Health science and Green Technology

CONTENT

Publishers Ethic Rules

Health science and Green Technology is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all necessary measures against publication malpractices. All authors submitting their works to Health science and Green Technology confirm that the submitted manuscripts are original, represent their own contributions, and have not been copied or plagiarized from other sources.

As a journal focusing on environmental sciences, natural sciences, and engineering research, Health science and Green Technology expects authors to ensure that submitted studies are scientifically sound and ethically conducted. Authors must disclose all actual or potential conflicts of interest related to their work.

Health science and Green Technology applies a single-blind peer-review process to ensure objective and fair evaluation. Editors and reviewers must avoid any conflict of interest and follow ethical review principles.

To promote transparency, the journal provides a platform for constructive academic discussion. Review comments require identity disclosure to editors, although publicly visible content does not require logging in.

Our ethical guidelines are based on the principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Publication Decisions

The editor of Health science and Green Technology is responsible for deciding which submitted articles will be published. Editorial decisions are guided by the journal’s policies, legal requirements, and ethical standards, particularly in areas such as plagiarism, copyright, and scientific integrity.

Fair Play

Editors evaluate all manuscripts based solely on their scientific merit, without regard to authors’ race, gender, nationality, political views, or academic background.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and may not share manuscript information with unauthorized individuals.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts must not be used in editors’ own research without the written consent of the author.

Research Ethics

Studies involving environmental data, natural habitats, ecosystems, hazardous materials, or engineering experiments must comply with international and national ethical standards. Where applicable, approval by an Ethics Committee is required.

For human-related surveys, environmental impact assessments, or volunteer-based studies, informed consent must be obtained. Information regarding ethics committee approval must be stated clearly in the manuscript’s Methods section.

Health science and Green Technology requires animal research (field studies or laboratory experiments) to comply with Basel Declaration principles and ICLAS guidelines. Authors must explicitly state compliance with relevant institutional or international standards.

For studies involving endangered species or ecologically sensitive areas, authors are advised to comply with international biodiversity protection regulations such as IUCN guidelines.

Human Subjects and Animal Use in Research

Health science and Green Technology adheres to the ethical standards of the World Medical Association’s Declaration of Helsinki and its guidelines on animal use in scientific research. Ethical approval is required for studies involving humans, animals, or sensitive environmental interventions.

In human studies, informed consent must be documented. For animal studies, authors must explain measures taken to minimize harm, stress, and environmental impact. Ethics details (approval number, committee name) must appear in the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

Health science and Green Technology requires authors, reviewers, and editors to disclose any financial, personal, academic, or institutional conflicts of interest. Authors must submit the ICMJE Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form during submission.

All financial support, project funding, or institutional contributions must be clearly declared.

Authors Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

Authors must present accurate, reproducible, and complete accounts of their research. Environmental, natural science, and engineering data must be reported transparently, with sufficient detail for independent replication.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be required to provide raw data for review and should retain such data for a reasonable period after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Manuscripts must be original. All borrowed material must be cited properly. Submitted manuscripts undergo plagiarism screening (iThenticate).

Multiple or Redundant Publication

Submitting the same work to multiple journals simultaneously is unethical and prohibited.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must cite all relevant prior work and acknowledge others’ contributions clearly.

Authorship

Authorship should reflect significant contributions to the study. All listed authors must approve the final manuscript.

Hazards and Experimental Risks

If the research involves chemicals, hazardous materials, environmental interventions, or engineering processes with inherent risk, authors must clearly identify and explain these risks.

Errors in Published Works

If authors discover major errors in their published work, they must promptly notify the editor and cooperate to correct or retract the article.

Responsibility for the Editors and Reviewers

Editors' Responsibilities

Strive to improve journal processes based on feedback.
Support ethical research conduct and discourage misconduct.
Ensure transparency in published content and editorial decisions.
Evaluate the effects of editorial policies and update them when necessary.

Reviewers' Responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Reviewers support the editorial process by providing objective evaluations.
Promptness: Reviewers must notify editors if they cannot complete a timely review.
Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review must be kept confidential.
Objectivity: Reviews must be impartial, constructive, and supported with evidence.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify missing citations and any potential plagiarism.
Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must avoid evaluating manuscripts where conflicts exist.