Ethical guidelines

 

Fisioterpia em Movimento journal is aligned with the manuscript qualification norms and standards established by WHO and by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Clinical trial articles will only be accepted when registered in a Clinical Trial Registry recommended by WHO and the ICMJE, and papers containing results from studies with humans and/or animals will only be accepted for publication if clear that all the ethical principles have been followed in the investigation. These papers must necessarily include a statement indicating that the research protocol has been approved by an institutional ethics committee (as established in the National Health Council Resolution 466/12 on the ethical guidelines for the development of research involving human subjects). For experiments involving animals, follow Pain international guidelines (PAIN, 16: 109-110, 1983).

Human subjects are entitled to privacy, and this right cannot be broken without a written consent term granting the permission for using and publishing the images. The use of eyes masks is not considered appropriate means of protection for maintaining anonymity.

Studies should be original and should not have already been published elsewhere in the peer-reviewed literature. To promote the predominance of originality, the journal adopts the Blackboard system to identify plagiarism, considering up to 30% text similarity acceptable.

As part of SciELO collection, Fisioterpia em Movimento journal follows the Guidelines on Best Practices for Strengthening Ethics in Scientific Publication, as well as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, aiming to promote integrity in the publication process and to prevent misconduct and malpractice. 

The editorial team of Fisioterapia em Movimento, in addition to the authors who publish in the journal, must always observe the guidelines on Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER), that comprise a set of guidelines that guide the reporting of information about sex and gender in study design, data analysis, and results and interpretation of findings. Furthermore, the journal observes the gender equity policy in the composition of its editorial board.


Responsibilities of the editor-in-chief

The responsibility of the editor-in-chief includes editorial policy implementation, oversight the editorial process, and journal relations with authors, reviewers, readers, indexers, funding agencies, the scientific community, and the general public. Particularly, transparency and quality control are essential aspects of the editorial process under the editor-in-chief’s responsibilities


Identification of scientific misconduct

Regarding best practices for strengthening the ethics in scientific publication, the editorial process, after complying with the formal aspects required, ensures that all authors review and take accountability for the content. Proof may be provided by digital confirmation. When there is any questioning regarding authorship, contact is to be first established with the corresponding author and, if necessary, with all authors. In case of impasse, the authors' affiliation institutions or funding agencies involved in the research development should be contacted.

As far as the subjects involved in the research are concerned, the editorial process requires authors to present antecedents, such as the position of the corresponding ethics committee, authorization of the subjects involved, and clinical trial records, among others. When there is doubt or questioning, the editor-in-chief should contact the corresponding author and, if necessary, all authors requesting completeness of the data.

In order to promote the predominance of originality of the texts, the journal should adopts software for duplicity verification with already published texts. The journal informs the authors on the software in use during the article submission process. When there is doubt or questioning, the editor-in-chief should contact the corresponding author and, if necessary, all authors. If duplicity is proven, the authors' affiliation institutions or funding agencies involved in the research development are to be contacted.

When there is doubt about the inclusion of citations and their references, the cited document is checked or requested. When there is doubt or questioning, the editor-inchief should contact the corresponding author and, if necessary, all authors.

When in the evaluation process, editors or reviewers identify excess self-citing by authors and/or the journal, the corresponding author and, if necessary, all authors are contacted for clarification to support decision making. Editors and reviewers should privilege impartiality, integrity and confidentiality in their evaluation, prioritizing constructive criticism and the time frame agreed with the journal. When there is doubt or questioning, the editor-in-chief should contact the corresponding editor and/or peer reviewers.

The fabrication or falsification of data and images are serious cases of misconduct. The evaluation process should be judicious in identifying such misconducts. In case there are any doubts, the authors are requested to provide supporting evidence of the methodology and results. In case of proven misconduct, the editor should inform the authors’ affiliation institutions or funding agencies involved in the development of the research.


Support mechanisms on decisions regarding misconduct

The journal should inform in the Instructions to Authors how it receive reports of suspected misconduct. In cases of doubts or questioning considered previously, the journal should follow the COPE flow diagrams for identification and guidance on misconduct. Eventually, in case the journal's decision is challenged, a committee of members of the editorial board, and external to the journal, should be assembled


Guidance on decision making on retractions and errata

The already published article in which misconduct is identified remains indexed in the SciELO database in the retracted condition. The retraction substantiate the reason for the withdrawal duly referenced, through a communication by the editor or another authorized agent, and published in the same journal. Retraction may be partial when the misconduct applies to a specific part of the article, without, however, compromising the set of published research. The article may not ever be “unpublished”. Cases of errors or failures, regardless of nature or origin, that do not constitute misconduct, are corrected by errata. The journal publishes as promptly as possible errata, corrections or retractions.