• Focus and Scope
• Peer Review Process
• Publication Frequency
• Open Access Policy
• Archiving
• Criteria for acceptance
• English language, scientific writing, and figures quality
• Plagiarism Policy and Screening
• Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest
• Research involving human participants or animals
• Informed consent
• Corrections, Retractions, Notes of Concern

Focus and Scope

The Innovo Medica Journal (IMJ) is a premier journal that publishes articles on basic and clinical biomedical science discoveries. The IM Publisher founded the journal in 2023. IMJ is a reliable source of information for researchers, physicians, pharmacologists, and other professionals interested in the most recent advances in biomedical sciences. The journal allows authors to share their research findings and encourages cross-disciplinary collaboration. The articles published in IMJ are of high quality and describe significant and novel works in fields such as molecular biology, environmental sciences, biochemistry, biophysics, pharmacology, nursing, medical sciences, biomedical sciences, computational biomedicine, and artificial intelligence in biomedicine. The journal's emphasis on publishing significant and novel works makes it a valuable resource for those interested in the most recent developments in biomedical sciences.

Peer Review Process

Once a manuscript is submitted, it is assigned to an Editor most appropriate to handle it, based on the subject of the manuscript and the availability of the Editors. If the Editor determines that the manuscript is not of sufficient quality to go through the standard review process or if the manuscript's subject is not appropriate to the journal scope, the Editor rejects the manuscript with no further processing. This decision is made within 1-3 days.

If the Editor determines that the submitted manuscript is of sufficient quality and falls within the scope of the Journal, he/she assigns the manuscript to a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 5 external reviewers for peer-review. The reviewers submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor:

• Accept submission (Publish Unaltered)
• Revisions required (Consider after Minor Changes)
• Resubmit for review (Consider after Major Changes)
• Decline submission (Reject: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently novel)

When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can make one of the following decisions: Publish Unaltered, Consider after Minor Changes, Consider after Major Changes, Reject. This decision is usually made within 30 days from the submission date.

If the Editor recommends "Publish Unaltered," the manuscript is accepted for publication. The manuscript is then assigned a DOI number and is published within 5 days in the Advanced online section of the Journal and PubMed.

If the Editor recommends "Consider after Minor Changes," the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. The Editor reviews the revised manuscript after the authors have made the minor changes. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted. The revised manuscript has to be submitted within two weeks. If you think you are unable to meet the deadline, please notify the Editorial Office.

If the Editor recommends "Consider after Major Changes," the recommendation is communicated to the authors. The authors are expected to revise their manuscripts according to the changes recommended by the reviewers and submit their revised manuscript within three months. Submission later than that will be regarded as a new submission that will go through the complete review process from the beginning. If you think you are unable to meet the deadline, please notify the Editorial Office.

If the Editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if two of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. The editorial workflow gives the Editors the authority to reject any manuscript because of the inappropriateness of its subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of its results. The Editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript submitted to the Journal, since any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the Editor in charge of the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the Journal.

The peer-review process is double-blinded, i.e., the reviewers do not know who the authors of the manuscript are, and the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer-reviewers are. Without the significant contributions made by peer reviewers, the publication of the Journal would not be possible.

Publication Frequency

Innovo Medica Journal is published continuously throughout the year. Upon acceptance, articles are first published Advanced Online and Ahead of Print and assigned to Articles in Press Section. The articles are collected in issues twice yearly: in (May- June) and (November-December). Additionally, supplement issues may be published upon the Editorial board's decision.

Open Access Policy

This Journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Articles accepted or published in their final form in Innovo Medica Journal may be freely deposited to any repository, including academic social networks. 

Archiving

Articles published in the Innovo Medica Journal are permanently stored in full text in CLOCKSS, LOCKSS. Many reputable libraries also index Innovo Medica Journal contents. Complete full-text archives are permanently available at the Journal's website https://innmed.enu.edu.iq/bmtj.

Criteria for acceptance

Innovo Medica Journal can publish only about 12% of the more than 800 submissions received per year. Submitted manuscripts may be rejected without detailed comments after an initial review by the editorial board if the manuscripts are considered inappropriate or of insufficient scientific priority for publication in the Biomolecules and Biomedicine. All other manuscripts undergo a complete review by consulting editors or other selected experts. Criteria for acceptance by the Biomolecules and Biomedicine include originality, the validity of data, clarity of writing, strength of the conclusions, and the potential importance of the work to the field of basic (preclinical) sciences. Submitted manuscripts will not be reviewed if they do not conform to standard English usage and the Instructions for authors, which are based on "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Innovo Medica Journal.

English language, scientific writing, and figures quality

Innovo Medica Journal imposes high English language and scientific medical writing standards, i.e., style, clarity, information flow, readability, terminology, and other writing aspects.

For scientifically sound articles, accepted for publishing, but with less than optimal English language and writing, authors will be informed about the necessity of editing. Authors will be requested to correct the technical (language and writing) aspects, preferably by a native English speaking editor or a professional editing service, and to provide a certificate of editing and scientific writing for the manuscript. Else, authors may choose to arrange the paid language editing and scientific writing with the Journal's collaborators.

The Journal publishes only high-quality figures. The content of the figures (graph or composite figures quality, image colors, brightness and contrast, font legibility, spelling errors), as well as figure resolution, have to be of high quality. If the figures are suboptimal, the authors will be asked to improve the figures. If the authors cannot improve the figures themselves, they may use the paid figure editing with the Journal's external collaborators.

Plagiarism Policy and Screening

Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are not allowed, and they will be dealt with according to the COPE guidelines (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines)

This Journal uses a Crosscheck/iThenticate software for the detection of the text-similarity and overlapping of the submitted manuscripts with published literature.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

Authors must disclose all relationships or interests that could directly or potentially influence or impart bias on the work. Although an author may not feel there is any conflict, the disclosure of relationships and interests provides a more complete and transparent process, leading to an accurate and objective assessment of the work. Awareness of real or perceived conflicts of interest is a perspective to which the readers are entitled. This is not meant to imply that a financial relationship with an organization that sponsored the research or compensation received for consultancy work is inappropriate. Examples of potential conflicts of interests that are directly or indirectly related to the research may include but are not limited to, the following:

• Research grants from funding agencies (please give the research funder and the grant number)
• Honoraria for speaking at symposia
• Financial support for attending symposia
• Financial support for educational programs
• Employment or consultation
• Support from a project sponsor
• Position on advisory board or board of directors or other types of management relationships
• Multiple affiliations
• Financial relationships, for example, equity ownership or investment interest Intellectual property rights (e.g., patents, copyrights, and royalties from such rights)
• Holdings of spouse or children that may have a financial interest in the work

Also, interests beyond financial interests and compensation (non-financial interests) that may be important to readers should be disclosed. These may include but are not limited to personal relationships or competing interests directly or indirectly tied to this research, or professional interests or personal beliefs that may influence your research. The corresponding author collects the conflict of interest disclosure forms from all authors. In author collaborations where formal agreements for representation allow it, it is sufficient for the corresponding author to sign the disclosure form on behalf of all authors. 

Research involving human participants or animals

1) Statement of Human Rights When reporting studies that involve human participants, authors should include a statement that the studies have been approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach, and demonstrate that the independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.

The following statements should be included in the Declaration of interest section, before the References section:

2) Statement on the Welfare of Animals used for research must be respected. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals have been followed, and that a research ethics committee has approved the studies at the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted (where such a committee exists).

For studies with animals, the following statement should be included in the Declaration of interest section, before the References section:

If articles do not contain studies with human participants or animals by any of the authors, please select one of the following statement:

Statement

• Ethical approval: This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
• Ethical approval: This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.
• Ethical approval: This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

All individuals have individual rights that are not to be infringed. Individual participants in studies have, for example, the right to decide what happens to the (identifiable) personal data gathered, to what they have said during a study or an interview, as well as to any photograph that was taken.

Hence it is important that all participants gave their informed consent in writing prior to inclusion in the study. Identifying details (names, dates of birth, identity numbers and other information) of the participants that were studied should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and genetic profiles unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the participant (or parent or guardian if the participant is incapable) gave written informed consent for publication. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve in some cases, and informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt.

For example, masking the eye region in photographs of participants is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic profiles, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning.

The following statement should be included: