Publication Ethics

AyuPrabha is committed to upholding high standards of publication ethics and expects all parties involved in the publishing process—authors, reviewers and editors—to follow responsible and transparent practices.

1. Ethical responsibilities of authors

• Originality and integrity

• Submitted work must be original and not previously published in whole or in part, except in the form of abstracts or academic theses.

• Data, images and analyses must not be fabricated, falsified or inappropriately manipulated.

• All relevant prior work must be properly cited; plagiarism, including self‑plagiarism, is strictly prohibited.

• Authorship and contributions

• Only individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis or interpretation, drafting or revising the manuscript, and who agree to be accountable for the work, should be listed as authors.

• The corresponding author must ensure that all co‑authors have approved the final version and agree with its submission to AyuPrabha.

• Any contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.

• Human and clinical research ethics

• Studies involving human participants must have prior approval from an Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) and must comply with the current national ethical guidelines for biomedical and health research.

• For Ayurveda and integrative‑medicine research, authors should follow recognized ethical requirements for research in integrative medicine and Good Clinical Practice for ASU/AYUSH medicines.

• Research must respect principles such as those in the Declaration of Helsinki, including informed consent, risk–benefit evaluation and protection of vulnerable populations.

• Clinical trials should be prospectively registered in a recognized registry; the registration number must be reported in the manuscript.

• Animal research ethics

• Studies involving animals require prior approval from a properly constituted and registered Institutional Animal Ethics Committee.

• Experiments must follow national regulations on the care and use of laboratory animals, apply the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) and use humane procedures.

• Authors should clearly describe welfare measures and approvals in the Methods section.

• Conflicts of interest and funding

• All financial and non‑financial relationships that could be perceived as influencing the work must be declared, including funding sources, employment, consultancies, ownership interests and personal relationships.

• The role of the funder, if any, in study design, data collection, analysis and publication should be clearly stated.

• Data availability and corrections

• Authors should retain original data and be prepared to provide access to it if requested during review or post‑publication for verification purposes, within the limits of confidentiality and ethics.

• When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal so that corrections, retractions or expressions of concern can be issued where appropriate.

2. Ethical responsibilities of reviewers

• Confidentiality

• Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and not shared, discussed or used for any purpose other than providing a review.

• Objectivity and fairness

• Reviews should be conducted objectively, focusing on the scientific quality, methodology and clarity of the manuscript. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

• Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest (financial, academic or personal). If a conflict exists or they feel unqualified to review, they should decline the invitation.

• Recognition of sources

• Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and should inform the editor of any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication or ethical concerns.

3. Ethical responsibilities of editors

• Editorial independence

• Editorial decisions are based solely on the manuscript’s scientific merit, originality, clarity and relevance to the journal’s scope, regardless of authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion or other personal characteristics.

• The Editorial Team will not be influenced by commercial interests or sponsors when making decisions.

• Fair and timely peer review

• Editors ensure that manuscripts are evaluated by suitably qualified reviewers and that the double‑blind process is maintained.

• Editors aim to provide decisions and feedback within reasonable timeframes, keeping authors informed of the progress.

• Handling of misconduct

• Suspected cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, unethical research or other forms of misconduct will be investigated.

• Depending on the findings, actions may include rejection of the manuscript, retraction or correction of published articles, and notification of authors’ institutions or relevant authorities.

4. Corrections, retractions and expressions of concern

If serious issues are identified in a published article, AyuPrabha will follow established best practice to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record:

• Corrections are issued for honest errors that do not invalidate the findings.

• Retractions are issued for major problems such as fabricated data, unethical research or plagiarism that undermine the reliability of the article.

• Expressions of concern may be published when investigations are ongoing, but evidence suggests potential serious issues.