Publication Ethics

For research manuscripts involving experiments on live vertebrates and/or higher invertebrates, the corresponding author must confirm that all experiments were performed following relevant guidelines and regulations. The manuscript must include a statement identifying the institute and/or licensing committee approving the experiments, including any relevant details. Manuscripts that lack proper ethical consideration for human or animal subjects will not be accepted for publication.

For experiments that involve human subjects, authors must identify the committee that approved the experiments and include in their submission a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained from all subjects. Authors using phase II and phase III randomized controlled trials in their study should refer to the CONSORT Statement for recommendations which facilitates complete and transparent reporting of trial findings. The MJHR follows the guidelines set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in all aspects of publication ethics, particularly protocols of research and publication misconduct. The authors must declare that all experiments on human subjects were conducted following the Declaration of Helsinki. All procedures were carried out with the adequate understanding and written consent of the subjects. The authors must also certify that formal approval to conduct the experiments described was obtained from the human subjects review board of their institution and should be made available if requested by the MJHR.

All animal experiments must adhere to institutional and national guidelines for animal subjects' care and use, which should be clearly stated within the manuscript. Manuscripts should contain a statement that advises all efforts were made to minimize animal suffering and reduce the number of animals used. If available, efforts to utilize alternatives to in-vivo techniques. Studies involving animals should obey the International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research as developed by the Council for International Organization of Medical Sciences (CIOMS).

The MJHR adheres to the COPE guidelines that ensure a high-quality standard of ethics for authors, editors, and reviewers:


  1. Authors attest that the material has not been previously published and has not transferred any rights to the article to another party.
  2. Authors should ensure the originality of their work and properly cite others' work following the format of the approved references.
  3. Authors should not engage in plagiarism or self-plagiarism.
  4. Authors should ensure that they follow the criteria for authorship as described in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).
  5. The authors must not disclose any personal information that may identify their subjects, such as overt descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees. If photographs of the patient are essential to the article, the authors must receive written consent and state it clearly within the article.
  6. When human subjects are involved, the authors must certify that their research follows ethical standards of The Helsinki Declaration and domestic and foreign committees that preside over human experiments. If any doubts are raised over whether the research was conducted following the declaration, the authors must respond to those doubts. Similarly, if animals are involved in the research process, authors must certify that all domestic and foreign guidelines relating to animal experiments in a laboratory were adhered to.
  7. Authors should make all data and details of their work available to the editors if there are suspicions of data falsification or fabrication.
  8. The article's authors should clarify any possible conflicts of interest, such as their job role, research expenses, consultant expenses, and intellectual property.


  1. Editors are responsible for every article published in the MJHR.
  2. Editors should assist authors, where possible, to ensure their articles adhere to ICMJE guidelines.
  3. Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers when making final publication decisions.
  4. An editor must evaluate manuscripts objectively for publication, judging each on its merit without bias towards nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. Editors should decline articles if there is a potential conflict of interest.
  5. Editors must ensure that documents sent to reviewers do not contain private information of the authors and vice versa.
  6. The editor's final decision should be relayed to authors timely and accompanied by the reviewer's comments unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks.
  7. If authors have a well-reasoned objection to a certain individual reviewing their work, editors should respect this request.
  8. Editors and all staff should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
  9. Editors will be guided by the COPE guidelines if there is a suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.


  1. Reviewers are required to comment on possible research, ethical, and publication misconduct if they are suspected.
  2. Reviewers must complete the work promptly and notify the editor immediately if they cannot complete the work.
  3. Reviewers are to respect the confidentiality of the manuscript.
  4. Reviewers should not accept manuscripts for assessment if they believe there is a potential conflict of interest between them and any authors.

Conflict of Interest Policy

General policy and sources of funding
Authors are required to disclose all sources of institutional, private, and corporate financial support for their study. Authors are also required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. An author's conflict of interest, or information specifying the absence of conflicts of interest, and funding sources for the research will be published under a separate heading entitled "Conflict of Interest." See for generally accepted definitions of conflicts of interest.

Submission by an editor or by an author whose relationship with the editor might create the perception of bias.
If a submitting author and editor of the MJHR have a relationship that may create a perception of bias, an alternative editor from another institute will be elected to oversee the manuscript. This editor will select the reviewers and have the final decision regarding the paper. The submitting editor will not have access to any information or correspondence relating to the submission that is not meant for the authors.

Potential conflict of interest for reviewers. The invitation letter to reviewers will include the following paragraph: ‘If you know or think you know, the identity of the author, or if you feel there is any potential conflict of interest in your reviewing this paper (e.g., friendship or conflict/rivalry), please declare it immediately. By accepting this invitation, it is assumed there is no potential conflict of interest.' If a conflict of interest has been declared, standard policy declares that an alternate reviewer must be used. However, this is at the editors' discretion.


Editors of the MJHR treat all submitted manuscripts and communication with authors and reviewers as confidential. It is expected that authors will also treat communication with the journal as confidential. Correspondence with the journal, reviewers' reports, and other confidential material must not be posted on any website or otherwise publicized without prior permission from the editors, regardless of if the submission is published or not.


Opinions expressed in articles and creative pieces published in the MJHR are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board or the publisher.