Ethical Guidelines for Publication of Research Results in Biology of Reproduction

The Society for the Study of Reproduction (SSR) is dedicated to maintaining the highest standards of ethical behavior for publication in its journal, Biology of Reproduction. The SSR Board of Directors has approved the following guidelines for performance of research being reported, for the review process, and for the procedure to be followed in event of alleged misconduct. The following statement is not meant to be all-inclusive, but is provided to give a clear understanding of the ethical considerations involved. These Guidelines supplement the Instructions for Authors. Click here for a PDF version.

A. Obligations of Authors

1) Report of Research Findings

The principal obligation of all authors is to provide an accurate, honest, and precise account of the research performed. Each manuscript shall contain the description of a complete, unique study that has not been submitted, either in part or as a whole, for publication elsewhere. Each author of the study shall be cognizant of the research and is responsible for its validity and accuracy. The author(s) have the following obligations.

1. To certify that no scientific misconduct (as defined below) occurred in the performance or reporting of the research.
2. To describe the research in sufficient detail for others to be able to repeat it.
3. To include all relevant data, even those that may contradict the hypotheses being tested.
4. To acknowledge previous contributions with accurate citations.
5. To follow all criteria for ethical conduct of research with animals and/or humans, and to include statements to this effect in the body of the manuscript.
6. To make available to other researchers all reagents and research materials not commercially available, including but not limited to plasmids, antibodies, cell lines, hybridomas, DNA sequences, and expression array data used in the studies reported.
7. To ensure that the submitted manuscript once accepted is not materially altered in the proof stage. All changes, other than minor textual ones, must be approved by the Editor(s)-in-Chief.
8. To ensure that correct nomenclature is used for DNA, mRNA, and proteins; that all DNA and protein sequences are deposited into public data bases; and that genes discussed are properly annotated with the correct genetic nomenclature such that information about them may be retrieved from public sources.

2) Definition of Scientific Misconduct

Scientific misconduct includes plagiarism; fabrication; falsification; selection of data; duplicate publications; violation of international, federal, or state rules; and honorary authorship. SSR accepts the definition of falsification and plagiarism stated in the ORI Handbook for Institutional Research Integrity Officers (1997), Office of Research Integrity, Public Health Service of the US Department of Health and Human Services (Washington, DC). In this case, plagiarism includes but is not limited to theft and misappropriation of intellectual property or textual copying of other peoples' work and representing the work as the author's own, and falsification includes the willful fabrication or manipulation of research data or the deliberate exclusion or alteration of data that is contrary to the experiments reported.

3) The Use of Experimental Subjects

All studies involving human subjects or human tissue must be in accordance with the principles set out in the Declaration of Helsinki and must have been formally approved by the appropriate institutional review board, ethical review committee, or equivalent. All manuscripts shall indicate that such approval was obtained, and the study populations shall be described in detail. In many studies, details of age, race, and sex are important. In experiments involving any significant risk or discomfort to subjects, it shall be documented that informed consent was obtained from the subjects and that an institutional human research committee approved the investigations. In text, tables, and figures, subjects must be identified by number or letter rather than by initials or names. Photographs of patients' faces shall be included only if scientifically relevant. Authors shall obtain written consent from the patient for use of such photographs. A statement that these guidelines were followed shall appear in the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript. The Editor(s)-in-Chiefs reserve the right to reject any manuscript that does not meet acceptable standards of research behavior as determined by the Belmont Report, the Geneva Convention, and the Declaration of Helsinki.

4) The Care and Use of Experimental Animals

SSR acknowledges that all animals are creatures of great intrinsic value and remarkable complexity. The use of nonhuman animals in research can contribute uniquely to the advancement of scientific knowledge, and thus, ultimately, to improvements in the health or welfare of humans and animals.

All investigators shall follow the highest possible standards for the humane care and use of animals in research. During development of the research plan, due consideration shall be given to the use of in vitro models, the appropriateness of the animal species, and the minimum number of animals needed to meet rigorous scientific and statistical standards. Animals bred specifically for laboratory study shall be used whenever practical; however, there are situations where wild, captive, random-source, or pound animals are necessary.

All research animals shall be acquired, retained, and used in compliance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Research animals shall be properly housed and fed, and their surroundings shall be kept in sanitary condition in accordance with the National Research Council's publication, Guide for Care and Use of Laboratory Animals¹ (the "NIH Guide"), and the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching, Federation of Animal Science Societies, First Revised Edition, 1999.²

Research animals shall receive appropriate anesthetics, analgesics, tranquilizers, and care to minimize pain and discomfort during preoperative, operative, and postoperative procedures. The choice and use of the most appropriate drug shall be made in strict accordance with the NIH Guide, and all procedures shall be those of accepted veterinary medical practice. If the study or the condition of the animal requires that the animal be killed, a humane method shall be employed.³ Use of animals shall be under the direct supervision of an experienced teacher or investigator.

Institutional approval is required for all animal studies and such approval shall be stated in the manuscript. A statement that these guidelines were followed shall appear in the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript.

____________

¹Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR) of the National Academy of Science, Bethesda, MD. 1996. Contact ILAR@nas.edu (e-mail) or 1-800-624-6242 for a free copy.
²Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching. Federation of Animal Science Societies, Savoy, Illinois. First Revised Edition; 1999.
³Report of the AVMA Panel on Euthanasia (JAVMA 1993; 202:229-249).

5) Authorship

Signature on the Statement of Authorship and Copyright Transfer form is required of all authors and indicates that each author is aware of the contents and has significantly contributed to the study reported. All authors must have participated in the research reported either in its conception, performance, or interpretation. An acknowledgment is appropriate for those who have contributed to a lesser extent, such as by providing a reagent or reviewing the data or draft of the manuscript. All authors will share full responsibility for the work and accountability for the results. Potential financial conflicts of interest by the authors must be disclosed in the cover letter, with appropriate documentation provided, if necessary. Authors of manuscripts submitted to Biology of Reproduction must agree that the substance of the research being reported has not been submitted or published elsewhere. If parts of the report have been presented in a preliminary report, such as an abstract or a poster, this occurrence must be stated but does not preclude publication. Presentation of data at conferences and publication of abstracts relevant to that report, such as at the SSR Annual Meeting, will not ordinarily influence the review of a manuscript as original data for the published report of the study. If some parts of the data have been reported in a review, a copy of the review must be provided to the Editor(s)-in-Chief along with the submitted manuscript.

B. Guidelines for Reviewers (Referees)

The timely, critical review of manuscripts is an essential stage in publication of Biology of Reproduction. A reviewer is expected to make expert, critical, and unbiased scientific and literary appraisals of research reports in her/his field of knowledge and expertise. The reviewer shall return completed reviews promptly, within the Editor(s)-in-Chief's deadline.

A reviewer shall not review a manuscript if:

1. The individual does not feel competent to appraise the research or issues in the manuscript.
2. The reviewer believes there may be a conflict of interest or that a close personal or professional relationship with the author(s) will bias judgment of the manuscript.
3. The reviewer has published with the authors within the previous three years.

If there is any doubt in these areas, the manuscript shall be returned unreviewed to the Editor(s)-in-Chief with an explanation. The Editor(s)-in-Chief shall also be notified if the referee previously reviewed the manuscript for another journal.

Manuscripts are confidential and no part of the manuscript under review shall be revealed to others. Therefore individuals other than the assigned reviewer shall not provide independent reviews for the referee to sign. If a designated reviewer has the need to consult a colleague or collaborator regarding review of a manuscript, then the reviewer must seek prior approval from the Editor(s)-in Chief. The colleague or collaborator, as well as reviewer, agree to the obligations of confidentiality and non-use. The reviewer's critique of a manuscript, especially if the overall judgment is unfavorable, shall be detailed, supported by appropriate references, and made available to the author. The reviewer shall note when there is concern that the author(s) may not have fulfilled the obligations in Section A. The reviewer shall report any substantial similarity of the manuscript to a published paper or another submitted manuscript and shall note when important work of others is improperly cited or omitted. The decision to recommend acceptance shall be based on an unbiased appraisal of the scientific and literary quality of the manuscript.

C. Guidelines for the Editors

The Editor(s)-in-Chief directs the publication process for Biology of Reproduction and is responsible for maintaining the scientific and literary quality of the journal. The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of a manuscript for publication is the responsibility of the Editor(s)-in-Chief. The Associate Editors identify possible reviewers for manuscripts, evaluate the reviews, and advise the Editor(s)-in-Chief on the suitability of the manuscript for publication.

A primary obligation of the Editor(s)-in-Chief and the Associate Editors is to make certain that all manuscripts submitted for publication receive confidential, expert, and unbiased reviews in a timely fashion. The Editor(s)-in-Chief and the Associate Editors shall not select referees for a predictable outcome of the review. Once reviews are in hand, the Associate Editors shall make prompt recommendation to the Editor(s)-in-Chief, who shall reach a speedy decision on the manuscript. While one of the functions of the Editor(s)-in-Chief is to act as an ombudsman, protecting the author from unfair or slow referees, the Editor(s)-in-Chief and the Associate Editors cannot unilaterally impose sanctions on unethical referees apart from ceasing to call upon them for reviews. The Editor(s)-in-Chief and the Associate Editors shall not use their position to change an honest, albeit controversial, interpretation of authors' results in a manuscript.

The Editor(s)-in-Chief and the Associate Editors may not participate in any part of the editorial management of manuscripts from his/her own research. Manuscripts submitted by an Editor(s)-in-Chief will be handled by a Consulting Editor selected by the Board of Directors. Manuscripts submitted by Associate Editors will be handled by the Editor(s)-in-Chief. The Editor(s)-in-Chief and the Associate Editors must also avoid conflict of interest in the editorial management of papers closely related to their own research. The Editor(s)-in-Chief and Associate Editors may not use unpublished information from a submitted manuscript without written permission of the author.

D. Due Process and Response

Allegations or complaints involving possible violation of the ethical guidelines presented above shall be submitted to or forwarded to the Editor(s)-in-Chief, who will then contact the author to request an explanation. If the Editor(s)-in-Chief feels that further investigation is warranted, she/he will contact the Chair of the SSR Publications Committee and the SSR President. These representatives of the Society will determine whether the allegations of misconduct need to be transmitted to the author's home institution. If such action becomes necessary, the home institution will be asked to keep the SSR President informed during any investigation and to provide written notification of the findings of any inquiry or investigation.

If an investigation by the home institution concludes that an SSR member or Biology of Reproduction author has committed serious scientific error or misconduct, then the President will convey the outcome of the institutional decision to the SSR Board of Directors for consideration of disciplinary measures. If institutional investigation provides convincing evidence that data or analyses in a paper published in Biology of Reproduction are erroneous, the Editor(s)-in-Chief shall facilitate prompt publication of a report pointing out the error and, if possible, correcting it or, if necessary, retracting the paper. The report may be written by an original author or, if necessary, the Editor(s)-in-Chief's office. If misconduct was uncovered during the host institution’s investigation, penalties may range from an official reprimand to removal from specific Society responsibilities, or dismissal from the Society. The penalty may also include temporary or permanent withdrawal of permission to publish in the Society's journal. If there is evidence that serious author misconduct is associated with any paper published in Biology of Reproduction, the Editor(s)-in-Chief shall promptly publish a notice of retraction.