ENT Updates

UK Scientific Publishing Limited follows COPE’s Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and follows the recommendations and policies related to research and Publishing ethics developed by COPE.

Publishing ethics are a set of guidelines and norms followed to ensure the credibility and reliability of academic research. Adhering to journal Publishing ethics can ensure the quality and reputation of journals, and enhance readers' trust and respect for academic research. At the same time, journal Publishing ethics are also an important guarantee for maintaining fairness, transparency, and credibility in the entire academic community.

Ethics for Editors

  • Editors adhere to the principles of independence and integrity and strictly abide by COPE's Core practices in the decision-making process, so as to strive for the publication and quality of manuscripts to meet ethical standards.
  • All manuscripts submitted to ENT Updates are subject to a rigorous peer review process.

    -Before peer review, manuscripts will be screened for readability, novelty, and relevance to the focus and scope of the journal.

    -The editor shall maintain the fairness and impartiality of the review. Each manuscript shall be reviewed by at least two reviewers. Whether the manuscript is accepted by the journal will be decided by the Editor-in-Chief or the academic editor designated by the Editor-in-Chief in combination with the reviewer’s comments.

  • Any manuscript submitted to ENT Updates is confidential.  The manuscript will not be disclosed to anyone except the editorial staff, reviewers, editors, and other individuals who participate in the preliminary review, peer review, and handling and are responsible for the publication of the manuscript (if accepted).
  • Editors shall not participate in all the processing of articles in which they have a conflict of interest.
  • We ensure that the commercial behavior of the journal will not affect the editorial decision, and firmly adhere to the principles of independence and integrity.

Editors, Employees and Members of the Editorial Board as Authors

UK Scientific Publishing Limited do not allow editors, employees, and members of the editorial board to participate in the processing of their own articles.
Editors, employees, and members of the editorial board must disclose all potential conflicts of interest related to their articles.
Editors, employees, and members of the editorial board should follow a strict review process to ensure the quality and reliability of articles.

For articles submitted by our editors, employees, and members of the editorial board, the UK Scientific Publishing Limited will assign the manuscript to an expert reviewer in the field who does not have a conflict of interest with the author, as well as to other editors for evaluation and processing.

Ethics for Authors

Clear Authorship

At the time of submission, whether the list of authors includes all the eligible authors of the article (in the correct order), and reach a consensus with all co-authors on the journal and the time of submission. (For Authorship please see the detailed policy)

Avoid Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism)

Check if the article correctly quotes yourself or someone else's work. Not only that, but the authors also need permission from the copyright owner to publish any previously published content (including quotations, numbers or forms).

Conflict of Interest

Any facts that may be considered a (potential) conflict of interest should be disclosed prior to the references section of the article. There are many types of financial and non-financial benefits involved in contributing to an article, some of which may include:

Financial interest:

  • Company Shares: The author owns shares in a company that is relevant to the topic covered in the article
  • Fund Sponsorship: Research is done through grant funding
  • Consultant/Consulting Work: The author has worked as a consultant or advisor in any company or organization relevant to the research in this paper
  • Patents Held: The author holds patents related to this research
  • Political Support: The author has donated to political parties or political candidates relevant to the study of this paper, government grants, foundation grants, etc.
  • Honoraria received by the author: The manuscript or other fee that the author receives after publishing the article
  • Other Financial Relationships: Disclosure is required if the author has other financial relationships with any company, organization, or individual related to the study in this paper

Non-financial interests:

Interpersonal relationships, political positions, religious beliefs, intellectual property rights, etc.

Authors, editors and reviewers should also make timely statements regarding (potential) non-financial conflicts of interest, including but not limited to the following:

  • Academic Competition Conflict of Interest: For example, the reviewer has an academic competition or conflict of interest with the author, editor, or other related person.
  • Personal Conflict of Interest: For example, the reviewer, author, or editor has a personal conflict of interest, such as a friendly relationship, kinship, or other personal relationship.
  • Conflict of Interest of Opinion Position: For example, the reviewer, author, or editor has a specific opinion or position.
  • Intellectual Property Conflict of Interest: For example, the reviewer, author, or editor has a specific intellectual property or patent right.
  • Conflict of Interest in Political, Religious, or other Beliefs: For example, the reviewer, author, or editor has a political, religious, or other belief position.

Editors must be honest and transparent at all times in order to avoid conflicts of interest. If an editor has a personal or financial interest related to a submitted article, the editor must disclose this to the publisher. At the same time, this editor is no longer involved in the review process related to this article until the article is finalized for publication.

When assigning reviewers for an article, editors must check to the maximum extent possible whether there is a (potential) conflict of interest between the assigned reviewer and the author(s) involved in the article. If a reviewer discovers a (potential) conflict of interest with the article at the time of review, the reviewer should immediately notify the relevant editor and withdraw from the article review process.

Avoid Writing more than One Draft

Consubmission to multiple journals is not allowed. Original research work must be novel and has not been previously published.

The above is not exhaustive, and authors should be aware of local regulations and accepted norms within academic publishing.

Allegations of Misconduct

The editors of UK Scientific Publishing Limited are responsible for ensuring the academic integrity of the articles published in the journal, and any misconduct takes all necessary actions according to the COPE guidelines. The misconduct includes (but is not limited to):

-Plagiarism

-Falsification of research, data fabrication

-Affiliation misrepresentation

-Submit to multiple journals simultaneously

-Breaches in copyright/use of third-party material without appropriate permissions

-Undisclosed competing interests

-Unethical research

Data Sharing

UK Scientific Publishing Limited encourages authors to share data. Data sharing facilitates scientific research and knowledge discovery, increases the reproducibility and reliability of research, as well as fosters collaboration and innovation, improves the efficiency of research, and increases the value and application of data. Sharing relevant data and materials when authors publish their articles can improve the transparency and quality of scientific research. Authors can work with the editors of their journals to share raw data, codes and other relevant materials used in their articles with other researchers for further scientific research.

We ask authors to provide raw data with their article submission and to provide details of the data sources and data processing methods in the article. If there are restrictions on the data or limitations such as privacy protection, authors should provide a suitable solution to ensure that other researchers can access the data under reasonable conditions.

Data shared by the journal include, but are not limited to, the following:

  • Raw data: Data collected or generated by the research, including experimental data, observations, questionnaire data, etc.
  • Code and algorithms: Software code and algorithms used to process, analyse and interpret the data.
  • Literature and metadata: Literature, metadata and annotations that relate to the research process, such as study design, methods, hypotheses, results and conclusions.
  • Images and multimedia: Includes multimedia materials such as images, audio, video, etc., used to support the presentation and interpretation of the research process and results.
  • Models and simulations: Including mathematical models, simulation tools, etc. used for research predictions and simulations.
  • Other related materials: Including questionnaires, sampling protocols, experimental protocols, and other materials related to the study.

Reproducibility of Data

The data and methods used in scientific research can be reproduced and validated by other researchers. Reproducibility of data contributes to: improving the credibility and reliability of scientific research, accelerating scientific progress, promoting academic communication and collaboration, and increasing the efficiency of research resources. In short, the reproducibility of journal data is of great importance to the development and progress of scientific research, and is the foundation and guarantee of scientific research.

We strongly recommend that authors adopt open science practices, such as sharing data on public databases and complying with applicable ethical and legal requirements. We believe that these practices help foster collaboration and innovation in the scientific community and enhance the credibility and reproducibility of scientific research.

We will strictly enforce the above policy and require reviewers and editors to critically review the data and methods of articles. We may reject articles or ask authors to make corrections and additions if incomplete data, inadequate methods or analytical errors are found.

Ethical oversight

UK Scientific Publishing Limited is committed to promoting the quality and reliability of scientific research, valuing ethical guidelines and following COPE's ethical oversight policy. We require all authors to adhere to the following ethical guidelines and policies when submitting articles (including but not limited to):

*Policies on consent to publication

UK Scientific Publishing Limited requires all authors to ensure that all Co-authors have given their consent to publication when submitting an article. The data and information involved in the article have been appropriately licensed. 

*Publication on vulnerable populations

UK Scientific Publishing Limited requires all authors to adhere to ethical guidelines and moral standards when conducting academic research involving vulnerable populations. In the case of research involving vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, people with disabilities, the sick and the underprivileged, the author must have clearly obtained the informed consent of the subjects or their guardians, and safeguarded their rights, privacy and confidentiality. UK Scientific Publishing Limited follows strict academic standards and is committed to promoting understanding and support for disadvantaged groups in order to promote equality and progress in society.

*Ethical conduct of research using animals

UK Scientific Publishing Limited strongly urges researchers to conduct animal experiments only when necessary, to comply with relevant ethical and moral standards when conducting animal research, and to ensure that the rights of animals are protected. Authors should provide detailed plans and methods for animal experiments, as well as appropriate ethical review and authorisation materials. We encourage authors to follow the 3R principles (Reduce, Refine, Replace) to strictly control the number and use of laboratory animals in order to reduce the harm to animals from animal experiments.

*Ethical conduct of research using human subjects

UK Scientific Publishing Limited requires authors to adhere to relevant ethical and moral standards when conducting human subject experiments to ensure that the rights and safety of the subjects are safeguarded. Authors should provide detailed trial plans and methods, as well as the appropriate ethical review and authorisation materials. Informed consent should be signed before subjects participate in the study, and authors should ensure that the rights and privacy of trial participants are adequately protected.

*Handling confidential data and ethical business/marketing practices

Authors should have a clear understanding of and comply with the policy on the protection of confidential data when handling confidential data, and ensure that data are kept confidential and secure to avoid misuse or disclosure of confidential data.

-Adhering to honest, fair and transparent business codes, compliance with corresponding laws and regulations;

-Not using false statements or misleading language;

Ethics for Reviewers

Peer reviews are conducted as a double-blind process via our Open Journal System (OJS). As the editor’s and/or reviewer’s comments will determine the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript, these comments play an important role in the peer-review process.

Reviewers are advised to adhere to the following:

  • Conflicts of interest should be declared accordingly.
  • Published worksthat are relevant and value-add to the manuscript should be pointed out.
  • Reviewed articles and their contents should be kept strictly confidential. Reviewers should not give, share, use, or in any other way distribute this manuscript to third parties before publication.
  • Reviews should be objective, avoid personal criticism.
  • Promptness in response; reviewers should notify UK Scientific Publishing Limited if they are unable to participate in the peer review of a specific manuscript. 
  • Possible areas of focus while conducting the review of manuscripts:

*Potential ethical concerns

          -Potential research misconduct (eg. Data fabrication/manipulation)

          -Potential author misconduct (eg. Plagiarism, redundant publication)

*Technical errors

*Logical errors (fallacies, lapses in logic, etc.)

*Language errors that mar the clarity of the text

*References

         - Suitability of references used

         - Other relevant research which should be referenced in the paper

Handling Complaints and Appeals

If an author disagrees with the decision made by the journal's editor, they have the option to submit an appeal for reconsideration. It is important for authors to clearly and concisely state their viewpoints and requests, providing appropriate evidence to support their arguments. The appeal should include the following:

 

Specific rebuttal to the editor's decision: Authors should explain why they believe the editor's decision is wrong or unfair, offering relevant evidence to substantiate their views.

Request for reconsideration: Authors should provide specific reasons why they are requesting the journal to re-review their submitted paper.

Reasonable suggestions: If authors believe there are other methods to resolve the issue, such as seeking intervention from an independent mediation or arbitration body to help address disagreements and decision disputes, or resubmitting the paper to another journal, they may include these suggestions in their appeal.

 

If you are filing a complaint against a journal or publisher, it is important to provide evidence of any misconduct on the part of the journal or publisher, such as violations of ethical standards, ethical principles, copyright infringement, and other related issues.

All complaints will be taken seriously by our publisher and journal, and we will respond to the complainant in a timely manner and inform the progress of the complaint.

The journal's policy is primarily to safeguard the rights of authors, reviewers, editors and publishers, and to adhere strictly to the publication ethics. All complaints and appeals must be supported by relevant materials and evidence. If you need to file a complaint or appeal, please contact us via email: entu@ukscip.com. We will handle the complaints and appeals following the relevant regulations by COPE: https://publicationethics.org/appeals.