Authors need to ensure that the research paper submitted is original and has not been published elsewhere under the same or different title.

Authors need to ensure that all the authors are represented accurately and clear references are given to work done by others. The onus is on the authors to reveal the source of all data and third-party material used. This includes any material used previously in both published and unpublished work by the authors themselves

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors

The Corresponding Author is the author responsible for communicating with the journal for publication. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication

Use of any third-party material is to be done after obtaining the written permission from the respective copyright holders. The permission documents should be submitted with due diligence along with the research work submitted for publication. At any stage, the publisher or editor cannot be held responsible for the improper use of copyrighted material in the research work. Authors are expected to comply with the editor or publisher when source of data, proof of authorship or any such detail is requested.

Any conflict of interest should be stated openly. If the research work submitted for publication will benefit a company, organisation or service that any of the authors is a part of, then the work should be accompanied by a disclosure.

When any ethical or technical issue is found with a published research work, the authors should be ready to provide corrigenda in a timely manner and cooperate with the editor and publisher in case of publication of an errata or retraction of the published research work.

Editors should read and understand our ethics policy, and follow them during all editorial processes ensuring the maintenance of the highest quality of academic integrity in publications. Editors should ensure that the 15 research work submitted for publication complies with the requirements of the journal.

The Editor - In - Chief, the Associate Editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and the publisher.

All publication processes should be transparent and any queries from the authors regarding the publication process should be answered in a timely manner. Editors should communicate all editorial decisions regarding a research work submitted for publication to the respective author and give the authors the chance to appeal against the same.

All research work submitted for publication should be subjected to a double-blind peer review and the review report should be submitted to the publisher for archival purposes.

Editors should ensure that the reviewers submit their reviews in the format given by the publisher and the review is done within a month from the receipt of the article. If the review report is not received and forwarded to the author within a month, the editor should inform the author on the reason for delay.

Editors need to keep the publishers informed of all editorial decisions and submit all relevant documents supporting the same. Any discrepancy, misrepresentation or insufficiency in copyright permissions procured by a research work sent for publication, as identified by the editor, should be brought to the notice of the publisher.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author and any article found using false data or has a detrimental impact on society should not be considered for publication. In case it is found after publication, the editors should publish an errata or corrigendum or retract the article depending on the seriousness of the issue.

Reviewers should read and understand the publication ethics policy of our journals and guidelines for submissions document. Reviewers may not accept the invitation to review a research work if they do not agree to the ethics policy of the journal or find the work submitted for review not relevant to their area of expertise.

Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of their work. Reviewers should not attempt to identify the author of a research work submitted for review and should maintain their anonymity.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the Editor- In - Chief and the Associate Editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

Reviewers should communicate well with the editors and publishers. Reviewers may approach the editors if they have any queries regarding the journal and its policies.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be 17 accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor- In- Chief/Associate Editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Reviewers should assess a work honestly, rigorously and objectively. The use of unprofessional or subjective language should be avoided in the review report. The review report should be sent to the editor within 28 days from the receipt of the research work for review.

Reviewers should be ready to review the research work they reviewed earlier. The reviewers may suggest changes and report any ethical misconduct to the editors. The author reworked papers may be sent to them for reconsideration.

Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.