Self-Archiving

Muthanna Medical Journal is open access and the following permitted uses apply:

1. Submitted Version (preprint)

A preprint is defined here as the un-refereed author version of an article. Authors may self-archive the submitted version of their paper on their personal website, in recognized not for profit subject-based preprint servers or repositories or in their company/ institutional repository or archive. The submitted version may not be updated or replaced with the final published version of record (VoR) The version posted must acknowledge acceptance for publication and, following publication of the final paper, contain the text: "This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: [FULL CITE], which has been published in final form at [Link to final article]. Authors are not required to remove preprints posted prior to acceptance of the submitted version.

2. Accepted Version (postprint)

A postprint is defined here as the final draft author manuscript, as accepted for publication by a journal, including modifications based on referees’ suggestions, before it has undergone copyediting and proof correction. Authors may self-archive the peer-reviewed (but not final) version of their paper on their own personal website, in their company/institutional repository or archive, and in approved not for profit subject-based repositories, following an embargo period of 12 months for scientific, technical or medical journals, 24 months for social sciences and humanities journals. The version posted may not be updated or replaced with the VoR and must contain the text This is the accepted version of the following article: [full citation], which has been published in final form at [Link to final article]. In addition, authors may also transmit, print and share copies with colleagues, provided that there is no systematic distribution of the submitted version, e.g. posting on a listserve, network or automated delivery.

Retracting of articles

Journal editors should consider retracting a publication if:
• They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication) • it constitutes plagiarism.
• It reports unethical research.
 
Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if:
• They receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors • there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case • they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive • an investigation is underway but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time
Journal editors should consider issuing a correction if:
• Asmall portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error).
• The author / contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).
 
Retractions are not usually appropriate if:
• Achange of authorship is required but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings.
 
Visit www.publicationethics.org to learn out more about COPE, including RETRACTION GUIDELINES.