Publication Ethics and Malpractice

1.1 Reporting Standards

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts clearly present innovative research outcomes, including appropriate methodologies, data, analyses, interpretations, and justifications.

1.2 Data Access and Retention

Authors must submit raw data for editorial review and provide consent to make the data publicly accessible for scientific use, where applicable.

1.3 Originality and Plagiarism

Submitted work must be original. Proper citation and acknowledgment of prior research are mandatory. Plagiarism in any form is strictly unethical and will result in rejection.

1.4 Multiple or Concurrent Submission

Simultaneous submission to multiple journals or republication of previously published work is unethical. At any given time, an author may have no more than three manuscripts under review with IENT.

1.5 Acknowledgement of Sources

All sources must be clearly cited according to IENT guidelines. Informal or confidential communications must not be published without prior permission.

1.6 Authorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the work. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors approve the final version of the manuscript.

1.7 Hazards and Human/Animal Subjects

Research involving hazardous materials or human or animal subjects must comply with all applicable legal and ethical regulations, and the relevant approvals must be clearly stated in the manuscript.

1.8 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All financial or other conflicts of interest, as well as funding sources, must be disclosed.

1.9 Fundamental Errors

Significant errors discovered post-publication must be reported immediately to the Editor-in-Chief for corrective action.

2.1 Editorial Board

Manuscripts are peer-reviewed by qualified experts. Final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the recommendations of reviewers and editors.

2.2 Publication Decisions

Decisions are based on scientific merit, relevance, originality, and compliance with legal and ethical standards.

2.3 Fair Play

Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their intellectual content, without bias.

2.4 Confidentiality

Editors must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts beyond the review process.

2.5 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must not use unpublished material for personal advantage and must disclose any conflicts of interest.

2.6 Unethical Behaviour

Allegations of misconduct will be thoroughly investigated, and authors will be given an opportunity to respond. Corrective actions may include notices, retractions, or sanctions.

Reviewers ensure the journal’s integrity through unbiased, confidential, and constructive reviews. Reviewers must decline assignments that fall outside their expertise or involve conflicts of interest.

Checklist for Reviewers

• Adherence to the author guidelines
• Clarity of objectives and conclusions
• Adequacy of references
• Language, grammar, and structure
• Plagiarism concerns
• Scientific and societal relevance
• Conflicts of interest
• Contribution to scientific knowledge

4.1 Addendum

An addendum is used to publish omitted but essential information without altering the original article.

4.2 Erratum

An erratum is issued for significant formatting or authorship errors affecting interpretation.

4.3 Corrections

Corrections are published when errors affect scientific interpretation but not the overall conclusions.

4.4 Retractions

Articles with serious ethical violations may be retracted in accordance with COPE guidelines and marked as “RETRACTED”.

4.5 Expression of Concern

An Expression of Concern is published when investigations are ongoing or inconclusive.

4.6–4.8 Misconduct Policies

Policies regarding fabrication, falsification, duplicate submission, and CrossMark are strictly enforced.