.
Authors are strongly encouraged to pre-register clinical trials with an international clinical trials register and cite a reference to the registration in the Methods section. Suitable databases include clinicaltrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register and those listed by the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
Approval to conduct a study from an independent local, regional, or national review body is not equivalent to prospective clinical trial registration. RIDE reserves the right to decline any paper without trial registration for further peer review. However, if the study protocol has been published before the enrolment, the registration can be waived with correct citation of the published protocol.
CONSORT Statement
RIDE requires a completed CONSORT 2010 checklist and flow diagram as a condition of submission when reporting the results of a randomized trial. Templates for these can be found here or on the CONSORT website (http://www.consort-statement.org) which also describes several CONSORT checklist extensions for different designs and types of data beyond two group parallel trials. At minimum, your article should report the content addressed by each item of the checklist.
Dual Use Research of Concern
RIDE follows the practical framework defined in Guidance for Editors: Research, Audit and Service Evaluations and introduced by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Research that could pose a significant threat, with broad potential consequences to public health or national security, should be clearly indicated in the manuscript, and potential dual-use research of concern should be explained in the cover letter upon submission. Potential areas of concern include but are not limited to biosecurity, nuclear and chemical threats, and research with a military purpose or application, etc. For these manuscripts to be considered for peer review, the benefits to the general public or public health must outweigh the risks. The authors have a responsibility to comply with relevant national and international laws.
Sex and Gender in Research
We encourage our authors to follow the ‘Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines’ and to include sex and gender considerations where relevant. Authors should use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully in order to avoid confusing both terms. Article titles and/or abstracts should indicate clearly what sex(es) the study applies to. Authors should also describe in the background, whether sex and/or gender differences may be expected; report how sex and/or gender were accounted for in the design of the study; provide disaggregated data by sex and/or gender, where appropriate; and discuss respective results. If a sex and/or gender analysis was not conducted, the rationale should be given in the Discussion. We suggest that our authors consult the full guidelines before submission.
Borders and Territories
Potential disputes over borders and territories may have particular relevance for authors in describing their research or in an author or editor correspondence address, and should be respected. Content decisions are an editorial matter and where there is a potential or perceived dispute or complaint, the editorial team will attempt to find a resolution that satisfies parties involved.
RIDE stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.