Authorship, retraction, research misconduct, publication ethics and similar topics

Part 1. Possible researching funds
Any source of funding for research or publication should always be disclosed. When is known organisation and contract number of grants, funds or similar that should be included.

Part 2. Authorship and acknowledgment
Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2 and 3. It is based on a definition of authorship of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Contributors who do not qualify as authors should be listed in an acknowledgment for description of given help. Authors contribution sections is obligatory part of the paper.

Part 3. Redundant (multiple) publication
Authors need clearly explain what is, if any, included partially or completely in prior publications. It could be abstracts, posters, papers, books, databases and any kind of archives (public or not). If editor evaluate that submission is not substantially different of such previous results, it could be rejected. 

Part 4. Plagiarism
We do not and will not support any kind of possible or real plagiarism. If authors feel that some parts could be described as plagiarism, even if are used proper quotations and citations in text, they need to report it as part of submission. We can use iThenticate or Plagscan to check similarities.

Part 5. Protecting research subjects and rejection of any discrimination
Standards of human or any life form research is beyond the responsibilities of journal, but all need to be stated that are performed according policy of institution where they are made. Any discrimination can not be applied in experiments, empirical works, subjects of researching or any at possible authors, according to law of Republic Croatia, common regulative of EU and country where researching is done. If it is necessary, authors need submission accompanied with statement that the relevant research ethics committee or institutional review board approved. Editors should reserve the right to reject papers if there is doubt whether appropriate procedures have been followed.

Part 6. Errata, retractions, expressions of concern
The Editor in Chief will decided if any post-publishing author's complaint is appropriate (editorial mistake) or not (i.e. result of author's errors during post-review and pre-publishing process). If editor finds such complaint valid, the proceedings will publish corrections (errata) on the conference web site. Likewise, we should publish ‘retractions’ if work is proven to be fraudulent or plagiarism or will published ‘expressions of concern’ if editors have well-founded suspicions of misconduct. The authors can send retraction note for published paper, but the Editor in Chief decides if such statement will be accepted or not.

Part 7. Post-publication critique

We do not publish post-publication critiques, i.e. anybody interested in such crituque is invited to submit its own interpretations and results of previously published content. It will be reviewed.