Rcodp

ISSN 1676-6849

Journal’s policies, publication ethics and malpractice statement:

Revista Clínica de Ortodontia Dental Press is published bymonthly, by Dental Press International, addressed to the dental class, and it is intended for the publication of clinical case reports and techniques, articles of interest to professionals, brief communications and updates.

Revista Clínica de Ortodontia Dental Press uses GNPapers, an online system for submission and evaluation of manuscripts. To submit manuscripts, please visit: http://rcodp.dentalpress.gnpapers.com.br/

Please send all other correspondence to: Dental Press International, Av. Dr. Luiz Teixeira Mendes, 2.712 - Zona 5, Zip code: 87.015-001, Maringá/PR, Brazil, Phone. (55 044) 3033-9818 - E-mail: artigos@dentalpress.com.br

The statements and opinions expressed by the author(s) does not necessarily correspond to that of editor(s) or publisher, who not assume any responsibility for them. Neither the editor(s) nor the publisher guarantee or endorse any product or service advertised or claim made by their respective manufacturers in this publication. Each reader must determine about how to proceed with the information contained in this publication. The Journal or the sponsors are not responsible for any mischance from the publication of erroneous information.

— APCS (Article Processing Charges) and Submission Charges

Revista Clínica de Ortodontia Dental Press is free of any kind of submission/publication fees, thus the authors are not charged to publish with us.

— Archiving

All of the Dental Press International journals, including Revista Clínica de Ortodontia Dental Press, are available in full text (PDF version) in the Publisher’s archive DentalGO which can be accessed via subscription. In the event the journal is no longer published, all of its content will be available in DentalGO.

— Copyright and access

  All rights reserved to Dental Press International. The journal’s full-text articles and issues can be accessed in both print and digital versions for subscribers. Please visit Dental Press Store for subscriptions.

— Peer review process

The manuscripts must be original and not published or submitted for publication in another Journal. All submitted articles are subject to a double-blind peer-review, in which the article will be forwarded to editors for initial analysis. Should they decide that the article is of low priority, it will be sent back to the author. Conversely, should at least one of the editors decide that the article is suitable for publication, it will continue on the submission process and will be thoroughly analyzed by a group of three to four reviewers. The “double blind” system is used in this phase and the editor-in-chief make the final decision.

— Plagiarism and malpractice

Papers in which plagiarism is detected will not be accepted for publication in Revista Clínica de Ortodontia Dental Press. The manuscripts must be original and not published or submitted for publication in another Journal, as well as must follow the recommendations from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE — http://publicationethics.org) and The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE — www.icmje.org). Manuscripts will be reviewed by the editor and reviewers and are subject to editorial review. For more details, please check below the “Procedures for dealing with unethical behavior”.

— Ethical Expectations

1. Publisher’s responsibilities

1.1 Dental Press International, responsible for Revista Clínica de Ortodontia Dental Press, shall ensure that good practice is maintained to the standards outlined below.

2. Editor's responsibilities

2.1 To act in a balanced, objective and fair way while carrying out their expected duties, without discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.

2.2 To handle submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

2.3 To adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the event of complaints of an ethical or conflict nature, in accordance with the policies and procedures of the journal where appropriate. To give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.

3. Reviewers’ responsibilities

3.1 To contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner.

3.2 To maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author. To not retain or copy the manuscript.

3.3 To alert the editor to any published or submitted content that is substantially similar to that under review.

3.4 To be aware of any potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative or other relationships between the reviewer and author) and to alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for that manuscript.

4. Authors’ responsibilities

4.1 To maintain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, and to supply or provide access to these data, on reasonable request. Where appropriate and where allowed by employer, funding body and others who might have an interest, to deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location, for sharing and further use by others.

4.2 To confirm/assert that the manuscript as submitted is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere. Where portions of the content overlap with published or submitted content, to acknowledge and cite those sources.

4.3 To confirm that all the work in the submitted manuscript is original, that all authors have significantly contributed to the research and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources. To obtain permission to reproduce any content from other sources.

4.4 Authors should ensure that any studies involving human or animal subjects conform to national, local and institutional laws and requirements (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki) and confirm that, where appropriate, approval has been sought and obtained. Authors should obtain express permission from human subjects and respect their privacy.

4.5 To declare any potential conflicts of interest (e.g. where the author has a competing interest (real or apparent) that could be considered or viewed as exerting an undue influence on his or her duties at any stage during the publication process). 4.6 To promptly notify the journal editor or publisher if a significant error in their publication is identified. To cooperate with the editor and publisher to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, or to retract the paper, where this is deemed necessary.

— Procedures for dealing with unethical behavior

1. Identification of unethical behaviour

1.1 Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone and they should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated.

1.2 All allegations will be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

2. Investigation

2.1 An initial decision should be taken by the editor, who should consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate, as well as to follow the recommendations from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE — http://publicationethics.org) and The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE — www.icmje.org).

2.2 Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

3. Breaches

3.1 Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

3.2 Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the publisher or Society as appropriate, should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

4. Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)

4.1 Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.

4.2 A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behaviour.

4.3 Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.

4.4 Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.

4.5 A formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.

4.6 Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer's department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.

Friday, March 22, 2019 17:34