Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Rheumatology (Bulgaria) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Journal strictly follows the international recommendations, guidelines, and core practices of leading editorial organizations, including:

The Journal editors also endorse the following editorial documents to ensure wide visibility of the publication and prevent violations of publication ethics:

1. Duties and Responsibilities of the Editors

1.1. Editorial Independence and Decision-Making The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board have complete authority and responsibility to accept, reject, or request modifications to a submitted manuscript. Editorial decisions are based solely on the manuscript's scientific merit, validity, originality, clarity, and its relevance to the Journal’s scope. Decisions are never influenced by the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy, nor by any commercial interests.

1.2. Confidentiality The Editors and editorial staff must ensure that all submitted materials remain strictly confidential during the review process. Information regarding a submitted manuscript will not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

1.3. Conflicts of Interest (Editors) Editors will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the explicit written consent of the authors. Editors must recuse themselves from considering 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.

1.4. Management of Research Misconduct and Ethical Complaints The Editors actively monitor for and safeguard against ethical misconduct. In cases of suspected misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, redundant publication, authorship disputes), the Editors will follow the relevant COPE code of conduct and guidelines. The Journal will thoroughly investigate all ethical complaints, even if discovered years after publication. If misconduct is confirmed, the Journal will take appropriate action, including publishing corrections, errata, expressions of concern, or full retractions.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of the Reviewers

Reviewers are esteemed experts within their respective professional fields, selected by the Editor-in-Chief to ensure a fair and objective evaluation of all submissions. They bear primary responsibility for maintaining the scientific quality and strict confidentiality of their assessments. In the course of the peer review process, reviewers are expected to consult the reporting standards of the EQUATOR Network and adhere to the ethical policies of global editorial associations, including the recommendations provided by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). To promote transparency and ensure appropriate recognition, the Journal publicizes the names of its reviewers annually. Reviewers are also encouraged to record their contributions on their ORCID iDs and may forward official acknowledgments to Web of Science. Reviewers have the following specific duties:

Providing timely, professional, and evidence-based evaluations of assigned manuscripts;
Declaring any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that could compromise the objectivity of the peer review;
Notifying the Editor-in-Chief of any suspicions regarding plagiarism or redundant publication in the evaluated work;
Upholding ethical standards by avoiding the unauthorized copying or reuse of unpublished materials for personal research interests;
Conducting comprehensive evaluations and suggesting specific amendments to enhance the scientific quality and ethical integrity of the submission;
Identifying relevant published work not cited by the authors, while avoiding requests for unethical self-citations;
Offering impartial recommendations on whether to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript, with the understanding that final authority rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

3. Duties and Responsibilities of the Authors

3.1. Reporting Standards and Data Access Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed, followed by 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 strictly unacceptable. Authors may be 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, if practicable, and retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. The authors are responsible for adhering to relevant research reporting standards of the EQUATOR Network.

3.2. Originality, Plagiarism, and Acknowledgment of Sources Authors must guarantee that they have written entirely original works. If authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms - from passing off another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper without attribution, to claiming results from research conducted by others - is unethical and unacceptable. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

3.3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications 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. Translation of a previously published article into another language for publication in Rheumatology (Bulgaria) may be considered an ethical secondary publication only under strict conditions: clear justification, official permission from the primary publisher, full alignment with ICMJE criteria, and complete transparency (a clear note that the article has been published elsewhere).

3.4. Authorship Integrity Authorship should be strictly limited to those who meet all four ICMJE criteria:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;
Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
Final approval of the version to be published;
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All those who have made significant contributions but do not meet the criteria for authorship must be recognized in the "Acknowledgments" section. The corresponding author ensures that all appropriate 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.

3.5. Conflicts of Interest and Funding (Authors) All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. A completed ICMJE Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form is mandatory.

3.6. Research Involving Human and Animal Subjects When reporting research involving human data or animal experiments, authors must explicitly state in the Methods section that the study was approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee. For human studies, a statement confirming that written informed consent was obtained from all participants is mandatory. All research must adhere to the WMA Declaration of Helsinki, or the relevant EU legislation/NIH policies regarding animal research. Patient anonymity and privacy must be strictly protected.

3.7. Errors in Published Works When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's strict obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

4. Duties of the Publisher

4.1. Commitment to Ethical Independence The Publisher of Rheumatology (Bulgaria) is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

4.2. Support for Good Practices The Publisher, in close cooperation with the Editorial Board, continuously works to set standards for best practices in publications, aiming to assist Editors, Peer Reviewers, and Authors in performing their ethical duties.

4.3. Handling Misconduct and Maintaining the Academic Record In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the Publisher, working alongside the Editor-in-Chief, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected work.

5. Ethics related to vulnerable subjects

All Editors, Reviewers, and Authors of the Journal are expected to adhere strictly to ethical principles concerning research involving vulnerable populations. For studies involving vulnerable subjects, such as children and pregnant minors, the manuscript must explicitly detail the specific measures taken to mitigate health risks and safeguard the welfare of the participants. Full compliance with the principles of the Belmont Report and the WMA Declaration of Helsinki is mandatory. In instances where vulnerable subjects are legally or cognitively unable to provide written informed consent, appropriate consent must be obtained from their parents or legal guardians.

6. Ethical Guidelines for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Scientific Research, Manuscript Preparation, and Graphic Illustration

Upon submission, authors are required to disclose within the Methods section and other relevant components of their manuscripts whether, and in what manner, artificial intelligence was utilized for data acquisition, drafting, editorial refinement, or the development of figures and other graphical illustrations. AI technologies do not qualify for authorship and must not be listed as such. All AI-generated content remains the sole responsibility of the human authors, who must verify its accuracy and ensure that it is appropriately processed to prevent plagiarism, copyright infringement, or erroneous referencing.

Editors and Peer Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading confidential materials received for review onto AI platforms. AI tools must not be employed for the evaluation of submitted manuscripts or the drafting of editorial comments. To safeguard the integrity of processed manuscripts and published content, Editors reserve the right to request full transparency from authors regarding the use of AI in the preparation of their texts and graphics.