| | Post date: 2018/07/18 |
|Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences (JRDMS) is an open access, peer-reviewed, quarterly published journal dedicated to increasing the new knowledge and information on all sciences related to dentistry and also to the oral cavity and relevant structures in health and disease. This journal welcomes original research articles, review articles, case reports and technical reports in the in the field of dentistry and related sciences.
Only descriptive and analytical studies conducted international standards will be primarily evaluated for potential publication. All studies should employ proper methodology and must be approved by the related ethics committee in case of using human or animal models. Review articles are considered for peer reviewing and accepted only if the topics are important enough and the works have high quality. Oral, dental and craniofacial researchers and clinical scientists, Dentist, Oral and dental policy-makers, Dental educators could be audience of this journal.
Publisher: Dental faculty, Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University
Chairman: Afshin Haraji, DDS, MSc professor of Oral & maxillofacial Surgery Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Editor-in-Chief: Arash Azizi, DDS, MSc: professor of Oral medicine Dept, Faculty of Dentistry, Tehran medical sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Peer review process
We consider all manuscripts received by our journal confidential. The manuscripts are peer-reviewed by at least two anonymous reviewers designated by the Editorial Board. The editor’s decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript or any required modifications will be announced to the corresponding author. If the manuscript is accepted, it will be scheduled for publication in one of the next upcoming issues.
All manuscripts submitted to JRDMS are primarily evaluated by an editor, who decides whether or not the manuscript qualify to go through the peer review process. Submissions thought to be appropriate for consideration will enter the peer review process by appropriate independent experts. A decision will be made by editors based on the reviewers’ reports and the result including the reviewers’ opinions will be sent to the authors via email. Authors should note that even in case of one positive feedback by one reviewer, issues raised by other reviewers might undermine the study and result in rejection of the manuscript, if not corrected accordingly.
We encourage authors to suggest potential reviewers; however, the final decision on the reviewers is made by the Editor(s) whether to assign the suggested reviewers. Authors should not suggest any colleagues or researchers working in their departments and should not purposefully provide incorrect information in this section. Authors have the right to exclude individuals as peer reviewers, but the reason for the exclusion should be clearly explained in the authors’ cover letter. Authors should not exclude too many reviewers as this may hinder the process of peer review.
Briefly, in JRDMS, a manuscript follows below steps:
- A manuscript is submitted via the journal’s online submission system.
- The manuscript is primarily checked by editorial assistants against a check-list, to ensure the manuscript conforms to the submission requirements. Cross-checking is also performed to make sure to prevent duplicate submission or plagiarism. Manuscripts that do not meet the submission requirements will be sent back to the authors for correction and resubmission.
- If the manuscript fully meets the submission requirements, the editor in chief assigns editors to the manuscript based on the subject of the article and the reviewer’s expertise.
- Manuscripts with insufficient quality or those with a topic not related to the journal scope will be fast rejected without further consideration.
- If the manuscript is selected for further consideration based on the editor’s opinion, the editor will assign 2-3 external anonymous reviewers for peer-reviewing.
- The peer-reviewers will send back their comments along with their recommendations to be: “accepted unchanged”, “minor revision”, “major revision”, or “rejected.”
- Based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor in chief will make the final editorial decision.
- The peer-review process is double blinded which means neither the reviewers nor the authors don't know the identity of the other.
Articles published by The JRDMS fall into the following categories:
Open submissions, Indexed, and Peer reviewed
Open submissions, Indexed, and Peer reviewed
Open submissions, Indexed, and Peer reviewed
Open submissions, Indexed, and Peer reviewed
Open submissions, and Indexed
- Original/ Research Article:
Open Access Policy
All articles published by Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences (JRDMS) are fully open access, which means they are immediately freely available to read, download and share.
On JRDMS, articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 , Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.
Ethical requirements and responsibilities
The editor makes the final decision on all the content. Decisions may be made by issues different from the quality of a manuscript, such as appropriateness for the journal. The editor can reject any article at any time prior to publication, even after acceptance, if concerns arise about the integrity of the work.
- Reviewers' and authors' identities are kept confidential.
- The existence of a submitted manuscript is not revealed to anyone other than the reviewers and editorial staff.
- As a part of submission, by checking off predesigned statements, author(s) should certify that neither the submitted manuscript nor another one with its main content under their authorship has been previously published in any language or being considered for publication elsewhere.
- Author(s) should be responsible for the integrity of the whole work, from inception to published article.
- Author(s) should guarantee that data, which the research is based on, is available and will be provided if anyone needs it.
- In the event that an author is added or removed from the list of a manuscript’s authors, written acceptance, signed by other author(s), must be submitted to the editorial office.
- Any financial support received for the research project should be clearly acknowledged.
- Should the study involves humans, the author(s) must include a written statement which clarifies the study is approved by the local ethical committee and that written consent is obtained from the participants in the study. For those without formal ethics review committees, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed. Also, the compliance of maintenance and care of experimental animals based on National Institutes of Health guidelines for the human use of laboratory animals should be declared in text.
- The manuscript author(s) must be responsible for obtaining all relevant permissions to use unpublished previous observations of others and stating it in the text. They should declare the names of the original author(s). Also, permission must be obtained to reproduce or adapt any figures or tables that have been published previously and declared in the legend/footnote.
- Author(s) should certify that their research study is in agreement with the regulations of their institution(s) and generally accepted guidelines governing such work; contains no violation of any existing copyright or other third party right; and is free of any obscene, indecent, libelous, or other unlawful material.
- Reviewers are required to keep manuscripts and any information related to them confidential.
- They must not use knowledge of the manuscript before its publication for their personal interests in any kind.
- The reviewers' comments should be constructive, straightforward, and polite.
- Reviewers should declare any conflicts of interest and decline review, if such a conflict exists. Knowing the author(s) must not affect their comments and recommendations.
Upon receiving a review request via email and going to the submission URL provided in it, following steps should be followed by the reviewer:
- Accept the review invitation by clicking on “yes, I agree.”
- Insert your username and password in reviewers section on the website to login.
- Access and download the manuscript and its supplementary file(s) on “article file” section.
- Start the review of the manuscript by clicking “Review”
- Filling in the review form.
- To edit your review point, use “Edit” button.
- To confirm your comments, click “Confirm” button.
- To cancel your comments, click “Cancel” button.
Publication ethics and malpractice statements
Journal of Research in Dental and Maxillofacial Sciences (JRDMS) follows the international regulations against scientific misconduct including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, etc. Also, JRDMS follows all instructions of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) , and any cases of suspected misconduct (such as redundant publication) will be assessed during the peer-review and publication process based on COPE guidelines. In addition, all pre- or post-publication issues will be managed based on COPE’s code of conduct and flowcharts.
Ethical considerations must be addressed in the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript.
1) Declare that author(s) obtained informed consent from all human adult participants and from the parents or legal guardians of minors. Include the name of the appropriate institutional review board which approved the project.
2) State in the text that the maintenance and care of experimental animals complied with National Institutes of Health guidelines for the humane use of laboratory animals, or those of your Institute or agency.
“All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000”. Also, mention that “informed consent was obtained from all patients for participation in the study”. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. Should any identifying information about patients is included in the article, the following sentence should be added as well:
- For studies on human subjects the following should be included:
“Additional informed consent was obtained from all patients for which identifying information is included in this article.”
“All institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed”.
- For studies on animals the following sentence should be included:
While it is not absolutely necessary, we recommend the author(s) to include the following sentence, just to make sure that readers are aware that there are no ethical issues with human or animal subjects:
- For articles that do not contain studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors:
“This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the any of the authors.”
Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
JRDMS strives to adhere to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, based on COPE instructions.
Based on the definition of American Journal Experts ""The U.S. Office of Research Integrity defines plagiarism as “the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.” Said differently, plagiarism is the misrepresentation of someone else’s original thought as your own. In fact, the Latin root of plagiarism means kidnapper or thief. Such theft is a form of academic misconduct and can thus lead to dismissal from universities and other research institutions, article rejections or retractions from journals, and decreased credibility as a researcher. ""
The editorial staff/reviewers of JRDMS will check all submissions for plagiarism twice (once upon submission and once before publication) using available plagiarism detection software such as iThenticate. If suspected plagiarism is found in an article either before (by reviewers or editorial team) or after (by readers) publication, JRDMS will act according to COPE’s code of conduct and flowcharts.
JRDMS is a green journal, which allows self-archiving of accepted and published papers through open access policy. Authors retain the copyright of their work and can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher’s version/PDF to personal or institutional repositories or libraries without requiring permission from the journal or publisher.
In order to digitally preserve all published scholarly content, JRDMS commits to submit all articles metadata and pdf version to international and national repositories.
Retraction and Correction Policy
JRDMS follow COPE Guidelines for Retracting Articles and Corrections.
Article Processing Charges (APC)
The APC for all paper is FREE to publish (no APC is payable).
Based on the ICJME recommendations "all those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged".
Any change in authorship (i.e. order, addition, and deletion of authors) after initial submission must be approved by all authors via written confirmation, in line with COPE guidelines. It is the corresponding author’s responsibility to ensure that all authors confirm they agree with the proposed changes. If there is disagreement amongst the authors concerning authorship and a satisfactory agreement cannot be reached, the authors must contact their institution(s) for a resolution. It is not the journal editor’s responsibility to resolve authorship disputes. A change in authorship after publication of an article can only be amended via publication of an Erratum.
In accordance with author agreement obtained upon submission, JRDMS is the copyright owner of the published manuscript. All works published in this journal are open access and freely available to anyone without cost, under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0.
JRDMS does not accept any advertisement in the journal website and articles.