Publication Ethics and Malpractice Policy at MSABP

🧭 Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Magna Scientia Advanced Biology and Pharmacy (MSABP) is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, editorial integrity, and responsible scholarly communication. The journal expects ethical conduct from all participants involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher.

MSABP supports fair, transparent, and responsible manuscript handling to protect the credibility, reliability, and integrity of the academic record. Any form of publication misconduct, unethical behavior, or malpractice is taken seriously and may result in editorial action, manuscript rejection, correction, withdrawal, or retraction where necessary.

⚖️ Editorial Responsibilities

✅ Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief and editorial team are responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts are suitable for publication in MSABP. Editorial decisions are based on originality, scholarly quality, scientific soundness, clarity, relevance to the journal scope, reviewer comments, and compliance with ethical and legal standards, including those related to plagiarism, copyright, and defamation.

🧪 Fair and Impartial Evaluation

Manuscripts are assessed only on the basis of academic merit, scientific value, and intellectual content. Evaluation should remain fair, unbiased, and free from discrimination based on gender, race, religion, nationality, citizenship, ethnicity, institutional affiliation, or political belief.

🔒 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Information about a submission may be shared only with the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial advisers, or publishing personnel where required for legitimate editorial and publication purposes.

⚠️ Conflicts of Interest

Editors must avoid handling manuscripts in which they have personal, academic, professional, institutional, or financial conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal benefit, professional advantage, or third-party use without the author’s explicit written consent.

🔍 Responsibilities of Reviewers

📝 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviewers assist the editorial team in evaluating the originality, scientific quality, relevance, methodology, and clarity of submitted work. Reviewer comments also help authors improve their manuscripts through constructive academic feedback.

⏱️ Timeliness

Reviewers who consider themselves unqualified to assess a manuscript, or who are unable to complete the review within the requested timeline, should promptly inform the editor and decline or withdraw from the review assignment.

🔒 Confidential Handling of Manuscripts

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, copy, distribute, or use the content of unpublished manuscripts without permission from the editor.

🎯 Objectivity and Constructive Feedback

Reviews should be conducted objectively, respectfully, and professionally. Comments should be based on scholarly merit and supported by clear reasoning. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate and unacceptable.

📚 Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors where appropriate. They should also inform the editor of any substantial similarity, overlap, duplication, or possible redundancy between the submitted manuscript and other known publications or submissions.

⚠️ Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist due to competitive, collaborative, institutional, financial, or personal relationships. Information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage.

✍️ Responsibilities of Authors

📄 Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate, honest, and clear account of their research. Manuscripts should contain sufficient detail, appropriate methodology, and relevant references to allow readers, reviewers, and editors to understand, evaluate, and where applicable reproduce the work. Fabrication, falsification, data manipulation, and misleading interpretation are unethical and unacceptable.

🗂️ Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide raw data, ethical approvals, patient consent statements, supplementary files, or supporting documentation for editorial review. Authors should retain relevant research records for a reasonable period after publication and cooperate when clarification is required.

🚫 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is original and that all borrowed text, ideas, data, tables, figures, images, and previously published materials are properly acknowledged. Any form of plagiarism, unattributed copying, improper paraphrasing, or unethical reuse of content is considered unacceptable publication behavior.

🔁 Multiple, Duplicate, or Redundant Submission

Authors should not submit the same manuscript, or substantially similar work, to more than one journal at the same time. Duplicate submission, duplicate publication, and redundant publication are considered serious ethical violations.

👥 Authorship and Contribution

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant intellectual, scientific, or practical contributions to the study. All listed authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all eligible contributors are included and that no inappropriate or honorary authorship is assigned.

💬 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, personal, or professional relationships that could influence, or appear to influence, the interpretation of research findings. Sources of funding, sponsorship, grants, or other support should also be clearly acknowledged.

🧾 Ethical Compliance

Where applicable, authors must confirm that studies involving human participants, animals, patient data, clinical materials, or sensitive information were conducted in accordance with relevant ethical standards and approved by a suitable ethics committee or institutional review authority. Evidence of informed consent should be stated whenever required.

📌 Correction of Significant Errors

If an author discovers a significant error, omission, or inaccuracy in a submitted, accepted, or published article, the author must promptly notify the editor and cooperate fully in correcting, updating, or retracting the work when necessary.

🚨 Misconduct and Editorial Action

MSABP treats publication misconduct seriously. Suspected cases of plagiarism, fabricated data, falsified results, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, image manipulation, citation abuse, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or ethical violations may be investigated by the editorial team.

Depending on the seriousness and nature of the issue, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

• 📄 Request clarification, explanation, or supporting documents from the author(s)
• ❌ Reject the manuscript during editorial review or peer review
• ⚠️ Publish a correction, editorial note, or expression of concern
• 🔁 Retract the published article where necessary
• 🏛️ Inform institutions, funding bodies, ethics committees, or other relevant authorities where appropriate

MSABP is dedicated to preserving trust in scholarly communication by promoting ethical authorship, fair peer review, responsible editing, and transparent correction of the scientific record. The journal expects all contributors to uphold these principles throughout the publication process.