Double Blind Peer Review Policy
The journal employs the double blind peer review process. Every proposal submitted for publication is read at least by an editor, for an initial review. If the paper agrees with editorial policies and with a minimum quality level, is sent to two reviewers. The reviewers won't know the author's identity, as any identifying information will be stripped from the document before the review.
Reviewers' comments to the editors are confidential and before passing on to the author will made anonymous. Based on the reviewers' comments, the Editorial Board makes a final decision on the acceptability of the manuscript, and communicates to the authors the decision, along with referees' reports. Whether significant revisions are proposed, acceptance is dependent on whether the author can deal with those satisfactorily.
Policy on Retraction of articles
The Journal follows the COPE guidelines for Retraction of articles: It Can be found at following link:
Policy on plagiarism
The Journal does check plagiarism of submitted paper through open source software Small SEO Tool - Plagiarism Checker. To complain, please feel free to contact us. The journal will debar the guilty authors from publishing for the period of six months.
Web Link: http://smallseotools.com/plagiarism-checker/
Open Access Policy
International Journal of Orthopaedics Sciences is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License
, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright as per Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial - Share Alike 4.0
Authors involving in the usage of experimental animals and human subjects in their research article should seek approval from the appropriate Ethical committee in accordance with "Principles of Laboratory Animal Care". The Method section of the manuscript should include a statement to prove that the investigation was approved and that informed consent was obtained.
Role of Editors: The role of the editors is to evaluate the suitability of submitted manuscripts for the journal, including: (a) the quality of the manuscript, (b) whether it meets the Aims and Scope of the journal, and (c) the originality of the work. The editors will not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers or potential reviewers, or other members of the editorial board. Editors will ensure the prompt handling of the review process. Editors will evaluate the merit of manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, country of origin, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation.
Role of Reviewers: Peer review is essential to the journal in assisting in making editorial decisions and assisting authors in manuscript improvement. Reviewers should point out relevant publications not cited in the manuscript and point out any similarities with previously published works. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest, competitive, financial, or collaborative. If a potential reviewer feels unqualified to review the manuscript, that reviewer should notify the editors immediately and decline the review. Manuscripts received for review will be treated as confidential documents and not shown or discussed with other without authorization from the editors. Authors should expect to receive reviewer reports in a prompt manner, normally within three weeks. Reviewer misconduct (breach of confidentiality, delay of peer review, plagiarism, or conflicts of interest) will not be tolerated.
Role of Authors: Authors of original research (not previously published or under consideration for publication elsewhere) should be an accurate presentation of the work carried out, a discussion of the significance of the work in context with previous works, and should contain sufficient experimental detail to allow others to replicate the work. Appropriate citation of previously published works must always be included. Authors should disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that may be construed as influencing the data or interpretation. All sources of financial support should be disclosed. Authorship should be limited to those persons who have made a significant contribution to the work in terms of conception, design, experimental implementation, and data analysis and interpretation. All persons making significant contributions should be included as co-authors. If an author discovers a significant error in the published work, the author is obligated to inform the journal editor in order to either correct or retract the paper.
Role of the Publisher: In cases of proven scientific misconduct, plagiarism, or fraudulent publication, the publisher, in collaboration with the editorial board, will take appropriate action to clarify the situation, publish an erratum, or retract the work in question.
Authorship provides credit for a researcher's contribution to a study and carries accountability (as described by McNutt et al. (2018) Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 201715374; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1715374115; licensed under CC BY 4.0).
All of our electronic content (website, manuscripts, etc.) is stored on three different sources. Content on one server is online and accessible to the readers. The copy of the same content is kept as a backup on another source. On the other hand journal’s Abstracting/Indexing services also store many essential information about the articles. All articles are also stored in printed format in our society's office.
The Journal allows authors to deposit versions of their work in an institutional or other repository of their choice as per Sherpa/Romeo Green policy.
Anyone can directly contact us via email or Enquiry Form for any kind of complaint, etc.