Publication Ethics
Governing body
Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology is under the scientific control of the Editorial Board, whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas included within the journal’s scope. Some executive roles of the Editorial Board members are delegated to the Editor-in-Chief, who is well-known in the journal’s scope.
 
Editorial team
Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology is under the scientific supervision of the Editorial Team, whose members are all experts with a high number of publications in their field.
 
Author fees/Access
Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology" is an Open-Access journal following the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing. Submission, review, and publication processes in this journal are fee-and charge-free. Nevertheless, if reviewers recommend language editing of a manuscript, it is the responsibility of authors to cover the associated costs.
Several language editing services are available around the world; however, it is advisable to use a trustworthy and professional service for editing your manuscript. We recommend submitting your paper to papereditorship@gmail.com, where our quality control division has approved its language editing services. While this option is available, it is not exclusive, and authors may seek alternative services.
 
 
Publication rules: terms and conditions
Human Rights
Reporting assurance statement for human subjects at the end of each article:
- Consent from study participants
-Compatibility of the study with the ethical guidelines of the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki 
- Strictly follow the instructions of the COPE  and ICMJE in both experimental and clinical studies, including ethical and scientific subjects. Despite the necessity of stating the related declaration by authors, otherwise, the following sentence should be given: None declared.
Reporting assurance statement for animal subjects at the end of each article:
- In case of animal experimentation, all animals must receive humane care; according to the "Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals"(published by the NIH, 1985) and the Basel Declaration, which outlines fundamental as well as ethical guidelines at the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS).
- It is highly recommended to include an ethical approval code for all submissions related to animal experiments.
 
Ethical Approval Code
It is required for the authors to obtain ethical permission from their institute. In this case, an ethical approval code is strongly recommended for all related issues in studies such as medical documents and human samples. In addition, authors' local institutes (such as a national center of ethics or the ethics department of universities) must approve this code.

Informed consent
In addition to writing an informed consent at the end of the article, the author should also include a statement that all experiments were performed in compliance with the relevant laws and institutional guidelines. It is also necessary to bring the statement related to the institutional committee(s) that approved the experiments.

Plagiarism
Similarity score
In the Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology journal, the similarity is checked using "iThenticate" in 2 phase by our online system: early submission and before the publishing stage. Authors must ensure that their study is an original work and, if they use other works, they should refer to them properly. 
Acceptance level in the case of similarity
Since our principle indicates that science should not be repeated, any sentences in submitted manuscripts must be unique and consequently, pre-defining a specific level of similarity is not feasible. The COPE terms and conditions are considered regarding similarity and plagiarism.

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 behavior 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 others 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.
Change to Authorship
 
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.

Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through 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.

Peer reviewer responsibilities toward the author
  • Authors must be on time in providing written and unbiased feedback based on the scientific value of the work.
  • Reviewers should be responsible for providing clear and relevant comments on the manuscripts, helping to the authors progress the quality of the work.
  • Considering personal & financial interests is forbidden.
  • The process of reviewing must be maintained confidential completely.
Peer reviewer responsibilities toward the editor
  • Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it, and giving decisions based on rating
  • The direct contact of the judges with the authors should be strictly avoided, except with the permission and information of the editor
  • Quickly informing the editor when any problem occurs in reviewing the articles and introducing alternative referees to do that work
  • Considering the guidelines of the journal and the editor in terms of sufficient minimums for judging an article
  • Providing clear and well-reasoned reasons for deciding on an article
  • Complete avoidance of pursuing any personal or financial interests 
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
  • In addition to keeping the reviewers' comments confidential, the original and copy of the manuscript should not be kept by the reviewers.
  • Reviewers' decisions must be solely based on scientific merit and should not be influenced by reviewers' financial interests or their ethnic, racial, and religious attitudes.
  •  The vision of this journal is to find expert reviewers in any field to which manuscripts are sent. If the reviewers do not have sufficient expertise regarding the manuscript, they should refuse to accept the refereeing.
  •  Reviewers should be responsible for completing the review within the pre-defined time and respect the limitations of the journal.
Editorial independence & Responsibility
Based on the strategy of this journal, the practical independence of all reviewers, editors-in-chief, and associate editors from the point of view of the publisher is fully guaranteed, and they will make decisions solely based on their scientific qualifications.
Principles of Editorial independence
Since the editors-in-chief are generally academics, their payments are independent of their journal activities. She is not paid for journal activities. Therefore, our journal does not pay any salary to the editors.

Publication Ethics
  • All IEM editorial board members, reviewers, and authors must adhere to and obey guidelines defined by COPE.
  •  The corresponding author is the main responsible person and owner of the article, so she/he can withdraw the article before entering the review process or when a revision is requested.
  • Authors cannot make major changes in the article after acceptance without a serious reason.
  • All editorial members and authors must resolve to publish any kind of corrections honestly and completely.
  • Any notes of plagiarism, data fabrication and falsification, simultaneous submission, duplicate publication, improper author contribution or attribution, citation manipulation, fraudulent data, or any other kinds of fraud must be reported completely to COPE.
  • In case of documented violations of any of the above-mentioned policies in any journal, immediate rejection of the manuscript and prohibition against all of the authors for any new submissions for a minimum of 36 months will be applied.

Republishing Policy
Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology journal strongly advises authors to refrain from submitting articles that have already been accepted elsewhere, even if they were accepted in a language other than English or published in a local journal.

Withdrawal Regulations
Withdrawal of an article can occur in the review or pre-publication processes. It might be because of a mistake in pre-publication in other journals or not considering the journal's ethical codes. In addition, it may happen due to some existing inconsistency in the declaration of authors’ contributions, or any doubt about the accuracy of the data, etc. To submit your withdrawal request, please send your request to(iem@modares.ac.ir).

Retraction Regulations
Although retraction may be initiated by the journal's editors or by the author(s), the responsibility for retraction lies with the editors of our journal, even if all or some authors refuse to retract the publication. As soon as editors are convinced that a specific publication is seriously flawed, the published title must be retracted.
What Are the Compelling Reasons?
  • High similarity score
  • Author's bogus claims
  • Misuse of data
  • Not considering ethical codes
  • Undisclosed competing interest
  • Multiple submission and redundant publication
Article Retraction Process
Authors and/or editor of the journal must sign a retraction statement entitled "Retraction: [article title]. This statement should be published in the paginated part of a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list. Also, a hyperlink is prepared to the original article in the electronic version. Despite the original article, the HTML version of the document is removed, and a watermark on the .pdf file of the article must be added to show that it is "retracted".

 Copyright
The content of Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology is under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License. To the extent this Public License may be interpreted as a contract, we are granted the Licensed Rights in consideration of your acceptance of these terms and conditions, and the Licensor grants you such rights in consideration of benefits the Licensor receives from making the Licensed Material available under these terms and conditions.
 
Process for identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct
The publisher and editors of Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology are reasonable in identifying and preventing the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In doing so, Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology follows COPE’s guidelines in dealing with allegations.
 
Ownership and management
Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology is owned, managed, and published by Tarbiat Modares University, Iran.
 
Conflicts of interests
All Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology Editorial Board members and the Editor-in-Chief submitted articles are subject to the same review process as the other authors. In cases where a reviewer suspects an undisclosed conflict of interest in a submitted manuscript or a reader suspects an undisclosed conflict of interest in a published article (all authors are filling the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest at the submission time), Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology will follow COPE’s guidelines.
 
Complaints and Appeals
Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology follows COPE’s guidelines on appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal’s editorial management of the peer-review process. Any complaint or appeal could  be sent to the publisher in the following way: Submit a ticket via Publisher Support at https://journals.modares.ac.ir/
 
Revenue sources/Advertising/Direct marketing
Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology is financially supported completely by Tarbiat Modares University, Iran, and has no other sources for earning funds. Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology accepts no advertisements on the site or even as a report article.
 
Publishing schedule/Archiving
Also, Infection Epidemiology and Microbiology is included in EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, DOAJ, ISC (Islamic World Science Citation Center), ICI (World of Journals), and Scopus, and has plans to enter PubMed and the Web of Science database.
 
Declaration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use
We recognize the usefulness of generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools (hereafter genAI) in academic research and dissemination and require all authors who use genAI tools to adhere to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on “Authorship and AI Tools” (COPE, 2023).
These guidelines are designed to support ethical uses of new open technologies in the publishing enterprise. COPE guidelines require authors to explicitly and transparently disclose any use of AI tools in the Methods section (e.g., which AI tools were used, how they were used, and for which purpose). It should be noted that authors are responsible for any content derived using genAI tools in their manuscript and, therefore, are liable for any ethical breaches (see SAGE’s Assistive and Generative AI Guidelines for Authors, SAGE, 2023).

What is genAI?
For journal publication, genAI refers to the use of any tools that are able to automatically produce creative texts, images, or other content following a human user’s prompt or instruction. We elaborate on appropriate and inappropriate uses of genAI in relation to article creation and dissemination below.
Note that GenAI does not include grammar-checking tools, citation software, plagiarism detectors, or text-to-speech or speech-to-text tools. Use of these basic AI tools to progress or refine manuscripts does not need to be disclosed or cited in manuscripts submitted to Language Testing.

GenAI and authorship
GenAI may not be named as an author on any publication in Language Testing.

Use of genAI for language editing
Authors may use genAI tools to improve the readability of their writing. However, they must be accountable for all content presented in their publications. Authors who use genAI to improve the quality of their writing must acknowledge its use in the Acknowledgements section.

Use of genAI for content generation
GenAI must not be used to generate the content for the manuscript beyond making editorial corrections.

Use of genAI to generate materials
GenAI may be used to generate text, speech, image, or multimodal prompts as research stimuli when genAI is the focus of research. In these cases, these uses must be disclosed in the manuscript. Authors should be aware that the content produced by genAI can change even with the same prompt; thus, in certain contexts, the use of genAI may lead to irreproducible results.
Authors should carefully assess the appropriateness of using genAI tools to generate other types of materials in the research process (e.g., test prompts and items). The large language models underpinning genAI tools can inherit biases from training data and machine learning algorithms. The materials generated by these tools (and, in some cases, by basic AI tools) may either carry biases or fail to represent the nature of text or speech in real-world contexts. In all cases, the appropriateness of genAI use will be evaluated by Language Testing editors and reviewers. Authors should demonstrate criticality in their use of genAI tools, for example, by acknowledging limitations.

Use of genAI to generate data
It is only acceptable to use genAI to generate data in simulation studies—that is, computer experiments designed to evaluate statistical methods using synthetic data. If genAI tools are used to generate data in simulation studies, authors should save and date all output and note which program and version were used. Generating data using genAI is prohibited for all other study types.
GenAI must not be used to fabricate or falsify data. These are serious forms of research misconduct.

Use of genAI for data analysis
GenAI may be used to code and analyze data. Please note that data and other relevant materials generated by genAI tools may be inaccurate. The use of genAI to analyze qualitative data provided by research participants normally requires informed consent from those participants that their data will be analyzed using genAI tools in the ethics approval process.
Please note that when information is entered into genAI, the organization that runs the genAI tools will likely have access to this data and may use it to further train the genAI model. Data leaks are possible. Authors should also be aware of potential ethical issues and how the use of genAI tools may impact the privacy of the participants in their studies, in addition to risks to their own privacy and intellectual property. Authors should be aware of copyright restrictions before uploading any published or unpublished documents or extracts into genAI tools.
In all cases, any uses of GenAI for data analysis or coding must be noted in the manuscript, and the authors bear responsibility for checking the accuracy of the analysis.