Publication ethics and malpractice statement

The Journal of Veterinary Research fully engages in keeping publication ethical standards high and preserving the integrity of the academic record. It endorses the ethics of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices https://publicationethics.org/, deems as malpractice conduct which fails to comply with these ethics and responds to such practice applying the relevant policies among those outlined below.

Editorial obligations

Accountability

The editor of the Journal of Veterinary Research is accountable for everything published in the journal. He or she applies the policies of the journal’s editorial board and the law regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions. The journal maintains the integrity of the academic record, prevents business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and publishes corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

Plagiarism Policy

The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscript screening, aiming to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process.

Documentation and communication of deviations

When the Journal of Veterinary Research deviates from its established editorial practices, the editor documents the reasons for such deviations (for example, where editor recusal is required or where limited disciplinary expertise necessitates the involvement of an editorial board member as a reviewer). The journal informs affected authors of the non-standard handling of their submission.

Mandating of demonstrated experimentation ethical oversight

The Journal of Veterinary Research requires all experiments upon animals described in published papers to have been conducted in accordance with relevant national legislation on the use of animals for research. Documented permission from Local Ethics Committees is mandatory.

Fairness

The editorial board evaluates manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors. The editor is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

The journal’s editorial policy masks authors’ identities from reviewers and reviewers’ identities from authors. The editorial board establishes a fair and impartial review process, submitting manuscripts for review to experts in the field who are affiliated with an institution different from that of the author.

Confidentiality

The editor and editorial staff do not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers and the publisher, as may be appropriate in the case.

Monitoring of authenticity of author contributions

The editorial board tolerates no plagiarism, guest authorship or ghostwriting. The editor attempts to prevent plagiarism through the use of software tools. To endeavour to stop guest authorship and ghostwriting, the editorial board obligates authors to name all contributors and state their affiliations and contributions. Manuscripts in which plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, guest authorship or ghostwriting are detected are rejected.

Appropriate handling of sensitive data

The editor exercises appropriate discretion in the handling of personal, confidential or otherwise sensitive data in a submitted manuscript, and requests clarification, modification or additional information from the authors where necessary.

Disclosure, conflict of interests, and other issues

Unpublished materials in a submitted manuscript are not used in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information obtained or ideas encountered through peer review are not used for the personal advantage of any member of the editorial staff. Editors recuse themselves (i.e. ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board to review and assess in their place) from considering manuscripts with respect to 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 research.

The Journal of Veterinary Research requires all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests prior to publication and to provide statements of competing interests when such are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action is taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Response to research ethics concerns

When concerns are raised regarding the ethical conduct of published or submitted research, the editor considers the matter in accordance with the journal’s policies and relevant COPE guidance. The editor seeks clarification from the authors, requests additional information or takes appropriate action where necessary.

Response to intellectual property concerns

When concerns arise regarding intellectual property or rights associated with submitted or published material, the editor considers the matter in accordance with the journal’s policies, requests clarification or modification, or takes other appropriate editorial action.

Safeguarding integrity after publication

The editor is guided by the COPE Retraction Guidelines https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/retraction-guidelines when considering publishing retractions, expressions of concern or corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in the Journal of Veterinary Research. The journal guards the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. The editorial board also pursues reviewer and editorial misconduct. The editor takes appropriate action when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewer obligations

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer reviews are written to assist the editor in making decisions and assist the author in improving the manuscript through subsequent editorial communication.

Assessment of own competence

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to evaluate the research reported in a manuscript immediately notifies the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Promptness

Any invited reviewer who knows that the timely review of a manuscript will be impossible immediately notifies the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

A manuscript received for review is a confidential document. It is not shown to or discussed with others unless the reviewer is authorised to do so by the editor.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews are objective and refrain from personal criticism of the author. Reviewers express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Previously reported observations, derivations or arguments mentioned in a review are accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer also calls to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other relevant published data of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interests

Privileged information obtained or ideas encountered through peer review are not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts with respect to which they have any conflict of interests resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the research.

Author obligations

Upholding reporting standards

Authors reporting original research present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Data are represented accurately in the manuscript. Research methods are described in sufficient detail and with the references necessary for others to replicate the experiment.

Submission of original work

Authors submit entirely original manuscripts. Authors appropriately cite the work of others that has been used.

Avoiding multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author does not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research to more than one journal or primary publication. Authors do not attempt fragmented or redundant publication (“salami publishing”). Where a manuscript forms part of a larger body of related work, authors only submit distinct and substantive contributions to that body and disclose any closely related manuscripts or publications.

Research conduct with ethical approval, consent acquisition and hazard identification

Authors conduct research involving animals or animal owners or custodians in accordance with applicable ethical standards and regulatory requirements when such research is to be reported in a submission. Documented permission from Local Ethics Committees is mandatory. Where required, informed consent is obtained and described in the manuscript. Where formal ethical approval is not required, the basis for this is stated. If a described experiment involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that are unusually hazardous in use, authors clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Authorship criteria and author order

Only those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported research are named as authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project are acknowledged.

The corresponding author ensures that all appropriate authors and no inappropriate authors are named in the manuscript. The length of the author list and order of authors are finalised before submitting the manuscript. The author clearly requests any required changes to the list after submission and acknowledges the discretion of the editor to grant or not grant such a request.

Final author approval

The corresponding author is obliged to present the final version of the manuscript to all authors and obtain their approval of its submission for publication.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others is always given. Authors also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported research.

Responsibility for third‑party intellectual property

Authors ensure that they have the right to use any third-party material included in their submission. If required, appropriate permissions, licences or acknowledgements are obtained and provided.

Appropriate handling of sensitive data

Authors ensure that personal, confidential or otherwise sensitive data (including data relating to animal owners, custodians or locations) are handled in accordance with applicable legal and ethical requirements. If such data cannot be made publicly available, the reasons are explained in the manuscript.

Disclosure and conflicts of interests

All authors disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interests that might be construed to have influenced the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the research and the publication of its findings are disclosed.

Provision of research data

Authors make the data underlying their findings available if possible. If data cannot be shared because of legal, ethical or practical constraints, the reasons are stated. A data availability statement describing how the data supporting the results can be accessed, or explaining why they are not publicly available, is included in the manuscript.

Correcting fundamental errors in published manuscripts

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal's editor and collaborate with them to either retract the paper or publish an appropriate erratum.

https://sciendo-parsed-data-feed.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/JVETRES/Authors_Contribution_to_the_Article_Ghostwriting_Guest_Authorship_and_Financial_Disclosure_Statements.docx

Journal of Veterinary Research

formerly Bulletin of the Veterinary Institute in Pulawy

About the journal

Editor-in-chief

All volumes and issues in this journal

Volume 70 (2026)

Volume 69 (2025)

Volume 68 (2024)

Volume 67 (2023)

Volume 66 (2022)

Volume 65 (2021)

Volume 64 (2020)

Volume 63 (2019)

Volume 62 (2018)

Volume 61 (2017)

Volume 60 (2016)

Volume 59 (2015)

Volume 58 (2014)

Volume 57 (2013)

Volume 56 (2012)

Journal details