- Aim & Scopes
- Editorial Board
- Join As A Reviewer
- Instruction To Author
- Copyright From
- Publication Ethics
SJIF Impact FACTOR
World Journal of Advance Medical and Pharmaceutical Research (WJAMPR) is electronic peer reviewed International Research Journal committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. In order to provide our readers with a journal of highest quality we state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement. All articles not in accordance with these standards will be removed from the publication if malpractice is discovered at any time even after the publication. WJAMPR is checking all papers in a peer review process.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A 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.
Data Access and Retention: Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of the Paper: 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 others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If author involve human or animal in the study, he must submit ethical committee permission details to the editor along with manuscript.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
The acceptance of each paper should be decided by three reviewer's agreements for publication.
- Editor receives manuscript submission, and then sends it to three reviewers.
- If one of the three reviewers disagrees with publication, editor will select the fourth reviewer for peer review.
- If the fourth reviewer agrees with publication, editor can inform the author.
- If the fourth reviewer disagrees with publication, editor will select the fifth reviewer.
- If the fifth reviewer agrees with publication, editor can inform the author. If not, the paper is treated as rejected.
- If there is no review expert of an article in expert database, the external experts will be invited for peer review.
- The final decision of acceptance lies with the chief editor based on the comments of the reviewers. Authors are informed of the decision (Acceptance, minor revision, major revision or rejection).
- Each peer review process is expected to be completed within 10 days (the first three reviewers should finish reviewing within 10 days, the rest two reviewers have 10 days each).
- The journal has international leading experts from different country.
- Two statistical editorial members are responsible for the review of statistics.
- Two linguistic editorial members are in review of languages in each article.
- Crosscheck plagiarism screening tool is used to prevent plagiarism.