Publication Ethics
Publication Ethics, Principles of Transparency and Best Practices
Basic rules for ensuring the principles of transparency, good practices, and ethics of publication
Editorial Principles and Ethical Commitments
Nova Geodesia is firmly committed to maintaining the highest standards of editorial integrity, ethical research practices, and transparency in scientific publishing.
The journal follows the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, jointly issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
In addition, the journal adheres to the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and, where applicable, the CONSORT Statement for the transparent reporting of randomized controlled trials, as well as other recognized international guidelines relevant to scholarly publishing.
These principles are implemented consistently across all editorial workflows, as detailed in the 'Procedures' and 'Peer Review Process' sections of the journal’s website.
Transparency is fundamental to all editorial workflows, from manuscript submission to peer review, acceptance, publication, and archiving. Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit and relevance to the journal’s scope, irrespective of authors’ personal characteristics, institutional affiliations, or beliefs.
1. Research Integrity and Misconduct
Authors must present accurate, original, and verifiable data. Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, or any form of research misconduct is strictly prohibited. All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection software.
Manuscripts with significant overlap or unethical reuse of content will be rejected, and serious cases will be referred to the authors’ institutions in accordance with COPE Core Practices.
2. Peer Review Integrity
The journal operates a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality. Authors must not attempt to influence the review process, including the provision of fabricated reviewer identities or false contact details.
Reviewers must maintain confidentiality, evaluate manuscripts objectively, and disclose any conflicts of interest that might bias their judgment.
3. Conflicts of Interest
All parties involved in the editorial and publication process (authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members) must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the objectivity, integrity, or impartiality of the review, editorial decision, or publication process.
Conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to:
- personal, academic, or professional relationships;
- financial interests, funding, or sponsorship;
- institutional affiliations or memberships;
- intellectual property rights or competitive interests.
Authors are required to declare any potential conflicts when submitting their manuscripts, within the “Author Statement” form. Reviewers must inform the editors immediately if they recognize the authors or have any competing interest, and decline the review if impartiality cannot be guaranteed. Editors and editorial board members must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.
Failure to disclose a relevant conflict of interest may result in rejection of the manuscript, retraction of a published article, or other corrective measures, in accordance with the journal’s ethical policies. The double-blind review process applied by the journal is described in detail at: https://novageodesia.ro/index.php/ng/prp.
4. Authorship and Contributions
Authorship must be based on substantial contributions to:
-
conception and design of the study,
-
data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation,
-
drafting or critically revising the manuscript,
-
final approval of the version to be published.
All co-authors must meet the authorship criteria as defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
The journal encourages the use of the CRediT taxonomy for transparent author contribution statements. All authors share responsibility for the content of the work.
5. Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of Concern
-
Corrections (Erratum/Corrigendum): Issued when minor errors are identified that do not alter the overall conclusions.
-
Retractions: Published when major errors, data fabrication, plagiarism, or other serious breaches of ethics are confirmed, following COPE Retraction Guidelines.
-
Expressions of Concern: Issued when there is credible evidence of potential misconduct but investigations are inconclusive.
All post-publication updates are clearly marked, linked to the original article, and include the date and reason for the change.
6. Handling Allegations of Misconduct
The editorial team follows COPE Flowcharts for handling ethical concerns, including those raised by reviewers, readers, or third parties.
Investigations are conducted confidentially, ensuring due process and fair treatment for all parties involved.
7. Ethical Approval and Informed Consent
For studies involving human participants, authors must follow the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and, where applicable, comply with the CONSORT Statement for the transparent reporting of randomized controlled trials.
Health science research should also follow other relevant reporting guidelines, such as STROBE (observational studies) or PRISMA (systematic reviews).
Research involving animals must follow internationally accepted welfare standards, and studies involving sensitive environmental or cultural heritage data must ensure proper permissions and ethical oversight.
In all cases, a statement on ethical approval and informed consent must be included in the manuscript.
