Good editorial practices

Open access: UNIFESP Journals Gateway adopts the definition of open access to peer-reviewed scientific literature that becomes available on the Internet, following the principles of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) 2002, without financial, legal, or technical barriers, allowing anyone to: read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or reference the full-text of these articles, collect them for indexing, introduce them as software data, or use them for any other legal purposes. The Journal Gateway follows a Gold Open Access model that allows the editor to make articles and content available free of charge on the Internet.

For the legal sharing of content, the Gateway managers have adopted the Creative Commons licenses, preserving copyright while granting the general users rules to use the content. Despite these rights, the Gateway managers understand that the authors' responsibility is to contact the editors to authorize any image reproduction. The Gateway uses the Open Journal System platform for editorial management, allowing interoperability, integration, and dissemination of content on the Internet.

Ethical considerations: UNIFESP Journals Gateway is dedicated to promoting integrity in publications, and therefore supports international standards for responsible research publication, presented by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Code of Ethics American Educational Research Association (AERA), the Council of Science Editors (CSE), the Código de Boas Práticas Científicas – FAPESP and the Guia de Boas Práticas da SciELO. UNIFESP Journals Gateway managers understand that integrity means research is always conducted to allow others to have confidence in the methods used and the generated results. Any professional conduct that does not contemplate this definition leads to misconduct in research: plagiarism, auto plagiarism, fraud, data and image manufacturing, among other examples.

The Gateway adopts and recommends editors the following definitions:

  • Misconduct: According to the Code of Ethics American Educational Research Association, misconduct consists of fabrication, counterfeiting, or contagion in the preparation, execution, or review of research or the reporting of research results. Therefore, such a definition excludes honest errors and differences of opinion. Any misconduct cases on the portal should be treated with the appropriate sanctions established by each journal's Editorial Board.

  • Manufacturing: data or results creation, recording them or reporting them as if they were effectively collected from thorough and careful methodology.

  • Falsification: Manipulation of materials, equipment, or research processes, or alteration or omission of data or results so that their record is neither accurate nor reliable.

  • Plagiarism: consists of the appropriation of ideas, processes, results, or words from another author/researcher without the due credit. Authors are responsible for the content and information inserted in their manuscripts. UNIFESP Journals Gateway recommends the use of Turnitin software that allows detecting plagiarism in the submitted materials.

In the case of Duplicate and Redundant Publication, Correction and Retractions, UNIFESP Journals Gateway recommends the following guidelines:

  • Duplicate Publication and Redundant Publication: Duplicate publication refers to the practice of submitting the same study to two or more journals without the proper authorization of editors and authors; redundant publication consisting of the inadequate division of study results into more than one article (also known as segmented publication or salami publication). UNIFESP Journals Gateway recommends the exclusive publication of original material, that is, material that has not been previously published or is in the process of being submitted to other journals, including Journals in different languages.

  • Corrections and Retractions: in cases of errors or failures, regardless of nature or origin, which do not constitute misconduct, UNIFESP Journals Gateway managers suggest correction utilizing errata. For articles already published in which misconduct has been identified, managers suggest the author's retraction, whose motivation should be properly referenced.

UNIFESP Journals Gateway adopts the following definition of Conflict of Interest: any interest or relationship, financial or other, or personal, religious, or political beliefs that may be perceived as influences to an author's objectivity is considered a potential source of conflict of interest. Potential sources of conflict of interest include but are not limited to

  • patent or ownership of shares,

  • participation in a board of directors of a company,

  • participation in an advisory board or committee of a company, and

  • consulting or receipt of a company's speaker fees.

The existence of a conflict of interest does not prevent publication, but UNIFESP Journals Gateway recommends that journals request that their authors declare any personal or commercial interests that may bias the manuscript. By submitting the article, the authors assume the declaration of no conflicts of interest.

Endogeny: UNIFESP Journals Gateway editors and managers combat academic inbreeding in publications (papers published whose authors are members of the same Journal's Editorial Committee, for instance) and encourage the nationalization, internationalization, and presence of different institutions in the composition of the editorial committees of its journals.

Peer review: UNIFESP Journals Gateway recommends that journals adopt and make it clear in the authors' guidelines the peer review process adopted:

  • Blind-Review Process: In this type of peer review, the author does not know who the reviewers are.

  • Double-Blind Review: In this type of peer review, reviewers do not know the authors' identity and vice-versa.

  • Open Peer-Review Process: In this type of peer review, the identity of the author and reviewers is known to all participants. Journals can also publish reviews and final articles, so readers can see reviewers' identities and comments once accepted.

  • Transparent Peer Review Process: Transparent peer review, reviewer reports, authors' responses, and editors' decision letters are published along with accepted articles. This process is fully compatible with journals that use blind or double-blind revision during the review process. Authors have the option to cancel transparent peer review during submission.

  • Collaborative Peer Review Process: The collaborative peer review process covers a wide variety of approaches in which a team of people works together to conduct the review. The first format is to have two or more reviewers working together to review the article, discuss their opinions, and submit a unified report. Another approach is to have one or more reviewers collaborating with the author to tailor the article to the established editorial standard.

Data Management: within the scope of the Network of Repositories of Research Data launched by FAPESP, UNIFESP Journals Gateway has been added to the integrated effort of the Rectory, the Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, Unifesp Press, the Coordination of the Library Network, and the Superintendence in Information Technology so that the science produced and published by any instance of the university is based on a standardized management plan and data preservation. In this sense, UNIFESP Journals Gateway is integrated into the UNIFESP Scientific Data Repository, supported by the Dataverse platform and the Cariniana Network, a Brazilian network of digital preservation services.

Open Science: UNIFESP Journals Gateway is added to the integrated effort of the Rectory, the Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, Unifesp Press, the Coordination of the Library Network, and the Superintendence in Information Technology to develop the debate and practices of open science, to develop and share transparent and accessible knowledge through social networks (FOSTER Open Science Definition).