Ethics Statement

Asian Journal of Medical Technology is highly committed to upholding ethics in publication and quality of articles. We strive to follow the Code of Conduct as defined by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE). These publication ethics include the editor following certain rules on relations with readers, authors, and reviewers as well as procedures for handling complaints. Conformance to standards of ethical behaviour is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. AJMedTech does not accept plagiarism in all forms that lead toward unethical publishing of an article. This includes simultaneous submission of the same article to more than one journal.The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

All authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest in their article that might be construed to influence its results or interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. They also have a duty to act if any misconduct is suspected and to ensure the integrity of the academic record.  AJMedTech, strictly, does not allow editors to use unpublished information of authors without their written consent. Editors are required to take appropriate responsive actions if ethical complaints have been lodged concerning a submitted or published article. Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted article to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. The editors ensure that all submitted articles being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two expert reviewers. 

The Chief Editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Chief Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted article must not be used in an editor's own research without the written consent of an author.

Reviewers: 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. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. In case where a selected reviewer is unable to review an article, the reviewer should notify the editor of his/her unavailability within TWO (2) weeks. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not be used for personal interest. Reviewers should not consider articles in which they have conflicts of interest (for example: collaboration and/or other connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions affiliated to the articles).