Ethics and Publication Malpractice
Drug Analytical Research (DAR) adheres to the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in all stages of the publication process. The policies below are established in accordance with the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, jointly issued by COPE, and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and apply to all submitted and published content.
- Authorship
Authorship Criteria
Manuscripts submitted to Drug Analytical Research must contain original, unpublished work that is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, in whole or in part. Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their manuscripts and for properly citing the work of others.
Authorship must be based on substantial contributions to the work. DAR follows the ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) criteria, requiring that each author has:
- a) Made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;
- b) Participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content;
- c) Approved the final version submitted for publication; and
- d) Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work, including its accuracy and integrity.
All individuals who meet all four criteria should be listed as authors. Those who contributed to the work but do not meet all criteria — such as technical support, writing assistance, or general supervision — should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section.
AI-generative tools can not be consider an Author.
Contributor Roles (CRediT)
Drug Analytical Research requires that all authors describe their individual contributions using the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework, as indicated in Template. CRediT provides a standardized vocabulary of 14 contributor roles — including Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing, Supervision, Funding Acquisition, and others — that allow for a transparent and detailed account of each author's participation in the work. Authors who are unsure how to apply CRediT roles may refer to the taxonomy at https://credit.niso.org/.
Corresponding Author
One author must be designated as the corresponding author, responsible for all communication with the editorial office during submission, peer review, revision, and post-publication correspondence. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript prior to submission and that all co-authors have read and agreed to the terms of this ethics policy.
Authorship Changes
Any addition, removal, or reordering of authors after manuscript submission must be approved by all current authors and justified in writing to the editor. Once a manuscript has been officially scheduled for publication, no changes to the authorship list will be accepted under any circumstances. Requests received after the scheduling date — including additions, removals, or reordering — will not be processed by the editorial team.
2. Complaints and Appeals
Drug Analytical Research is committed to handling all complaints and appeals in a fair, timely, and consistent manner, in accordance with COPE's Core Practices.
Appeals of Editorial Decisions
Authors who wish to appeal a rejection decision may submit a formal written appeal to the editor-in-chief within 30 days of receiving the decision. The appeal must include a detailed justification explaining why the decision should be reconsidered. Appeals are evaluated by at least one additional editor or independent reviewer not involved in the original decision. The editor-in-chief's ruling on an appeal is final.
Research Misconduct Allegations
Any allegation of research or publication misconduct — including plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification or fabrication, undisclosed duplicate publication, or inappropriate authorship — will be investigated according to COPE procedures. In confirmed cases of misconduct, appropriate actions will be taken, which may include rejection, correction, retraction, or reporting to the authors' institutions. Allegations may be submitted by any party and will be treated with confidentiality to the extent possible. Editors will not encourage misconduct or knowingly allow it to occur.
3. Conflicts of Interest / Competing Interests
Drug Analytical Research requires full and transparent disclosure of any financial, personal, professional, or institutional relationships that could influence — or be perceived to influence — the submission, review, or publication of a manuscript.
Authors
All authors must declare any competing interests at the time of submission. If no competing interests exist, a statement to that effect must be included. Competing interest statements will be published alongside all accepted articles. Funding sources and the role of any sponsors in the research design, data collection, analysis, or reporting must be clearly disclosed.
Reviewers
Peer reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively and confidentially, providing constructive feedback to assist authors in improving their work. Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal advantage. Those who identify a conflict of interest after accepting an assignment must notify the editor immediately and recuse themselves if necessary.
Editors
Editors are responsible for making publication decisions based solely on the academic merit, originality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts, without discrimination based on the authors' gender, ethnicity, nationality, or institutional affiliation. Editors must ensure confidentiality during the review process.
4.Data Sharing and Reproducibility
Drug Analytical Research is committed to promoting transparency and reproducibility in scientific research. Authors are expected to make the data and methods underlying their results as accessible as possible.
Reproducibility
Authors must provide sufficient methodological detail — including instrument parameters, reagent specifications, software versions, and statistical procedures — to allow independent reproduction of the reported results. DAR may request supplementary method documentation or raw data during peer review or post-publication.
5.Ethical Oversight
Research involving human participants, animal subjects, or sensitive personal data must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international ethical standards and must have received prior approval from a recognized ethics review body.
Human Subjects
Research involving human participants must have been approved by the relevant Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Research Ethics Committee (REC). Authors must include in the manuscript the name of the approving body and the approval reference number, as well as must confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants or their legal guardians, in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Studies involving patient data must include a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained.
Animal Research
Research involving animal subjects must comply with applicable national and institutional guidelines for the ethical treatment of animals. Authors must identify the ethics committee that approved the research and confirm that all procedures were conducted in accordance with the relevant regulatory standards.
Plagiarism and Text Recycling
Plagiarism in any form — including self-plagiarism, data fabrication, and data falsification — is strictly prohibited. All submitted manuscripts are subject to similarity checks using CopySpider or equivalent plagiarism detection software. Any manuscript found to contain plagiarized or fraudulent material will be immediately rejected. Confirmed cases of misconduct in published articles will result in retraction and may be reported to the authors' institutions.
Author Responsibilities After Publication
Authors must participate in the post-publication process and notify the editor promptly if significant errors are discovered after publication, so that appropriate corrections or retractions can be made.
Corrections and Erratum
Where a published article contains a factual error, calculation mistake, or other inaccuracies that does not affect the article's conclusions, an erratum will be issued. The original article will be updated with a link to the correction notice.
Retractions
Articles found to contain major errors, fabricated or falsified data, plagiarism, undisclosed duplicate publication, or other forms of misconduct that undermine the integrity of the findings will be retracted. Retractions will follow COPE's Retraction Guidelines and will include a public retraction notice stating the reason for retraction. Retracted articles will remain visible in the journal archive and will be clearly marked as retracted.
