ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND PUBLICATION POLICY

Mediterranean Veterinary Journal follows certain ethical standards for publication, existing to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public trust in scientific findings, and due credit for original ideas.MeditVetJ is connected to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), abides by its Code of Conduct, and aims to adhere to its Best Practice Guidelines.
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from https://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf

Authors who submit papers to MeditVetJ certify that his or her work is original and is not published or under publication consideration elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that submitted papers have not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other papers or studies. Authors certify that he or she does not have potential conflicts of interest or partial benefits associated with his or her papers.

MeditVetJ will check for plagiarism in all submitted articles prior to publication. If plagiarism is detected at any stage of the publication process, the author will be instructed to rewrite the manuscript. Every submission will be scanned by Turnitin to prevent plagiarism. If any manuscript is 20% plagiarized the article will be rejected and the author will be notified. We strongly recommend that authors check paper content before submitting for publication. Plagiarism can be checked by using free online software, like (FREE PLAGARISM CHECKER at http://www.quetext.com.)
MeditVetJ is committed to objective and fair blind peer reviews of submitted papers and the prevention of any actual or potential conflicts of interest between writers and reviewers.

Authors must confirm the following:
1. Manuscripts must be the original work of the submitting author.
2. Submitted manuscripts must be unpublished.
3. There should be no conflict of interest. If it exists, it must be clearly stated.
4. Authors should cite all data sources used in the preparation of the manuscript.
Please note: It is unethical to submit a manuscript to more than one journal concurrently.

Reviewers must confirm the following:
1. Manuscripts are reviewed fairly based on the intellectual content of the paper regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, religion, citizenship or political view of the author(s).
2. Any observed conflict of interest during the review process must be sent to the editor.
3. Information that may be a cause for rejection of publication must be sent to the editor.

Editors must confirm the following:
1. Manuscripts are reviewed fairly based on the intellectual content of the paper regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, religion, citizenship or political view of the author(s.)
2. Information pertaining to manuscripts is kept confidential.
3. Any observed conflict of interest pertaining manuscripts must be disclosed.
Please note: The Editorial Board takes responsibility for making publication decisions on submitted manuscripts based on the reviewer’s evaluation of the manuscript, policies of the journal editorial board, and legal efforts to prevent plagiarism, libel, and copyright infringement
Note: Author should make corrections in 2 months, otherwise paper will rejected.

Policies

Peer Review Policy
The author(s) of the present study and the journal accept(s) the ethical responsibilities that fit the PUBLICATION ETHICS. Each author is responsible for the content of his or her article. Articles submitted for publication are checked by the Turnitin (Professional Plagiarism Prevention) program. If an article contains plagiarism or self-plagiarism in more than 20% of the manuscript, it will be returned to the author for appropriate citation and correction.

• Submission of the same manuscript to different journals will not be accepted.
• Submissions with contents outside the scope of MeditVetJ will not be considered for review.
• Submissions will have a blind peer review.
• All papers are expected to have original content. They should not have been previously published or under review.
• The journal requires a minimum of three independent reviewers. All submissions are subject to a blind peer review.
• Publication decisions are made by the journal's Editor-in-Chief on the basis of the reviewer' reports.
• Submitted papers and reviewer reports are archived whether they are published or not and are not returned.
• Authors who want to discontinue the publication process after submission to MeditVetJ have to apply to the editorial board in a written correspondence.
• Authors are responsible for the writing quality of his or her papers.
• After submitting an article to the MeditVetJ, a fee is charged regardless of the acceptance/rejection condition.

Open Access Copyright Policy
Open access (OA) journals are scholarly journals that are available online "without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.” Open Access (OA) provides unlimited access and reuseability of research publications online for free. Therefore, the open access creates the network for reaching the widest possible audience, sharing the entire papers and building upon them.

MeditVetJ has signed the Budapest Open Access Initiative and shows its “openness” clearly in a standardized form.
MeditVetJ also supports the Budapest Open Access Initiative definition of ''Open Access,'' which is defined as:
“It has free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.”

Articles published in MeditVetJ will be Open-Access articles distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution License
MeditVetJ is licenced by Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

You can find information about CC-BY please click https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

The auhtor(s) retain all copyrights of their articles. However, authors grant the publisher non-exclusive publishing rights to publish the articles.


Archieving Policy (LOCKSS)
The LOCKSS system has permission to collect, preserve, and serve this Archival Unit.
The European Mechanical Scienceis using the LOCKKS archiving system.
The LOCKSS Program, based on the program used at Stanford University Libraries, provides libraries and publishers with award-winning, low-cost, open source digital preservation tools to preserve and provide access to persistent and authoritative digital content.
The LOCKSS Program (https://www.lockss.org/) is an open-source, library-led digital preservation system built on the principle that “lots of copies keep stuff safe.” The LOCKSS Program develops and supports libraries using an open source peer-to-peer digital preservation software.
The LOCKSS system allows librarians to access to the e-content to which they subscribe, restoring the print purchase model with which librarians are familiar.
The Global LOCKSS Network preserves today's e-journals and e-books for tomorrow's readers. The Global LOCKSS Network is a proven preservation approach that uniquely empowers both libraries and publishers. It enhances a library's value by restoring library collections via a locally installed "LOCKSS box", which is essentially a digital bookshelf. The Global LOCKSS Network enhances a publisher's value by preserving the original published artifact, including branding, historical context, and underlying files. It protects the publisher's interest by driving all reader traffic to their web site. The Global LOCKSS Network is administered and managed by the Stanford University Libraries LOCKSS Program. See the LOCKSS Program website for additional information, http://www.lockss.org/lockss/Home.
A detailed explanation of what sets the LOCKSS software apart and how preservation works in the LOCKSS network (e.g. technical infrastructure, security) can be found in the following link: https://www.lockss.org/about/how-it-works/.
MeditVetJ LOCKSS data can be found in the following link: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/meditvetj/lockss-manifest

Complaint Policy
Complaints are welcome as they provide an opportunity for improvement. Responses to complaints should be quick, helpful, and constructive. Please address complaints with a volume number, issue number, paper ID, paper title, and page number.
MeditVetJ accepts the following complaints:
• Authorship complaints
• Plagiarism complaints
• Multiple, duplicate, and concurrent publications or simultaneous submissions
• Allegations of research errors and fraud
• Research standards violations
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest
• Reviewer bias or competitive/harmful acts by reviewers

Policy for Handling Complaints
If the Journal receives a complaint that any contribution to the Journal infringes intellectual property rights or contains material inaccuracies, libelous materials, or otherwise unlawful materials, the Journal will investigate the complaint. An investigation may include a request that the parties involved substantiate their claims (the Journal will make a good faith determination whether to remove the allegedly wrongful material). A decision not to remove material should represent the Journal's belief that the complaint is without sufficient foundation, or if well‐founded, that a legal defense or exemption may apply. The Journal will document its investigation and decision. We strive to ensure that MeditVetJ is of the highest quality and is free from errors. However, we accept that occasionally mistakes might happen.

Editorial Complaints Policy
The Managing Editor and staff of MeditVetJ will make every endeavor to resolve issues as soon as possible in the most appropriate way, offering a right of reply when necessary. We will investigate complaints in a blame-free manner, looking to see how systems can be improved to prevent mistakes occurring.

Guiding Principles
Our general approach to complaints is that they are a rare but inevitable part of a process that involves putting together complex material at great speed. Despite rare mistakes, we will spend effort to treat complaints with urgency. Timely solutions can prevent the escalation of problems. All substantial errors and complaints are referred to senior executives within the editorial staff.

The procedure outlined below aims to be fair to the submitting authors who have complaints as well as the things they complain about. All complaints will be acknowledged within three working days if by email. If possible, a definitive response will be made within two weeks. If impossible, an interim response will be given within two weeks. Interim responses will be provided until the complaint is resolved. Escalated complaints are sent to the editor.

How to Make a Complaint
Complaints about editorial content should be made as soon as possible after publication, preferably by email to: meditvetj@mehmetakkif.edu.tr


Article Correction Policy
The online, published version of an article is considered the final and complete version. Even though it is possible to correct this version, our policy (in common with other publishers) is not to do so, except in very rare circumstances.

The only typographical errors that can be corrected are: author names, affiliations, article titles, abstracts, and keywords. In such cases, an erratum or corrigendum would be necessary as well (see below) so that there is a record of the difference between the online and print versions.

We can publish a correction to your article if there is a serious error, for example with regard to scientific accuracy, or if your reputation or that of the journal would be affected. We do not publish corrections that do not affect the contribution in a material way or significantly impair the reader’s understanding of the contribution (such as a spelling mistake or a grammatical error).

Please send an email to meditvetj@mehmetakif.edu.tr  the event a correction is needed.

Errata
An erratum will be used if an important error has been found during the publication process of the journal article. Errors requiring an erratum include: an error that affects the publication record, the scientific integrity of the paper, the reputation of the authors or of the journal, and errors of omission (e.g. failure to make factual proof corrections requested by authors within the deadline provided by the journal and within journal policy).

Erratas are not published for typing errors except where an error is significant (for example, an incorrect unit.) A significant error in a figure or table is corrected by the publication of a newly- corrected figure or table as an erratum. The figure or table is republished only if the editor considers it necessary.

Corrigenda
A corrigendum is a notification of a significant error made by the authors of the article. All authors must sign a corrigenda that is submitted for publication.
In cases where co-authors disagree, the editors will take advice from independent peer-reviewers and impose the appropriate amendment; noting the dissenting author(s) in the text of the published version.

Addenda
An addendum is a notification of a peer-reviewed addition of information to a paper. An example is a response to a reader’s request for clarification. Addenda do not contradict the original publication. If the author inadvertently omits significant information, the information can be published as an addendum after peer review.
Addenda are published only rarely and only when the editors decide that the addendum is crucial to the reader’s understanding of a significant part of the published contribution.

1. Editor's responsibilities

The editor is responsible to evaluate manuscripts submitted to the journal on the basis of its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. The decision will be based on the manuscript’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher. Editors and editorial board members will also ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential under review.

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo the blind review process by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field by not revealing the identity of the author(s) of a manuscript to the reviewers of that manuscript, and vice versa.


The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the Editor-in-Chief, who take the final decision to publish them or not. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

2. Authors and Authors responsibilities

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to public sources of information to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism such as copying another's manuscript as the author's own, paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution) or claiming results from research conducted by others and in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable. The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship is only limited to persons who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition and analysis of the study. All other persons who assist the authors in technical help, writing, and other general support but do not meet the criteria for authorship are not considered authors of the manuscript. Rather, these people should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section.

Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.

When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.

Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.

3. Reviewers' Responsibilities

Peer review assists editors and executive editorial board of the journal in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Reviewers must report to the editor of the journal if they are aware of copyright infringement and plagiarism on the author’s part.

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on content without regard to the authors’ race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious belief, citizenship, political orientation or social class.

4. Publisher's Responsibilities

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.

5. Readers' Responsibilities

Journal readers should refrain from violating the copyright of scientific articles. Not share or disseminate full-text files of articles on social media or any other online platform without the permission of the publisher.