Please refer to the journal's Policies on Publication Ethics.
There are differing definitions of scientific misconduct. We deal with these problems at SLJS on a case by case basis while following guidance produced by bodies that include the:
The WAME gives a useful overview of misconduct, using a slightly amended version of the US Office of Research Integrity definition of scientific misconduct and including these behaviours:
Also included are redundant publication and duplicate publication, lack of declaration of competing interests and of funding/sponsorship, and other failures of transparency to be forms of misconduct.
We take seriously all possible misconduct. If an editor has concerns that a submitted article describes something that might be considered to constitute misconduct in research, publication or professional behaviour, the SLJS editorial board may discuss the case in confidence with the institutional or national ethics committees.
If the case cannot be resolved by discussion with the author(s) and the editor still has concerns, the case may be reported to the appropriate authorities. If, during the course of reviewing an article, an editor is alerted to possible problems (for example, fraudulent data) in another publication, the editor may contact the journal in which the previous publication appeared to raise concern.
Readers that suspect misconduct in a published article are encouraged to report this to the editor of the SLJS.
Sri Lanka Journal of Surgery strongly believes in gender equity in research and promotes such policies through its publications. SLJS therefore has adopted SAGER guidelines proposed by Heidari, S., Babor, T.F., De Castro, P. et al. (2016) and require its authors to follow these guidelines whenever applicable. Following is a reproduction of the SAGER general guidelines.
Recommendations per section of the article
Title and abstract
If only one sex is included in the study, or if the results of the study are to be applied to only one sex or gender, the title and the abstract should specify the sex of animals or any cells, tissues and other material derived from these and the sex and gender of human participants.
Authors should report, where relevant, whether sex and/ or gender differences may be expected.
Authors should report how sex and gender were taken into account in the design of the study, whether they ensured adequate representation of males and females, and justify the reasons for any exclusion of males or females.
Where appropriate, data should be routinely presented disaggregated by sex and gender. Sex- and gender-based analyses should be reported regardless of positive or negative outcome. In clinical trials, data on withdrawals and dropouts should also be reported disaggregated by sex.
The potential implications of sex and gender on the study results and analyses should be discussed. If a sex and gender analysis was not conducted, the rationale should be given. Authors should further discuss the implications of the lack of such analysis on the interpretation of the results.
Heidari, S., Babor, T.F., De Castro, P. et al. Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev 1, 2 (2016). (https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6)
The SLJS is a member of CrossCheck by CrossRef and iThenticate.
iThenticate is a plagiarism screening service that verifies the originality of content submitted before publication. iThenticate checks submissions against millions of published research papers, and billions of web content.
SLJS runs manuscripts through iThenticate screening prior to publication. Authors, researchers and freelancers can also use iThenticate to screen their work before submission by visiting www.ithenticate.com.