Free On-line Access

SPCI - Sociedade Portuguesa de Cuidados Intensivos

Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva

AMIB - Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira

OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE MEDICINA INTENSIVA AND THE SOCIEDADE PORTUGUESA DE CUIDADOS INTENSIVOS

ISSN: 0103-507X
Online ISSN: 1982-4335

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

 

The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva


It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher.


Our ethic statements are based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


Publication decisions

The editor of the Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.

The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.


Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.


Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.


 


Duties of Reviewers


Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.


Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.


Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.


Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.


Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


 


Duties of Authors


Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.


Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.


Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.


Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.


Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.


Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.


Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.


Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.


Fundamental errors in published works


When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Ethical Considerations in the Conduct and Reporting of Research Statement

 

Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva supports the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors - ICMJE (copyright free), that can be found in http://www.icmje.org/, as stated bellow.


Protection of Human Subjects and Animals in Research


When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5). 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. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.


All articles published by RBTI should have a statement of the study's approval by the Research Ethics Committee (REC) from the institution where it was carried out (or from another that has a constituted REC and been appropriately designed), also mentioning the approval or exemption of the free informed consent by the same committee. This information must be available both in the letter sent to the journal, and also in the Methods section, whenever is needed. If needed, the journal reserves the right to require the authors its sending. When studies in humans are being reported, authors should indicate if the study processes are in accordance with the ethics standards defined by the committee in charge for studies in humans (institutional or national, if applicable) and in accordance with the 1975 Helsinki declaration, which was reviewed in 2000. If studies are performed in animals, authors must indicate if the institutional/national guidelines for care and use of animals were followed. In any research, be it clinical or experimental, in human or in animals, these pieces of information must be both in the letter and in the Methods section. For all manuscripts that include clinical information or pictures in which the patients may be individually identified, a free informed consent signed and written by each patient or relative must be sent;


Authorship and Contributorship


The Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva supports the following criteria for authorship. Only people who directly contributed to the intellectual content of the article must be considered authors, according to the following criteria:

1.            developed the initial idea and planned the paper or interpreted the final results OR

2.            wrote the article or reviewed consecutive versions AND

3.            approved the final version of the article.


Administrative positions, data collection, and support are not considered authorship criteria and, when applicable, they should be only in the acknowledgements section. In original articles, each author contribution must be clearly placed in the end after the acknowledgements section.



 

Submission On-line

Indexed in

Scopus

SciELO

LILACS

Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB

Rua Arminda nº 93 - 7º andar - Vila Olímpia - São Paulo, SP, Brasil - Tel./Fax: (55 11) 5089-2642 | e-mail: rbti.artigos@amib.org.br

GN1 - Systems and Publications