Manuscripts submitted to Research Journal of Biomedical and Biotechnology are evaluated through a double or multiple blind review process and published electronically with free access. The following are the ethical responsibilities, roles and duties of the authors, journal editor, reviewers and publisher. The following ethical principles and rules have been prepared according to the guidelines of the 'Committee on Publication Ethics' (COPE (https://publicationethics.org/)). Information is also provided on what is considered plagiarism and unethical behavior by the RJBB.

In human research, a statement of informed consent of study participants is required in the “Materials and Methods” section. All studies should be conducted in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/), which covers the date of the most recent revision. Patient confidentiality should be protected according to universally accepted rules. When procedures for volunteers or patients are involved, the study subjects must be informed and their consent must be given before the study begins. If the authors do not have a local ethics committee, the principles outlined in the “Declaration of Helsinki” should be followed. When asked about legislation and other relevant regulations, authors should declare that they comply with the latest internationally recognized guidelines and submit “Ethics Committee Approval”.

Manuscripts reporting the results of experimental studies on animals should state that the study protocol was approved by the institution's animal ethics committee and that the study was conducted in accordance with internationally recognized guidelines, including the European Universal Declaration of the Rights of Animals (Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes, Principles of Laboratory Animal Science, and Handbook for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals). Authors are kindly requested to send a record of the ethics committee approval with the manuscript.

AUTHOR(S)

Articles submitted to RJBB journal must be original works.
All sources used in the articles should be cited correctly and appropriately.
It should be stated that the articles submitted to the journal have not been submitted to another journal and the Copyright Transfer Form should be filled in.
People who did not contribute to the article should not be listed as authors.
Conflicts of interest related to the submitted manuscript should be indicated and the reason should be explained.
Authors should inform the editor and the editorial board when they detect an error in their manuscript and collaborate in the correction or retraction process

REFEREES

All articles in the RJJB are evaluated through a double or multiple blind peer review process. Blind reviewing means that authors are kept confidential from reviewers and reviewers are kept confidential from authors to ensure an unbiased, objective and independent review process. Articles are sent to the reviewers for evaluation through the journal management system. The referees are required to fill out a form containing their decision on the originality of the article and whether the article is publishable and the reasons for their decision. 

Reviewers are only required to review articles related to their area of expertise.
Reviewers are expected to agree to review articles without any conflict of interest. Referees should inform the editor if they notice any conflict of interest and refuse to referee the relevant article.
Reviewers should evaluate the articles impartially and objectively.
Reviewers are required to fill out the Referee Evaluation Form for the articles they evaluate, and are expected not to mention their names on the forms in order not to harm the blind review process. The referees are also required to indicate their decision on whether the article is publishable or not and the reasons for their decision in this form.
The style used by the referees in their suggestions should be polite, respectful and scientific. Reviewers should avoid offensive, disrespectful and subjective personal comments. When reviewers are found to have made such unscientific comments, they may be contacted by the editor or editorial board to reconsider and correct their comments.
Reviewers are required to complete their reviews within the given deadline and are expected to comply with the ethical responsibilities outlined here

EDITOR

The editor is required to follow the 'Ethical Conduct and Best Practices for COPE Journal Editors' published by the 'Committee on PublicationEthics' (COPE (https://publicationethics.org/)). 

 The editor should continuously update the publication and writing rules and the sample template to inform the authors of what is expected of them.
The editor should evaluate the manuscripts submitted to the journal in terms of the journal's editorial guidelines, the importance and originality of the work, and if he/she decides to reject the manuscript during the initial submission process, he/she should clearly and impartially communicate the reasons to the authors. In this process, if it is decided that the manuscript should be revised in terms of grammar, punctuation and/or spelling rules (margins, proper referencing, etc.), the authors should be informed about this and given time to make the necessary corrections.
Manuscripts should include the dates of submission and acceptance for publication.
When authors request information about the status of their manuscripts, they should be informed about the status of their manuscripts in a way that does not disrupt the blind review process.
The editor should ask the referees to evaluate the articles in accordance with their knowledge and expertise. Thus, it should be ensured that the articles are appropriately evaluated by experts in their fields.
The editor is obliged to require reviewers to state that they have no conflicts of interest before evaluating an article.
The editor should communicate to the reviewers all necessary information about the peer review process and what is expected of the reviewers.
The editor should ensure that the peer review process is blind peer-reviewed and should not disclose to the authors about the reviewers and to the reviewers about the authors.

All articles submitted to the RJBB Journal are scanned with a software program before publication. Articles with a similarity rate of 20% or less are accepted for publication. Articles exceeding this rate are examined in detail and if deemed necessary, they are sent back to the authors for revision or correction, and if plagiarism or unethical behavior is detected, publication is rejected.