Dedicated to Quality and excellence
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
It is necessary to agree upon standards of ethical behavior for all author/staff/editor/reviewer/publisher involved in the act of publishing. Our ethic statements are based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to IJABR:
Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Journal OA Policy and Ethics:

Our Open Access journals maintain the highest standards of peer review while increasing the efficiency of the process. All research articles published in journals are fully open access: immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Submission of a manuscript to a Our journal implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies.

Originality and plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Ethics approval: Research involving human participants, human material, or human data, must have been performed in accordance with the approval by an appropriate ethics committee. Manuscripts may be rejected if the Editor considers that the research has not been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework.

Sex and gender in research (SAGER): We encourage our authors to follow the ‘Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines’ and to include sex and gender considerations where relevant.

Consent for publication: For all manuscripts that include details, images, or videos relating to an individual person, written informed consent for the publication of these details must be obtained from that person. The consent must be for publication of their details under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (such that they will be freely available on the internet).

Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: All submissions must include disclosure of all relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest.

Peer review of referred papers:
Single blind:Author doesn't know the identiy of the reviewer.
Double blind:Reviewer doesn't know the identity of the author, and vice-versa.
Open Peer review:The identity of the author and the reviewer is known by all participants, during or after the review process.
Transparent Peer review: Review report is posted with the published article. Reviewer can choose if they want to share their identity.
Collaborative: Two or more reviewers work together to submit a unified report.    OR  Author revises manuscript under the supervision of one or more reviewers.
Post publication: Review solicited or unsolicited, of a published paper. Does not exclude other forms of peer review.
Editors of our Open Access journals will decide promptly whether to accept, reject, or request revisions of referred papers based on the reviews and editorial insight of the supporting journals. In addition, Editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. Authors will be advised when Editors decide further review is needed.

Our Peer review process  of novel submissions:
1. Authors submit an Manuscript.
2. The Editor-in-chief verifies relevance of the Manuscript to the journal's policy for publishing.
3. If Manuscript have the merits of journal's Scope, the Editor-in-chief will assign the two reviewers, who are expert in respective field. IJABR follows Double blind Review process.
4. Reviewer'r comment will be sent to the Associate editor, whether Manuscript Need modification, Rejection or Accepted. This message will forward to Authors also.
5.  If Manuscript accepted by reviewrs, Acceptance will be sent to the author, after galley proof approved by the Author then Manuscript will be in queue for publication.
6. If modification asked by the reviwer, The author/s should respond in due time and clarify ambiguities if any.
7. Upon receiving the revised Manuscript, the reviewers will check the author/s modified Manuscript.
8. If modified/revised paper Manuscript by the reviewer, the acceptance will be sent to the author, after galley proof approved by Author then Manuscript will be in queue for publication.

Withdrawal of Manuscripts
Authors are not allowed to withdraw submitted manuscripts, because the withdrawals are waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscript, money and works invested by the publisher.
Withdrawal of manuscripts are only allowed after withdrawal request has been made to the Publisher.
In case of fraudulent submission, Withdrawn means that the article content (HTML and PDF) is removed and replaced with a HTML page and PDF simply stating that the article has been withdrawn according to the journal Policy on Article in Press Withdrawal with a link to the current policy document.

Use of patient images or case details: Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Confidentiality: Editors will treat all manuscripts submitted to our journals in confidence. Our journal adheres to COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewers are therefore required to respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond the information released by the journal. We will not share manuscripts with third parties outside of our journal editorial committee except in cases of suspected misconduct.

Third party submissions: All manuscripts must be submitted by an author and may not be submitted by a third party.

Informed Consent Policy
Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper. Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should disclose to these patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with the journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or laws. We decide that patient confidentiality is better guarded by having the author archive the consent and instead providing the journal with a written statement that attests that they have received and archived written patient consent. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the published article.
Nonessential identifying details should be omitted.
The Process for Handling Cases Requiring Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Expressions of Concern.

Corrections
Errors in published papers may be identified in the form of a corrigendum or erratum when the Editor-in-Chief considers it appropriate to inform the journal readership about a previous error and makes a correction to the error in the published article. The corrigendum or erratum will appear as a new article in the journal, and will cite the original published article.
Retractions
Retractions are considered and published when there are severe errors in an article that invalidate the conclusions. Retractions are also made in cases where there is evidence of publication malpractice, such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, or unethical research.
According to industry best practice and in accordance with COPE guidelines, AME implements the following procedure if a retraction is confirmed:
1.     A retraction note titled "Retraction: [article title]" signed by the authors and/or the editor is published in a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list.
2.     In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article.
3.     The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note. It is to this screen that the link resolves; the reader can then proceed to the article itself.
4.     The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the HTML and PDF indicating on each page that it has been "retracted."
Editorial expressions of concern
Where substantial doubt arises as to the honesty or integrity of a submitted or published article, journal editors may consider issuing an expression of concern. However, expressions of concern should only be issued if an investigation into the problems relating to the article has proven inconclusive, and if there remain strong indicators that the concerns are valid.  Under some rare cases, an editorial expression of concern may also be issued when an investigation is underway but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time.
The expression of concern will be linked back to the published article it relates to.

Retractions
Retractions are considered and published when there are severe errors in an article that invalidate the conclusions. Retractions are also made in cases where there is evidence of publication malpractice, such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, or unethical research.
The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the HTML and PDF indicating on each page that it has been “retracted.”

Editorial expressions of concern: Where substantial doubt arises as to the honesty or integrity of a submitted or published article, journal editors may consider issuing an expression of concern. However, expressions of concern should only be issued if an investigation into the problems relating to the article has proven inconclusive, and if there remain strong indicators that the concerns are valid.  Under some rare cases, an editorial expression of concern may also be issued when an investigation is underway but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time.

COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS
Nature of complaints considered: Complaints may relate to a failure of process (e.g. delays) or a severe misjudgement (e.g. an improperly applied retraction notice). They may also relate to author or reviewer misconduct. Complaints may be made by anyone, including authors, reviewers and readers.
Process for making a complaint: Complaints should be emailed to in submi.bioit@gmail.com. Please provide as much detail as possible and include supporting information where appropriate (for example, copies of email correspondence) with manuscript ID number.

Process for handling the complaints:  A formal acknowledgement of the complaint will be made within Four working days. Otherwise, regular interim communications will be made, at least once in every four weeks. Complaints will be dealt with by the journal office wherever possible. The Corresponding Editor has the right to consult the other Editors or with any third party over the issue, and make a final decision. That final decision shall be binding, and the matter shall be closed.
Complaints or concerns about author or reviewer misconduct: If you wish to complain or raise a concern about suspected author or reviewer misconduct, please refer to our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement. *Suspicion of an ethical problem with a manuscript, unethical image manipulation, duplicate publication, self-plagiarism,excessive self-citation.We take allegations of misconduct very seriously and will investigate.
If your complaint is not satisfactorily resolved:  We will be referred back to the Editors, whose decisions on such matters is final.

Appeals: If Author appeals against the editorial decision only under highly specific issues and usually only where a author can indicate a clear misunderstanding of the article by the reviewer.

Rejected manuscripts: The most common reasons for rejecting manuscripts are:
    The article content is not within the scope of the journal;
    The article is not written in clear English;
    The article does not conform to our Guidelines for Authors in terms of content, style and/or formatting.
    The article does not meet the journal’s quality as per recommendations of reviewers and decision of the editor.

Retracted articles: We will only consider appeals against retractions if substantial evidence can be provided to demonstrate that the decision was unjust.

Advertising policy
"    Currently we are not accepting any advertising.

Research Ethics Policy:
"To ensure that all research activity involving human participants undertaken should scrutinized by scrutiny/ethical committee and it complies with agreed ethical standards. "To provide academic staff with the experience of the ethical scrutiny of research.
"Ethical approval is required prior to commencement of any research involving human participants or their personal data.
"We are maintaining open and transparent procedures relating to the conduct and review of research.

Data Sharing Policies:We always facilitating faster and more effective research discovery by enabling reproducibility and verification of data, methodology and reporting standards. We encourage authors of articles published in our journals to share their research data including, but not limited to: raw data, processed data, software, algorithms, protocols, methods, materials.

Data Availability Statement: Authors can select more than one statement if they have data under different conditions.
Author shouls state the repository name, the persistent URL, and any conditions of reuse.

Reproducibility of research.
Citation and linking of research data and their associated articles, enhancing visibility and ensuring recognition for authors.

Deposition within data repository (strongly recommended):All data and related metadata underlying reported findings should be deposited in appropriate public data repositories, unless already provided as part of a submitted article. The Data Availability Statement must list the name of the repository or repositories as well as digital object identifiers (DOIs), accession numbers or codes, or other persistent identifiers for all relevant data.

Data citation: References to data sets (data citations) must include a persistent identifier (such as a DOI).

Unacceptable Data Access Restrictions: Authors will not share data because of personal interests, such as patents or potential future publications.