Acta Veterinaria Eurasia

Publication Ethics
Acta Veterinaria Eurasia aims to adhere to the guidelines and core practices set by several organizations, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (joint statement by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME), and Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals by ICMJE. These guidelines and recommendations promote transparency, integrity, and best practices in scholarly publishing. By adhering to these standards, the journal aims to ensure that the research it publishes is of high quality and meets the ethical standards of the scientific community.

Medical research involving human subjects, including research on identifiable human material and data, should follow the WMA Declaration of Helsinki, amended in 2013, to guide on issues such as obtaining informed consent from participants, protecting their privacy and confidentiality, and avoiding harm to study participants.  

Acta Veterinaria Eurasia also adheres to the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)’s Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals. These recommendations guide on how to handle conflicts of interest, deal with suspected research misconduct, and ensure the integrity and transparency of the peer review process. By following these recommendations, the journal helps to ensure that the research it publishes meets the highest ethical standards.

Authors are advised to use EASE Ethics Checklist for Authors to ensure that their manuscripts comply with ethical standards and practices. 

All research involving animal subjects, veterinary records, or animal tissues must adhere to ethical guidelines and be reviewed and approved by an appropriate committee, such as an institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) or an ethics committee, before its execution. In the manuscript submitted for publication in Acta Veterinaria Eurasia, authors should mention the name of the ethics committee that reviewed and granted approval for the research, along with the ethics committee approval number and date. Furthermore, the journal may request authors to provide a copy of the ethics committee's approval during the manuscript submission process. This stringent review process ensures that the research involving animals has been appropriately evaluated and authorized and allows the journal to confirm that the study adheres to the ethical standards necessary for publication.

For studies involving animals, it is required to obtain approval of research protocols from an ethics committee. The ethics committee should review the research protocols to ensure that they are in compliance with relevant guidelines and regulations, such as the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (8th edition, 2011) and the International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals (2012). These guidelines provide detailed information on how to conduct research involving animals ethically and humanely is widely recognized as the standard for such research.

They can use the ARRIVE checklist, which is designed to help authors provide this information in a clear and comprehensive manner.

In addition to the ethical treatment of animals, authors should also provide information on the measures taken to prevent pain and suffering. This is to ensure that the research is conducted in a humane manner, and to allow readers to verify that the research meets the relevant ethical standards.

If the manuscript reports the findings of a survey or interviews, the author must confirm that the participants gave their informed consent to participate in the study and for their personal details to be recorded if that is the case. If quotations or other attributable statements are included, these must be deidentified, or the manuscript must state that the person agreed to be named in the manuscript.

If a study is exempted from the ethics committee approval, the authors must present a statement from the ethics committee explaining the reason for the exemption. This is to ensure that the research was reviewed by an ethics committee and that the decision to exempt the study was made in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. 

Manuscripts those do not require ethical approval, the authors should explain the reason (For example; “Our study did not involve any invasive procedures on animals, therefore an ethics committee approval is unnecessary”)

If a manuscript is submitted to Acta Veterinaria Eurasia without ethics committee approval, the journal will review the manuscript according to the COPE’s Research, Audit and Service Evaluations guideline. This guideline provides guidance on how to handle manuscripts that do not have ethics committee approval, and allows the journal to assess the risks and potential ethical concerns associated with publishing the research.

If the journal determines that the lack of ethics committee approval is a significant concern, the manuscript may be rejected after editorial review. This is to ensure that the journal maintains high ethical standards and only publishes research that has been properly reviewed and approved by an ethics committee. 

Plagiarism and Ethical Misconduct
All submissions are screened by a similarity detection software (Crossref Similarity Check Powered by iThenticate) multiple times during the peer-review and/or production processes.

When you are discussing others' (or your own) previous work, make sure that you cite the material correctly in every instance.

Authors are strongly recommended to avoid any form of plagiarism and ethical misconduct that are exemplified below.

•    Citation manipulation: The practice of manipulating the number of citations received by an author, journal, or other publication through various means, such as self-citation, excessive citation of articles from the same journal, or the inclusion of honorary citations or citation stacking. 
•    Self- plagiarism (text-recycling): The practice of using overlapping sections or sentences from the author's previous publications without properly citing them. This is considered to be a form of plagiarism, as it involves using someone else's work (in this case, the author's own work) without proper attribution.
•    Salami slicing: The practice of using the same data from a research study in several different articles. This is considered to be unethical, as it involves reporting the same hypotheses, population, and methods of a study in multiple papers.
•    Data Fabrication: The addition of data that never occurred during the gathering of data or experiments. This is considered to be a form of research misconduct, as it involves presenting false or misleading information as if it were real data.
•    Data Manipulation/Falsification: The practice of manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This can include manipulating images, removing outliers or "inconvenient" results, changing data points, and other forms of manipulation. This is also considered to be a form of research misconduct, as it involves presenting false or misleading information as if it were real data.

In the event of alleged or suspected research misconduct such as plagiarism, citation manipulation, or data falsification/fabrication, the Editorial Board will follow the appropriate COPE flowcharts to ensure that the allegations or suspicions are handled in a fair, transparent, and consistent manner.  


EISSN 2619-905X