Probecell Science

Probecell Science is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, research integrity, transparency, and responsible scholarly communication. The journal follows established principles of responsible publishing and expects authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher to uphold these standards throughout the publication process.

This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted to and articles published by Probecell Science, including original research articles, reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, case reports, methodological articles, letters, and other scholarly contributions.

1. Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the presentation of another person's words, ideas, data, figures, images, or other intellectual work as one's own without appropriate acknowledgment.

All submitted manuscripts may be screened for plagiarism or substantial textual similarity using appropriate similarity-detection tools.

Manuscripts containing unacceptable levels of plagiarism or unattributed copied material may be rejected. If plagiarism is identified after publication, the journal may investigate the matter and take appropriate corrective action, which may include publication of a correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction, depending on the severity and circumstances.

Properly cited quotations, commonly used technical terminology, and appropriately referenced material are not considered plagiarism.

2. Duplicate Publication and Redundant Publication

Authors must not submit or publish the same manuscript or substantially overlapping work in more than one journal. Duplicate publication, redundant publication, or substantial overlap with previously published work without appropriate disclosure is considered a violation of publication ethics.

Authors must disclose any closely related manuscripts, preprints, conference papers, datasets, or previous publications that may overlap with the submitted manuscript.

Where legitimate secondary publication is permitted, it must comply with applicable ethical and editorial requirements and must clearly acknowledge the original publication.

3. Fabrication

Fabrication is the invention of data, results, observations, participants, experiments, or other research information that did not actually occur.

Fabricated research is unacceptable. Where fabrication is suspected, the journal may request clarification, supporting data, ethical approval documentation, or other relevant evidence from the authors or their institution.

Confirmed fabrication may result in rejection or retraction and notification of the relevant institution or research organization where appropriate.

4. Falsification

Falsification includes manipulating, altering, omitting, selectively reporting, or misrepresenting research data, experimental procedures, results, images, or other research information in a manner that may produce a misleading scientific record.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted data and results accurately represent the underlying research. Confirmed falsification may result in rejection, correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction, depending on the circumstances.

5. Image Manipulation

Images, photographs, microscopy images, blots, graphs, radiological images, and other visual data must accurately represent the underlying research.

Image processing is acceptable when it is applied uniformly and does not obscure, remove, add, or misrepresent scientifically relevant information. Authors should retain original, unprocessed image files and must provide them when reasonably requested during an editorial investigation.

Deliberate manipulation, duplication, fabrication, selective alteration, or inappropriate enhancement of research images may constitute research misconduct.

If image manipulation is suspected, the journal may request original files and supporting information and may refer the matter to the authors' institution when appropriate.

6. Authorship and Authorship Disputes

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, acquisition or analysis of data, interpretation of results, or development of the manuscript, and who have participated in approving the final version and accept responsibility for the work.

All listed authors must approve the submitted manuscript and agree to its submission. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria should be appropriately acknowledged where applicable.

Changes to authorship after submission or publication require agreement from all affected authors and may require supporting documentation.

The journal does not adjudicate authorship disputes independently. When a dispute cannot be resolved by the authors, the journal may refer the matter to the relevant institution or research organization and may suspend editorial processing until the matter is resolved.

7. Conflict of Interest

Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose any financial, personal, professional, institutional, or other relationships that could reasonably influence or be perceived to influence the research or editorial decision.

Authors should disclose relevant funding, employment, consultancy, patents, financial interests, or other relationships associated with the submitted work.

Editors and reviewers must not participate in the evaluation of manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest.

The existence of a conflict of interest does not necessarily prevent publication, provided that the conflict is appropriately disclosed and managed.

8. Peer-Review Manipulation

Authors must not attempt to influence or manipulate the peer-review process. Prohibited practices include:

• Providing false reviewer identities or contact information.
• Suggesting reviewers with undisclosed conflicts of interest.
• Impersonating reviewers.
• Attempting to contact or influence reviewers regarding a manuscript under review.
• Submitting fabricated or manipulated reviewer reports.
• Using third parties or commercial agencies to manipulate the peer-review process.

The journal may verify reviewer identities and affiliations when necessary. Suspected peer-review manipulation may result in rejection, withdrawal of the manuscript, retraction of a published article, or notification of the relevant institution.

9. Citation Manipulation

Authors must cite literature accurately and appropriately. Citations must be relevant to the manuscript and should not be included solely to increase citation counts of authors, editors, journals, or institutions.

Editors and reviewers must not require authors to add irrelevant citations for the purpose of increasing citations to themselves, the journal, or another publication.

Citation stacking, coercive citation practices, and deliberate manipulation of citation metrics are unacceptable.

10. Retraction

A published article may be retracted when the scientific or ethical integrity of the published record is seriously compromised. Reasons for retraction may include, but are not limited to:

• Fabrication or falsification of data.
• Major plagiarism.
• Substantial errors that invalidate the main findings.
• Duplicate publication.
• Unethical research.
• Fraudulent authorship.
• Serious manipulation of images or data.
• Peer-review manipulation.
• Other circumstances that substantially compromise the reliability or integrity of the publication.

A retraction notice will identify the affected article and explain the reason for the retraction. Wherever technically possible, the original article will remain accessible but will be clearly marked as Retracted.

Retraction does not necessarily imply misconduct by every author.

11. Corrections and Amendments

Errors identified after publication that do not invalidate the main findings may be corrected through an appropriate correction notice. Corrections may address, for example:

• Factual errors.
• Author or affiliation information.
• Figures or tables.
• References.
• Metadata.
• Typographical errors that affect interpretation.
• Other significant errors in the published record.

The journal will maintain a transparent connection between the correction notice and the original article. Minor typographical errors that do not affect the scientific record may be corrected without a formal correction notice at the journal's discretion.

12. Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be published when there is a substantial concern regarding the integrity, reliability, or ethical status of a published article but the available information is insufficient to make an immediate decision regarding correction or retraction.

An Expression of Concern may remain in place while the journal or the relevant institution investigates the matter. The journal will update the published record when the investigation reaches an appropriate conclusion.

13. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that the decision resulted from a significant factual error, misunderstanding of the manuscript, procedural problem, or demonstrable problem in the peer-review process.

Appeals should provide a clear and evidence-based explanation of the specific issue and should not simply repeat arguments already considered during peer review.

Appeals are evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or another appropriate editor who was not directly involved in the original decision, where practicable.

An appeal may result in reconsideration, additional peer review, or confirmation of the original decision. Editorial decisions based on legitimate differences in scientific judgment are not normally overturned solely because authors disagree with the outcome.

14. Complaints

The journal welcomes complaints relating to editorial procedures, publication ethics, peer review, authorship, conflicts of interest, publication errors, or other aspects of journal operation.

Complaints should provide sufficient information and supporting evidence to allow the journal to investigate the matter. Complaints concerning editorial decisions will be handled independently of the original decision-making process where reasonably practicable.

Where a complaint concerns potential research misconduct, the journal may request information from the authors' institution or relevant research organization.

The journal aims to investigate complaints fairly, confidentially, and in a timely manner.

15. Ethical Approval for Research

Research involving human participants, animals, or other regulated research subjects must comply with applicable ethical and regulatory requirements. Authors must provide information regarding relevant ethical approval or exemption where applicable.

The manuscript should identify:

• The name of the approving ethics committee or institutional review board.
• Approval or reference number, where applicable.
• The date or other relevant details of approval where required.

The journal may request documentation of ethical approval during editorial review. Failure to obtain required ethical approval may result in rejection or further investigation.

16. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must comply with applicable national and international ethical standards. Authors must ensure that participants are treated with respect and that risks, benefits, privacy, and confidentiality are appropriately addressed.

Where applicable, manuscripts should include a statement identifying the approving ethics committee or institutional review board and the approval or reference number.

Authors must not include personally identifiable information unless it is necessary, appropriately protected, and permitted under applicable ethical requirements.

17. Research Involving Animals

Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international standards for the ethical treatment and welfare of animals.

Authors should provide details of the relevant animal ethics committee approval or exemption, including the approval or reference number where applicable.

The manuscript should provide sufficient information about measures taken to minimize animal suffering and distress. The journal may request evidence of ethical approval or compliance with relevant animal welfare requirements.

18. Informed Consent

For research involving human participants, authors must obtain informed consent where required by applicable ethical standards and regulations. Where appropriate, manuscripts should include a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained.

For case reports or identifiable clinical information, authors must obtain appropriate consent for publication where required. Personal information should be removed or anonymized wherever possible.

If identifiable images or other information are essential to the publication, appropriate consent for publication must be obtained.

19. Editorial and Investigative Procedure

When a potential ethical violation is identified, the journal may undertake an initial assessment and request clarification or supporting documentation from the authors.

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the journal may:

1. Request an explanation from the authors.
2. Request original data or supporting documents.
3. Consult editors or independent experts.
4. Contact the relevant institution or research organization.
5. Request additional ethical documentation.
6. Correct the published record.
7. Issue an Expression of Concern.
8. Retract the article.
9. Take other appropriate editorial action.

Investigations will be conducted fairly and with appropriate confidentiality. The journal will avoid making conclusions about research misconduct without appropriate evidence.

20. Responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers, Editors, and Publisher

Authors

Authors are responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity, and ethical conduct of their research and for the accuracy of information submitted to the journal.

Reviewers

Reviewers must provide objective, confidential, constructive, and evidence-based assessments. Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and must not use confidential manuscript information for personal or professional advantage.

Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring that editorial decisions are based on scholarly quality, relevance, originality, ethical standards, and the results of peer review. Editors must manage conflicts of interest and protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.

Publisher

The publisher supports the editorial independence of the journal and is responsible for providing the infrastructure necessary to maintain the integrity, accessibility, and preservation of the scholarly record.

21. Protection of the Scholarly Record

Probecell Science is committed to maintaining an accurate and transparent scholarly record. When a published article requires correction, clarification, an Expression of Concern, or retraction, the journal will provide an appropriate notice and maintain a clear connection between the notice and the affected publication.

The journal will not remove a published article from the scholarly record solely because of a dispute or disagreement. Removal will be considered only in exceptional circumstances where retention of the article would create a serious legal or ethical risk.