Publication Ethics Charter

This Publication Ethics Policy has been developed in accordance with the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the publishing regulations of the Ministry of Higher Education of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, and in harmony with the academic principles and values of Kateb University. Accordingly, this policy sets out the ethical standards and requirements for authors, reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board, and all other individuals involved in the publication process of the Kateb Journal of Medical Sciences and Biotechnology.

To become more familiar with the ethical principles and standards governing scholarly publishing, researchers are encouraged to consult the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as well as the Research Ethics Guidelines approved by the Ministry of Higher Education of Afghanistan.

Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board

1. Editorial Independence

The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board shall preserve their editorial independence and ensure that authors enjoy academic freedom in presenting their scholarly work. Responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts rests with the Editor-in-Chief and is normally based on the recommendations of peer reviewers. However, manuscripts that are clearly outside the scope of the journal or are considered fundamentally unsuitable may be rejected without external peer review.

2. Impartiality

The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board shall perform their duties impartially, fairly, confidentially, and constructively. Editorial decisions shall be based solely on the scientific merit, originality, quality, and relevance of the submitted manuscripts, without discrimination or influence arising from personal, institutional, ideological, political, religious, ethnic, or other non-scientific considerations.

3. Conflict of Interest

The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board shall avoid any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest.

To prevent conflicts of interest, editors shall not participate in the editorial handling of manuscripts for which they have competing personal, professional, academic, financial, or institutional interests. Editorial responsibility for manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief or members of the Editorial Board shall be delegated to another qualified editor, such as a former Editor-in-Chief, an Editorial Board member, or another appropriately qualified individual independent of the manuscript.

Editors shall not influence the editorial or peer-review process of manuscripts they have authored or co-authored. Likewise, editors shall recuse themselves from handling manuscripts whenever a real or potential conflict of interest exists arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships with any author, institution, or organization associated with the manuscript.

Examples of situations that may constitute conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to:

• The editor and the author are employed by the same institution;
• The editor has served as a member of the author's thesis or dissertation committee, or vice versa;
• The editor and the author are currently collaborating on another publication or have co-authored a publication within the previous two years.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review

The journal follows a double-blind peer-review process in which neither the authors nor the reviewers are aware of each other's identities. If, under exceptional circumstances, a manuscript is evaluated using a procedure other than double-blind review, the review process and its rationale shall be clearly stated.

5. Confidentiality

The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board shall not disclose any information relating to submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, or individuals directly involved in the editorial process, as appropriate.

Appropriate editorial procedures shall be established to preserve the confidentiality of the peer-review process. Editors shall ensure that the identities of authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. Reviewer identities may be disclosed only with the reviewer's explicit consent.

The Editor-in-Chief shall ensure that all Editorial Board members adhere to these confidentiality requirements. Unpublished materials contained in submitted manuscripts shall not be used in an editor's own research without the author's prior written consent. Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review shall not be used for personal advantage.

6. Quality of Peer Review

Normally, each manuscript shall be evaluated by at least two independent reviewers.

The Editor-in-Chief shall routinely assess the quality of reviewers' reports. In exceptional circumstances, the Editor-in-Chief may edit a review report before forwarding it to the author, for example, to remove information that could reveal the reviewer's identity, or may withhold review reports that are inappropriate, offensive, or lacking constructive scientific value.

The quality and performance of reviewers shall be evaluated periodically to ensure the effectiveness and integrity of the journal's peer-review process. Reviewer performance records shall remain confidential and shall be accessible only to the Editor-in-Chief.

7. Timeliness

The editorial office, the Editor-in-Chief, and members of the Editorial Board shall make every effort to ensure the timely processing of all submitted manuscripts and provide prompt responses to authors regarding the status of their submissions.

Initial editorial assessment and reviewer selection should normally be completed within one week after manuscript submission.

8. Quality of Editorial Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for communicating editorial decisions to authors.

Decision letters should be clear, professional, and constructive, integrating reviewers' comments with any additional editorial recommendations. Editorial decisions should not be communicated merely by forwarding reviewers' comments without appropriate explanation or editorial guidance.

9. Accuracy

When the Editor-in-Chief receives convincing evidence indicating that the findings or conclusions of an unpublished manuscript are inaccurate or unreliable, the author shall be informed promptly.

If similar evidence becomes available after publication, the Editor-in-Chief shall take appropriate action, including the publication of a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or any other appropriate notice, in accordance with the journal's editorial policies and internationally accepted publication ethics standards.

10. Authority

Ultimate editorial authority and responsibility for the journal rest with the Editor-in-Chief.

The Editor-in-Chief shall respect all stakeholders of the journal, including readers, authors, reviewers, Editorial Board members, editorial staff, the Managing Editor, and the publisher, and shall strive to preserve the integrity of the journal's scholarly content while continuously improving its scientific quality.

The Editor-in-Chief shall appoint members of the Editorial Board and reviewer panel, define their responsibilities, and evaluate their performance on a regular basis.

11. Journal Performance

The Editor-in-Chief shall establish and monitor appropriate journal performance indicators.

The journal shall publish annual statistics concerning its editorial performance, including manuscript acceptance rates, publication frequency, the proportion of manuscripts undergoing external peer review, and other relevant performance indicators.

These indicators shall be used to evaluate and continuously improve the journal's editorial management, peer-review process, and publication quality.

Responsibilities of Authors

1. Submission of High-Quality Scholarly Manuscripts

Authors shall prepare and submit manuscripts in accordance with the journal's submission guidelines and accepted standards of scholarly writing. The research methodology should be described accurately, clearly, transparently, and objectively, and the data should be reported truthfully and precisely. Authors must respect intellectual property rights by providing appropriate citations to the works of others. The inclusion of fabricated or misleading information, plagiarism, discriminatory, unethical, or offensive content, or the translation or reproduction of others' work without proper acknowledgment is strictly prohibited.

2. Availability of Research Data

Upon request by the journal, authors may be required to provide the raw data, interview transcripts, questionnaires, or other research instruments used in the study for editorial review. Where appropriate and consistent with the ALPSP–STM Statement, authors are encouraged to facilitate access to such materials in order to enhance the transparency, reproducibility, and scientific quality of their research.

3. Originality of Submitted Work

Authors shall ensure that the submitted manuscript is entirely original. Any use of the ideas, data, text, figures, or findings of other researchers must be appropriately acknowledged and cited in accordance with the journal's referencing style.

4. Multiple, Duplicate, or Concurrent Submission

Submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal, or submitting a manuscript that has already been published or accepted for publication elsewhere, constitutes a violation of publication ethics and is strictly prohibited.

5. Proper Citation and Referencing

Authors are responsible for providing complete and accurate citations for all books, journal articles, theses, websites, datasets, and any other sources used in the manuscript, in accordance with the journal's prescribed citation style.

6. Authorship and Contribution

The corresponding author shall ensure that all individuals who have made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, implementation, analysis, or preparation of the manuscript are appropriately listed as authors, and that no individual who has not contributed significantly is included as an author.

The corresponding author is responsible for confirming the accuracy of the names and affiliations of all authors and ensuring that all listed authors have reviewed, approved, and agreed to the submission of the final version of the manuscript.

7. Disclosure of Potential Risks

Any potential hazards associated with the research that may affect humans, animals, the environment, or other living organisms shall be clearly identified and disclosed within the manuscript.

8. Acknowledgment of Financial and Non-Financial Support

Authors shall acknowledge all sources of financial, institutional, technical, or other forms of support in the Acknowledgments section immediately before the reference list.

9. Correction of Errors

If the corresponding author or any co-author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted, accepted, or published manuscript, they are obligated to notify the journal promptly and cooperate fully with the Editorial Office to correct the manuscript, publish an erratum, retract the article where appropriate, or take any other corrective action required.

Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the content of their manuscripts. Publication of an article does not imply that the journal endorses or guarantees the validity of its contents.

The Kateb Journal of Medical Sciences and Biotechnology adheres to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and complies with the applicable regulations governing the prevention of scientific misconduct and academic fraud.

10. Copyright Ownership

Under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) license, authors retain full copyright ownership of their published work without restriction. Authors maintain full control over their scholarly work, including the rights to reuse, distribute, republish, archive, and share their articles in accordance with the terms of the applicable license.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers assist the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board in evaluating the scientific quality, originality, and scholarly merit of submitted manuscripts. Through their constructive comments and recommendations, reviewers also contribute to improving the quality and academic value of manuscripts.

2. Timeliness and Quality of Peer Review

Invited reviewers should promptly inform the Editorial Office, Managing Editor, or Editor-in-Chief after their initial assessment if:

• they are unable to review the manuscript because it falls outside their area of expertise, due to insufficient time, or for any other reason; or
• they are able to review the manuscript only with a delay because of professional commitments, limited access to necessary resources, or other justified circumstances.

In evaluating manuscripts and formulating recommendations, reviewers should recognize the significant influence of peer review on editorial decisions. Reviews must be objective, honest, balanced, and supported by clear scientific reasoning. Reviewers should provide sufficient explanation and evidence to justify their recommendations to both the Editor-in-Chief and the authors.

Reviewers should avoid inconsistent or contradictory evaluations, such as providing overly favorable comments to the authors while submitting excessively negative confidential comments to the Editor-in-Chief without adequate justification.

Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the specified review period (10 working days). If additional time is required, they should promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief to request an extension or allow another reviewer to be assigned.

3. Confidentiality

All information contained in manuscripts under review shall be treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers shall not disclose, discuss, copy, distribute, or use any part of a manuscript for personal or professional benefit prior to its publication.

Reviewers shall respect the confidentiality of the peer-review process and communicate only with the Editor-in-Chief regarding matters related to the manuscript. If reviewers suspect scientific misconduct or ethical violations, they should report their concerns confidentially to the Editor-in-Chief and refrain from discussing the matter with any third party until an official editorial decision has been made.

4. Objectivity and Evidence-Based Evaluation

Reviewers shall evaluate manuscripts objectively, impartially, fairly, and professionally. Their recommendations must be based exclusively on scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, validity of data, and scholarly significance.

Personal opinions or discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender, political views, institutional affiliation, or any other non-scientific consideration shall have no place in the review process.

5. Identification of Relevant Sources

Reviewers should carefully examine whether authors have appropriately acknowledged the work of other researchers. Any significant published work, relevant literature, or important references that have not been cited should be brought to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief and the authors.

6. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers shall decline to review manuscripts whenever they have any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest arising from financial, institutional, professional, collaborative, competitive, or personal relationships with the authors, institutions, or organizations associated with the manuscript.

If a reviewer becomes aware of such a conflict after accepting the review assignment, the conflict must be disclosed immediately to the Editor-in-Chief, who will determine the appropriate course of action.

Examples of conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to, situations where the reviewer is conducting a closely related research project, has a competing manuscript under review elsewhere, or maintains a collaborative or competitive relationship with the authors.

Because the journal follows a double-blind peer-review process, reviewers are generally unaware of the identities of the authors. However, if a reviewer recognizes the identity of an author or otherwise becomes aware of a conflict of interest, the Editor-in-Chief must be informed immediately.

7. Professional Responsibility

Peer review is an essential scholarly responsibility that contributes to the advancement of scientific knowledge and the integrity of academic publishing. Researchers who submit manuscripts to the journal are expected, whenever appropriate, to reciprocate by accepting invitations to review manuscripts within their areas of expertise.

8. Right to Decline a Review

Reviewers have the right and the professional responsibility to decline review invitations whenever they believe they lack sufficient expertise to evaluate a manuscript objectively or when a conflict of interest exists.

If reviewers are invited to evaluate a revised version of a manuscript they have previously reviewed, they should inform the Editor-in-Chief of their earlier involvement unless the invitation explicitly requests them to conduct the subsequent review.

9. Double-Blind Peer Review

The journal employs a double-blind peer-review system in which neither the reviewers nor the authors know each other's identities.

Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts for which they have previously provided comments directly to the authors outside the journal's formal review process. Likewise, if a reviewer becomes aware of the identity of the author or co-authors in a manner that could compromise impartiality, the reviewer should inform the Editor-in-Chief and, where appropriate, withdraw from the review process.

Reviewers are also responsible for avoiding any action, statement, or communication that could reveal their identity to the authors during or after the peer-review process.

Responsibilities of the Publisher and Publishing Staff

1. Publication Decisions

The Publisher shall ensure that copyright laws and regulations governing the use and reproduction of published materials are fully respected and that the intellectual property rights of authors and other rights holders are protected throughout the publication process.

2. Fair and Unbiased Editorial Decisions

Decisions regarding submitted manuscripts shall be made solely on the basis of their scholarly merit, originality, scientific quality, and relevance to the journal's scope, without discrimination based on the authors' gender, race, ethnicity, religion, nationality, citizenship, political beliefs, institutional affiliation, or any other non-scientific consideration.

3. Confidentiality

All personal information relating to authors and submitted manuscripts shall be treated as strictly confidential by the Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board members, Managing Editor, editorial staff, reviewers, consultants, copy editors, layout editors, the publisher, and all other individuals involved in the editorial and publication process.

Such information shall be protected at all stages of the editorial workflow and shall not be disclosed to any unauthorized person.

4. Protection of Intellectual Property

The use of research findings, data, figures, tables, illustrations, or other materials produced by other researchers shall be permitted only with proper citation and, where required, with the explicit written permission of the copyright holder.

5. Open Access Statement

The Publisher fully endorses and follows the principles of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI).

The Kateb Journal of Medical Sciences and Biotechnology is a fully Open Access journal. Accordingly, all accepted manuscripts are made freely and permanently available online immediately after publication, allowing unrestricted access for readers worldwide without subscription or access fees.

Users are free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, cite, and share published articles in any medium or format, provided that appropriate credit is given to the authors and the journal.

The benefits of the journal's Open Access policy include:

• Authors retain the copyright of their published work.
• Articles are freely accessible to readers worldwide.
• Greater visibility, discoverability, readership, and dissemination of published research.
• Increased citation and scientific impact of published articles.
• No geographical restrictions on access to published content.
• Rapid dissemination of scientific knowledge.

6. Copyright and Publishing License

Under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) license, authors retain full copyright ownership of their published work without restriction.

Although authors maintain full control over the reuse, distribution, republication, archiving, and sharing of their work, submission of a manuscript to the journal constitutes authorization for the Publisher to publish the work, provided that it successfully completes the peer-review and editorial process.

7. Informed Consent of Research Participants

The journal is committed to protecting the privacy and dignity of all human research participants.

Researchers shall not disclose personally identifiable information—including names, photographs, family pedigrees, or any other identifying data—unless such information is scientifically essential and the participant (or the participant's parent or legal guardian, where applicable) has provided prior written informed consent for publication.

8. Ethical Use of Laboratory Animals

The Kateb Journal of Medical Sciences and Biotechnology supports research involving the responsible and ethical use of laboratory animals.

All studies involving laboratory animals shall be conducted in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations of Afghanistan, the policies of the institution where the research was performed, and internationally recognized guidelines for laboratory animal welfare.

Authors shall clearly state in the manuscript that the study received approval from the appropriate institutional ethics committee and that all ethical requirements relating to the housing, care, handling, and use of laboratory animals were fully observed.

Research involving laboratory animals shall comply with the internationally accepted 3Rs Principles:

• Replacement – using suitable alternatives whenever possible;
• Reduction – minimizing the number of animals used; and
• Refinement – employing methods that minimize pain, distress, and suffering.

The use of laboratory animals is acceptable only when no scientifically valid alternative exists and when the minimum number of animals necessary to achieve scientifically reliable results is used.

Authors shall employ appropriate veterinary procedures and accepted scientific methods to minimize pain, suffering, and stress, including the use of suitable anesthesia, analgesia, laboratory animal care, and humane euthanasia, where required.

The journal reserves the right to reject or decline to review any manuscript that fails to comply with ethical requirements governing research involving laboratory animals or lacks valid ethics committee approval.

9. Policy on Scientific Misconduct and Plagiarism

Submission of a manuscript through the journal's online submission system automatically generates a notification email to all listed authors. The inclusion of an individual's name as an author indicates that he or she has made a substantial scholarly contribution to the work.

If any listed individual has been included as an author without his or her knowledge or consent, the journal should be notified immediately.

All authors share responsibility for the originality and integrity of the submitted work. The journal reserves the right to investigate allegations of plagiarism or other forms of scientific misconduct and to take appropriate editorial action where necessary.

Scientific misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

• Submitting another person's work under one's own name;
• Listing individuals as authors who have made no substantial contribution to the research;
• Copying or reproducing substantial portions of another publication, including one's own previously published work, without appropriate citation;
• Presenting the results or findings of another researcher's work as one's own;
• Duplicate or redundant publication of the same work in multiple journals;
• Fabrication, falsification, or deliberate misrepresentation of research findings; and
• Using invalid, manipulated, or falsified research data.

All allegations of plagiarism and scientific misconduct will be investigated carefully by the journal. Depending on the severity of the violation, appropriate editorial action may include:

• Immediate rejection of the manuscript or retraction of the published article from the journal's website; and
• Placement of all authors involved on the journal's blacklist, rendering them ineligible for future submissions.