Ethics policies, plagiarism detection and malpractice statement


This corresponds to the control of the ethics of the publication. MHSalud Journal will ensure that all the people that make up the editorial management ecosystem, namely: the journal's team, peer reviewers and authors, comply with the ethical standards necessary in the publication process. To do this, the Journal has a Code of Ethics and Good Practices for the publication of scientific articles in the MHSalud Journal that guides the work of the Journal to resolve cases of controversy. It can be consulted in the following link: Code of Ethics and Good Practices. This was prepared with criteria such as those established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), specifically: Code of conduct and guidelines on good practices for Journal editors
To review and detect plagiarism, the MHSalud Journal has the Turnitin software that allows the verification of coincidences in the text. Any case of coincidences in the text will be checked before the peer evaluation of the article and the authors will be asked to: (1) clarify the status of the coincidences, (2) correct them if its possible or (3) proceed with the rejection if it is assessed that the amount of coincidences contravene the originality requirement of the manuscript. In all cases the Journal will provide a document with the observations on the coincidences detected.

Code of Ethics and Good Practices for the publication of scientific articles in the MHSalud Journal

I. Ethical Principles[1]

  1. Open Access
  • The people involved recognize and understand the declaration of the Budapest Open Access (Budapest, 2002) as a statement to ensure the transmission of scientific knowledge in a universal, fast, inclusive and above all respectful of the intellectual property rights of the authors.
  1. Accuracy of scientific knowledge
  • In the presentation of research results: The scientific method implies that others can repeat and verify the scope of their research, so they will not manufacture or falsify data. Neither will results be modified to support a hypothesis or omit problematic observations (APA, 2010, p.12). If after the publication, the author identifies errors, the authors are responsible for making these errors public.
  • Retention and providing of data: during the review and publication process, researchers must allow their data to be available to the editor in case questions arise about the accuracy of the report. Refusal to do so may lead to rejection of the manuscript without any consideration.
  • Duplicate publication or partial publication: The duplicate publication is the publication of the same data or ideas in two different sources. It distorts the base of knowledge and can lead to the violation of copyright. Partial publication is the unnecessary segmentation of a researcher's single-effort discoveries into several articles. According to the Editorial Council of Biology Editors, some synonyms are: duplicate publication, dual publication or overlapping publication. A redundant article may include new data or new findings, but if the practical relevance or its importance is modest, the new results will not contribute to the construction of knowledge. This principle does not necessarily exclude manuscripts previously published in summary format. It excludes complete or partial material that has been published (for example, conference proceedings and book chapters).
  • Plagiarism and self-plagiarism: The author presents another's work as if it were his. If the author designs a study based on another that someone else carried out, credit must be given to the creator author. In relation to self-plagiarism, authors must not present their own published work as a new research, however, there are exceptions (for example, to describe the details of an instrument or an analytical approach).
  • Data falsification or data fabrication: This practice consists in adulterating or transforming the original information of a document or the data obtained. The author should not do this as a way to demonstrate the validation of his research.


  1. Protection of confidentiality
  • When the researchers use case studies to describe their research, they are prohibited from disclosing "personally identifiable confidential information, concerning their patients, individuals or organizations, students, research participants or recipients of their services, in order to protect the rights and guarantees of these people in the investigation. Therefore, when working with human beings, the responsible personnel has carried out the investigation within the framework of the "Prior Informed Consent" and has tried to protect the identity of each participant.
  • All the databases that require publication, must seek the anonymization of personal data of the participants.


  1. Protect intellectual property rights
  • Publication credit: Individuals must only have the authorship credit for a job they have done or with which they contributed substantially. Therefore, authorship includes both the people who write and those who have made substantial scientific contributions to a study.
  • The editorial review of a manuscript requires that the editing staff and each reviewer exchange and comment on the manuscript. During the review process, the article is considered a confidential and privileged document. These people involved should not -without the explicit permission of the author- quote a manuscript in review verbatim or circulate copies of it for no other purpose than the editorial review.
  • Authorship over an unpublished manuscript: The copyright granted to the titleholder once his article is published is also granted to authors of unpublished works.
  • Respect for citation sources: The Journal uses quality control procedures to ensure strictness in the use of citation sources, as well as the adequate preparation of references based on the APA model. To filter the quality of the citation, Turnitin software is used to identify matches in the text with respect to other publications.


  1. Editorial transparency
  • The Journal registers each stage of the editorial process through the OJS platform and through internal databases that make it possible to show the rigor of the stages of the evaluation process. It also offers statistics on the number of articles of entry, processed, rejected and published.
  • In turn, the website of the Journal displays all the necessary information that allows the researcher to know the characteristics of this publication and its requirements.
  • The articles published include data on the affiliation of all the authors, as well as a means of contact to facilitate the research networks.

II. Responsibilities of the parties involved in the process of publishing scientific results

Author or Authors

  • Understand the ethical obligations related to the publication and not omit them due to impatience or disinterest. In the same way, authors must not interpose their personal interests on the principles that guide authorship and publication.
  • Observe the copyright and commit to correctly repay the credits of these people. For this, they cite and reference these sources using the APA citation model, in the most current edition.
  • Read and know the editorial policies and the Manuscripts Submission Guideliness and Instructions for Authors of the MHSalud Journal. In addition to understanding the responsibilities indicated in the Cover Letter (Originality Statement and Transfer Agreement); subscribing thus all the terms described therein.
  • The author cannot duplicate the sending of his article simultaneously to another journal.
  • The authors understand that, in case of simultaneous application, partial publication, plagiarism or self-plagiarism, the MHSALUD Journal and its Editorial Board have the right to cancel the article in its "Rejected" status. These authors will receive the proper response of their article considering this condition.
  • They have the responsibility to add in the methodology of the article what concerns the Code of Ethics of the body responsible for their country.
  • They are responsible for specifying the authorship and the order in which the names of the co-authors will appear. The general rule is that the name of the main collaborator appears first and the subsequent names in order of decreasing contribution.
  • In case of conflict of interest or other disputes over authorship, The MHSalud Journal will consider the national norms as well as the recommendations of COPE is assumed as the basis for the resolution of the same.

Editor and Editorial Board

  • Execute the editorial policies established by the Journal in such a way this team can guide the authors, reviewers and the Editorial Committee during the editorial management process.
  • Review the article with consistency and efficiency in the times of reception and evaluation. Resist external pressures that may alter the integrity of the publication process.
  • Suggest to the authors the use of tools that avoid the ambiguity in the nomenclature of the names of each person participating in the research (For example: ORCID)
  • Confirm the authorization of the co-authorship of the articles submitted for evaluation, as well as the order in which they appear cited in the article.
  • Review all the technical, administrative details that accompany and guarantee the quality of the editorial process.
  • Ensure that the authors declares the approval of the Ethics Committee of their country for the disclosure of the results of their research, thus avoiding possible conflicts of interest.
  • Ensure that, during the arbitration process, the reviewer will be selected according to the principles of thematic knowledge and expertise in the scientific review of scientific articles.
  • Protect the identity of the authors and reviewers, applying the "double blind" modality for the review process.
  • Communicate with an Evaluation Report, the observations made by the reviewers, and thus provide the result of the evaluation.


  • Reviewers should not accept the review of an article unless it is qualified for evaluation.
  • Should respect the time assigned for the evaluation of the manuscript and be diligent in it, in order not to harm or compromise the fluency of the review process.
  • If, during the evaluation process, the reviewer detects an irregularity or identifies unusual circumstances in the article under review, must inform immediately to the editor of the MHSalud Journal.
  • Conflict of interests: the reviewer must inform the editor of the existence of a situation of commercial, economic or personal interests that could affect the evaluation of the article. Although this will depend on individual circumstances. On a general basis, it is not recommended that the reviewer accept the evaluation of a manuscript of a relative, collaborator, colleague, friend or recent student.
  • Respect and protect the condition of confidentiality of the content of the manuscripts during this stage of the editorial process.
  • Understand all the extremes of what the "double blind" review modality implies, and in order to safeguard the confidentiality of content and authorship.

I. Malpractices Statement[2]

  1. Process of intervention in situations of bad practices identified
    • Elaboration of citations and references in an appropriate way: Once the article is registered in the Journal, a rigorous review of citations and references is carried out to verify the correct use of the citation model, as well as the correct identification of all the sources. Any required correction will be sent to the contact author so that he can elaborate the requested adjustments. Subsequently, a verification is carried out with the Turnitin software to prevent bad practices in the elaboration of textual quotes or paraphrasing. Any case of coincidences in the text will be checked prior to the peer evaluation of the article and the authors will be asked to clarify the status of the detected coincidence, correct if possible or proceed with the rejection if it is assessed that the number of matches violates the originality requirement of the manuscript. In all cases a document will be provided with the observations on the coincidences detected.
    • Detection of plagiarism in the manuscript: If the Editorial Board or the Peer Review Committee, as well as external agents (in case of articles already published) have identified a plagiarism situation in the manuscript, the complaint will be documented and analyzed, for which the author will be asked to answer in writing about the complaint. If plagiarism is proven during the evaluation process, the article will be rejected. If plagiarism is demonstrated in a published article, the Journal will proceed to make a written retraction of the situation and it will be published in the Journal to alert possible readers about the situation. The Journal will have an internal file of cases of plagiarism. Any other provision will be resolved with the institutional[3], national and international regulations regarding intellectual property.
    • Lack of conduct and respect for the editorial process: Any practice that pretends to fraudulently alter the editorial management process will be documented and processed through the Editorial Board responsible for the Journal, and in case it involves any representative of the Journal's team, will be regulated with the institutional regulations for that purpose.
    • Data fabrication: It is considered that the adequate presentation of the methodological process and its coherence in the article will be decisive to guarantee the quality of the manuscript. When necessary, the editor can request the authors, expand information or provide documents that validate the researching process carried out. In any situation in which the validity of the information is questioned, the authors will be asked to clarify what is necessary to verify the veracity of the data and the investigation procedure.
    • Conflicts of interests: The Journal establishes in this document the possible situations that may present conflicts of interest. In the event that a conflict of interest situation arises, authors will be given a space to clarify the situation and, if it is proven that if a conflict of interest arises, the article will be rejected.
    • Transparency in the participation of coauthors: The persons who subscribe the Originality Statement and Transfer Agreement, confirm the authorship and participation on the manuscript presented to the Journal. In this sense, it is not authorized to incorporate authorships after the reception of the article. The authors will place the order of participation according to internal agreement and once the article is published, the order cannot be changed.
    • Retractions: It corresponds to the action of "retracting" a situation related to an article already published that can be catalogued as an error, a correction, an ethical or legal misconduct. The retraction can be presented by any person related to the editorial process, for example, one or more authors of an article, the editor of the journal, the Editorial Board, external persons such as institutions, readers, among others. In the cases where a retraction is necessary, the journal will proceed according to the Protocol of Retraction of MHSalud Journal (in spanish) and will publish a document of retraction that will detail the arguments that justify this procedure. The retraction will be evidenced on the journal's website to avoid confusion when this article is used as a source of information for future research.


The email is available for complaints about  malpractices in the scientific publication process.

[1] Adaptated from del American Psychological Association (2010, p.12) and Council of Science Editors (2006 p.11)

[2] Based on Principles of transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing from COPE (2018).

[3] Refering to Universidad Nacional

Go to About the Journal