Author Instructions

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission’s compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

  •  The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
  •  The submission file is in Open Office, Microsoft Word.
  •  Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
  •  The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
  •  The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.

Author Guidelines

General Author Instructions

Submission

Manuscripts should be submitted by one of the authors of the manuscript through email to the editorial office. Regardless of the source of the word-processing tool, only electronic Word (.doc, .docx) files can be submitted. Only email submissions are advised strongly to facilitate rapid publication and minimize administrative costs. Submissions by anyone other than one of the authors will not be accepted. The submitting author takes responsibility for the paper during submission and peer review. The author can send the manuscript as an email attachment.

Manuscript Submission Department

Online Submission: The authors can submit online using OJS, however, if feel problem with online submission can also send through editor@bbasr.org

Types of Papers

  1. Original research papers:

Papers that include original empirical data that have not been published anywhere earlier (except as an abstract). Null/negative findings and replication/refutation findings are also welcome. This type of paper normally should not exceed 25 double-spaced pages of text (including references) and should contain no longer than 15 figures/tables. We advise a length of 3000-6000 words (including everything). This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables.

  1. Short Research Articles:

These may be small single-result findings. Such articles can be brief but need to include enough information, particularly in the methods and results sections, that a reader could understand what was done. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables.

  1. Short communications:

Short Communications are urgent communications of important preliminary results that are very original, of high interest and likely to have a significant impact on the subject area of the journal. A Short Communication needs only to demonstrate a ‘proof of principle’. Authors are encouraged to submit an Original Research Paper to the journal following their Short Communication. We advise a length of 2500-3500 words, plus 2-3 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables.

  1. Review papers:

These papers will not have empirical data acquired by the authors but will include a discussion of papers published and data acquired in a specific area. We advise a length of 5000-9000 words, (including 50-150 references plus 3-5 figures and/or tables (if required).

  1. Minireview papers:

Minireviews are brief historical perspectives or summaries of developments in fast-moving areas covered within the scope of the journal. They must be based on published articles; they are not outlets for unpublished data. We advise a length of 3000-6000 words, (including 30-70 references plus 2-3 figures and/or tables (if required). They may address any subject within the scope of the journal. The goal of the Minireviews is to provide a concise summary of a particular field in a manner understandable to all readers.

  1. Case reports / Case studies (Mainly for bio-medical journals):

Case reports describe patient cases which are of particular interest due to their novelty and their potential message for clinical practice. While there are several types of case reports, originality and clinical implications constitute the main virtues by which case reports are judged. (Ref: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18677298). Case studies are an invaluable record of the clinical practices of a profession. While case studies cannot provide specific guidance for the management of successive patients, they are a record of clinical interactions which help us to frame questions for more rigorously designed clinical studies. Case studies also provide valuable teaching material, demonstrating both classical and unusual presentations which may confront the practitioner. (Ref: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2597880/). Case Reports should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Presentation of Case, Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables. Abstract (not more than 250 words) of the Case reports should have the following sections: Aims, Presentation of Case, Discussion, and Conclusion. Only Case Reports have word limits: Papers should not exceed 2000 words, 20 references or 5 figures.

  1. Systematic Reviews:

Systematic Reviews should usually be based on medical interventions or animal model studies. We recommend that authors consult the PRISMA guidelines for reporting in Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews should deal with a clearly formulated question and use systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and critically assess the relevant research. We advise a length of 5000-9000 words, (including 50-150 references plus 3-5 figures and/or tables (if required).

  1. Policy Papers:

The purpose of the policy paper is to provide a comprehensive and persuasive argument justifying the policy recommendations presented in the paper, and therefore to act as a decision-making tool and a call to action for the target audience. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references.

  1. Commentaries / Opinion Articles:

An opinion-based article on a topical issue of broad interest that is intended to engender discussion. We advise a length of 2500-3500 words, plus 2-3 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references.

  1. Data Notes:

Data Notes are brief descriptions of scientific datasets that include details of why and how the data were created; they do not include any analyses or conclusions.

  1. Study Protocols and pre-protocols:

We welcome protocols for any study design, including observational studies and systematic reviews. All protocols for randomized clinical trials must be registered and follow the proper Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines; ethical approval for the study must have been already granted. Study pre-protocols (i.e. discussing provisional study designs) may also be submitted and will be clearly labeled as such when published. Study protocols for pilot and feasibility studies may also be considered.

  1. Method Articles:

These articles describe a new experimental or computational method, test or procedure, and should have been well tested. This includes new study methods, substantive modifications to existing methods or innovative applications of existing methods to new models or scientific questions. We also welcome new technical tools that facilitate the design or performance of experiments and data analysis such as software and laboratory devices, or of new technologies to assist medical treatment such as drug delivery devices. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references.

  1. Data Articles:

A dataset (or set of datasets) together with the associated methods/protocol used to create the data. No analysis of the data, results or conclusions should be included.

  1. Clinical Practice Articles:

A short article relating to a specific clinical problem or scenario that discusses issues relating to patient management and treatment pathways using an evidence-based approach. Clinical Practice Articles include case series (i.e. group or series of case reports involving patients who were given similar treatment), but should not be based on a single case (see Case Reports).

  1. Abstracts of scientific meetings:

Abstracts of oral presentations and posters (within the scope of the journal) can be published in discussion with the academic editors. Standardized abstracts (prepared in accordance with journal guidelines) need to be in English language and will be peer-reviewed prior to publication. It is recommended to contact the editor before submitting abstracts of a scientific meeting. Normally a collection of the abstracts (minimum 10 abstracts) will be published in a special issue. Abstracts are not considered for regular issues of the journal. Publication of ‘collection of abstracts of a conference, symposium, etc’ requires a guest editorial board. Normally the ‘Review committee / Screening committee’ of the conference will form the guest editorial board. A list of the guest editors also will be published in the special issue.

  1. Letter to the Editor:

A letter to the editor provides a means of communication between the author of an article and the reader of a journal, allowing continued dialogue about journal content to take place. Although not original research per se, a letter may provide new insight, make corrections, offer alternate theories, or request clarification about content printed in the journal. Letters to the Editor are considered for publication (subject to editing and abridgment) provided they do not contain material that has been submitted or published elsewhere. Letters in reference to a Journal article must not exceed 600 words (excluding references). Letters not related to a Journal article must not exceed 600 words (excluding references). A letter can have no more than eight references and one figure or table. A letter can be signed by no more than four authors. Financial associations or other possible conflicts of interest must be disclosed. This type of article will be fully peer-reviewed. [Reference and more information:
1. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2647072 2. http://www.nejm.org/page/author-center/letter-submission 3. http://www.sciencemag.org/site/misc/editor.xhtml]

  1. Scholarly Book Review:

The scholarly book review is considered by some to be a form of academic writing that serves to describe and critically evaluate the content, quality, meaning, and significance of a book. A well-constructed book review can provide a thoughtful perspective and will be appreciated. Scholarly Book Review should be within 1800 words. Scholarly Book Review must have to be systematic and structured and proper references (2-5 numbers) should be cited during the review. Scholarly Book Review must be avoided to advertise the book. A normal peer review process will be followed to ensure the academic quality of such book reviews. An only academically important and critical review of books will be considered for publication. There will be restrictions on a number of such articles to be published per year.

Units of Measurement

Units of measurement should be presented simply and concisely using System International (SI) units.

Title and Authorship Information

The following information should be included

Paper title.

Full author names.
Full institutional mailing addresses.
Email addresses of all the authors.

Manuscript Structure

The manuscript should be written in English with a simple layout. The text should be prepared in single-column format. The text, excluding the abstract, if required, can be divided into numbered sections with brief headings. Starting from the introduction with section 1, subsections should be numbered (for example 2.1 (then 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2, etc.), up to three levels.

Title

The title should be without any abbreviations and it should enlighten the contents of the paper.

Abstract

The abstract should be concise and informative. It should be between 300-400 words in length. It should briefly describe the purpose of the work, techniques, and methods used, major findings with important data and conclusions. Different sub-sections, as given below, should be used. No references should be cited in this part. Generally, non-standard abbreviations should not be used, if necessary they should be clearly defined in the abstract, at first use.

Keywords

Immediately after the abstract, about 4-8 keywords should be given. Use of abbreviations should be avoided, only standard abbreviations, well known in the established area may be used, if appropriate. These keywords will be used for indexing.

Abbreviations

Non-standard abbreviations should be listed and the full form of each abbreviation should be given in parentheses at first use in the text.

Introduction

Provide a factual background, clearly defined problem, proposed solution, a brief literature survey, and the scope and justification of the work done.

Material and methods

Give adequate information to allow the experiment to be reproduced. Already published methods should be mentioned with references. Significant modifications of published methods and new methods should be described in detail. This section will include sub-sections. Tables & figures should be placed inside the text. Tables and figures should be presented as per their appearance in the text. It is suggested that the discussion about the tables and figures should appear in the text before the appearance of the respective tables and figures. No tables or figures should be given without discussion or reference inside the text.

Tables should be explanatory enough to be understandable without any text reference. Double spacing should be maintained throughout the table, including table headings and footnotes. Table headings should be placed on the table. Footnotes should be placed below the table with superscript lowercase letters.

Each figure should have a caption. The caption should be concise and typed separately, not in the figure area. Figures should be self-explanatory. Information presented in the figure should not be repeated in the table. All symbols and abbreviations used in the illustrations should be defined clearly. Figure legends should be given below the figures.

Some guidelines for Medical papers:

Randomized controlled trials should follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines (http://www.consort-statement.org). Case reports, case series, cross-sectional, and other observational studies should follow the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines (http://www.strobe-statement.org). If the detailed methods are explicitly stated in the manuscript for single case studies, STROBE may be avoided.
Authors producing systematic reviews and meta-analyses should follow the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines (http://www.prisma-statement.org).

Results & Discussion

Results should be clearly described in a concise manner. Results for different parameters should be described under subheadings or in a separate paragraph. Table or figure numbers should be mentioned in parentheses for better understanding.

The discussion should not repeat the results, but provide a detailed interpretation of data. This should interpret the significance of the findings of the work. Citations should be given in support of the findings. The results and discussion part can also be described as separate, if appropriate.

Tables & Figures

Tables & figures should be placed inside the text. Tables and figures should be presented as per their appearance in the text. It is suggested that the discussion about the tables and figures should appear in the text before the appearance of the respective tables and figures. No tables or figures should be given without discussion or reference inside the text. Tables should be explanatory enough to be understandable without any text reference. Double spacing should be maintained throughout the table, including table headings and footnotes. Table headings should be placed on the table. Footnotes should be placed below the table with superscript lowercase letters. Vertical rules should not be used.

Each figure should have a caption. The caption should be concise and typed separately, not in the figure area. Figures should be self-explanatory. Information presented in the figure should not be repeated in the table. All symbols and abbreviations used in the illustrations should be defined clearly. Figure legends should be given below the figures. Upon submission of an article, authors are supposed to include all figures and tables in the PDF file of the manuscript. Figures and tables should not be submitted in separate files. If the article is accepted, the authors will be asked to provide the source files of the figures. Each figure should be supplied in a separate electronic file. All figures should be cited in the paper in consecutive order. Figures should be supplied in either vector art formats (Illustrator, EPS, WMF, FreeHand, CorelDraw, PowerPoint, Excel, etc.) or bitmap formats (Photoshop, TIFF, GIF, JPEG, etc.). Bitmap images should be of 300 dpi resolution at least.

Guideline for Reporting P values:

P is always italicized and capitalized.

  1. i) Correct expression: (P = .05). Wrong Expression: (P < .05), unless P < .001.
    ii) The P value should be expressed to 2 digits whether or not it is significant. If P < .01, it should be expressed to 3 digits.
    iii) When rounding, 3 digits is acceptable if rounding would change the significance of a value (eg, P = .049 rounded to .05).
    iv) Expressing P to more than 3 significant digits does not add useful information since precise P values with extreme results are sensitive to biases or departures from the statistical model.
    v) Reporting actual P values avoids this problem of interpretation. P values should not be listed as not significant (NS) since, for meta-analysis, the actual values are important, and not providing exact P values is a form of incomplete reporting.
    vi) Do not use 0 before the decimal point for statistical values P, alpha, and beta because they cannot equal 1.

Conclusions

This should briefly state the major findings of the study.

Acknowledgments

A brief acknowledgment section may be given after the conclusion section just before the references. The acknowledgments of people who provided assistance in manuscript preparation, funding for research, etc. should be listed in this section. All sources of funding should be declared as an acknowledgment. Authors should declare the role of the funding agency, if any, in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript. If the study sponsors had no such involvement, the authors should so state.

Competing Interests

Declaration of ‘competing interest’ should be placed here. All authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately (or appropriately) influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding.

Authors’ Contributions

Authors may use the following wording for this section: “ ‘Author A’ designed the study, performed the statistical analysis, wrote the protocol, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. ‘Author B’ and ‘Author C’ managed the analyses of the study. ‘Author C’ managed the literature searches…… All authors read and approved the final manuscript.”

Ethical Approval

This section is compulsory for medical journals. Other journals may require this section if found suitable. If human subjects are involved, informed consent, protection of privacy, and other human rights are further criteria against which the manuscript will be judged. It should provide a statement to confirm that the authors have obtained all necessary ethical approval from a suitable Institutional or State or National or International Committee. This confirms either that this study is not against the public interest, or that the release of information is allowed by legislation.

All manuscripts which deal with animal subjects must be approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Ethical Committee, or an Animal Utilization Study Committee. , and this statement, and the approval number must accompany the submission. If required, the author should be ready to submit a scanned copy of the IRB or Ethical Committee Approval at any stage of publication (Pre or post-publication stage). The manuscript should contain information about any post-operative care and pain management for the animals.

For manuscripts involving animal experiments, Authors may use the following wording for this section “All authors hereby declare that “Principles of laboratory animal care” (NIH publication No. 85-23, revised 1985) were followed, as well as specific national laws where applicable. All experiments have been examined and approved by the appropriate ethics committee”

All manuscripts which deal with the study of human subjects must be accompanied by Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethical Committee Approval, or the national or regional equivalent. The name of the Board or Committee giving approval and the study number assigned must accompany the submission. If required, the author should be ready to submit a scanned copy of the IRB or Ethical Committee Approval at any stage of publication (Pre or post-publication stage).

For manuscripts involving human experiments, Authors may use the following wording for this section: “All authors hereby declare that all experiments have been examined and approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.”

Reference Style

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the information in each reference is complete and accurate. All references must be numbered consecutively and citations of references in the text should be identified using numbers in small brackets (e.g., “as discussed by Gaskin et al., 2005); “as discussed elsewhere (Gaskin et al., 2005; Steel et al., 1997). All references should be cited within the text; otherwise, these references will be automatically removed. References must be listed at the end of the manuscript and numbered in the order that they appear in the text.

Gaskin, J. F., Zhang, D. Y., and Bon, M. C. (2005). Invasion of Lepidium draba (Brassicaceae) in the western United States: distributions and origins of chlorokplast DNA haplotypes. Molecular Ecology 14, 2331-2341.

Steel RGD, Torrie JH and Dicky DA (1997). “Principles and procedures of statistics: a  biometrical approach,” McGraw-Hill, New York New York, USA, pp: 400-428.

Weaver, S. E., and Riley, W. R. (1982). The Biology of Canadian Weeds.: 53. Convolvulus arvensis L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 62, 461-472.

S.A.S. Institute. 2001. SAS/STAT software: Changes and enhancement through release 9.1. SAS Inst Cary NC.

Soyars, C. L., Peterson, B. A., Burr, C. A., and Nimchuk, Z. L. (2018). Cutting edge genetics: CRISPR/Cas9 editing of plant genomes. Plant and Cell Physiology 59, 1608-1620.

Wilson, C. J., Fennell, T., Bothmer, A., Maeder, M. L., Reyon, D., Cotta-Ramusino, C., Fernandez, C. A., Marco, E., Barrera, L. A., and Jayaram, H. (2018). Response to “Unexpected mutations after CRISPR–Cas9 editing in vivo”. Nature methods 15, 236-237.

Zeng, Y., Cui, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Liang, M., Chen, H., Lan, J., Song, G., and Lou, J. (2018). The initiation, propagation and dynamics of CRISPR-SpyCas9 R-loop complex. Nucleic acids research 46, 350-361.

Zuo, Z., and Liu, J. (2017). Structure and dynamics of Cas9 HNH domain catalytic state. Scientific reports 7, 1-13.

Proofs

A PDF file of proof will be sent to the corresponding author as an e-mail attachment. Authors will be asked to check any typographical or minor clerical errors in the manuscript at this stage. No other major alteration in the manuscript is allowed.

Ethical Issues

Authors cannot submit a manuscript for publication to other journals simultaneously. It is a waste of valuable resources because editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing submitted manuscripts. It is also unethical to republish similar research articles (text/figures/tables) again because journals have limited page space and it most likely violates copyrights that have already been transferred to the first journal. Therefore, all journals require a signed author’s copyright transfer agreement stating the originality of the research work submitted as a manuscript. As stated above that authors should submit original, new, and unpublished research work to the journal. Ethical issues such as plagiarism, fraudulent and duplicate publication, violation of copyrights, authorship, and conflict of interest are serious issues concerning ethical integrity when submitting a manuscript to a journal for publication.

BBASR is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and endorses the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Policy Statement on Geopolitical Intrusion on Editorial Decisions. BBASR also endorses the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.

Submission of a manuscript to a BBASR journal implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies.

Medeye Publishers remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 

Communicate with Respect

At Medeye Publishers we believe that only through relationships based upon mutual respect can we build trust and deliver quality publishing products and services to the communities we serve. Our staff are expected to behave professionally and respectfully at all times when engaging with authors, reviewers and readers. Likewise, we expect the same standards of behavior from the academic community and the public in their interactions with our staff. We do not tolerate aggressive behavior, or any form of harassment, bullying or discrimination directed against Medeye Publishers staff. We reserve the right to bring serious cases to the attention of employers or local authorities, if needed, and may refuse to interact, or do business, with individuals who repeatedly or seriously violate this policy.

Ethics and consent

Ethics approval

Research involving human participants, human material, or human data, must have been performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing this, including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate, must appear in all manuscripts reporting such research. If a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption). Further information and documentation to support this should be made available to the Editor on request. Manuscripts may be rejected if the Editor considers that the research has not been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework. In rare cases, the Editor may contact the ethics committee for further information.

Retrospective ethics approval

If a study has not been granted ethics committee approval prior to commencing, retrospective ethics approval usually cannot be obtained and it may not be possible to consider the manuscript for peer review. The decision on whether to proceed to peer review in such cases is at the Editor's discretion.

New clinical tools and procedures

Authors reporting the use of a new procedure or tool in a clinical setting, for example as a technical advance or case report, must give a clear justification in the manuscript for why the new procedure or tool was deemed more appropriate than usual clinical practice to meet the patient’s clinical need. Such justification is not required if the new procedure is already approved for clinical use at the authors’ institution. Authors will be expected to have obtained ethics committee approval and informed patient consent for any experimental use of a novel procedure or tool where a clear clinical advantage based on clinical need was not apparent before treatment.

Consent to participate

For all research involving human participants, informed consent to participate in the study should be obtained from participants (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 16) and a statement to this effect should appear in the manuscript. For manuscripts reporting studies involving vulnerable groups (for example, unconscious patients) where there is the potential for coercion (for example prisoners) or where consent may not have been fully informed, manuscripts will be considered at the editor’s discretion and may be referred to an internal editorial oversight group for further scrutiny. Consent must be obtained for all forms of personally identifiable data including biomedical, clinical, and biometric data. In the case of articles describing human transplantation studies, authors must include a statement declaring that no organs/tissues were obtained from prisoners and must also name the institution(s)/clinic(s)/department(s) via which organs/tissues were obtained. Documentary evidence of consent must be supplied if requested.

Research involving human embryos, gametes, and stem cells

Manuscripts that report experiments involving the use of human embryos and gametes, human embryonic stem cells and related materials, and clinical applications of stem cells must include confirmation that all experiments were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations (See also Ethics and Consent)

The manuscript should include an ethics statement identifying the institutional and/or national research ethics committee (including the name of the ethics committee) approving the experiments and describing any relevant details. Authors should confirm that informed consent (See also Ethics and Consent and Consent for publication) was obtained from all recipients and/or donors of cells or tissues, where necessary, and describe the conditions of donation of materials for research, such as human embryos or gametes. Copies of approval and redacted consent documents may be requested by the Editor.

We encourage authors to follow the principles laid out in the 2016 ISSCR Guidelines for Stem Cell Research and Clinical Translation.

In deciding whether to publish papers describing modifications of the human germline, the Editors are guided by safety considerations, compliance with applicable regulations, as well as the status of the societal debate on the implications of such modifications for future generations. In case of concerns regarding a particular type of study the Editor may seek advice from the Medeye Publishers Research Integrity Group.

The decision to publish a paper is the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal.

Sex and gender in research (SAGER)

We encourage our authors to follow the ‘Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines’ and to include sex and gender considerations where relevant. Authors should use the terms sex (biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully in order to avoid confusing both terms. Article titles and/or abstracts should indicate clearly what sex(es) the study applies to. Authors should also describe in the background, whether sex and/or gender differences may be expected; report how sex and/or gender were accounted for in the design of the study; provide disaggregated data by sex and/or gender, where appropriate; and discuss respective results. If a sex and/or gender analysis was not conducted, the rationale should be given in the Discussion. We suggest that our authors consult the full guidelines before submission.

  • Definition of Sex and Gender (taken from Office of Research in Women’s Health, NIH).
  • Sex - refers to biological differences between females and males, including chromosomes, sex organs, and endogenous hormonal profiles.
  • Gender-  refers to socially constructed and enacted roles and behaviors which occur in a historical and cultural context and vary across societies and over time.
  • Applications of the guidelines: These guidelines apply to studies involving humans,  vertebrate animal and cell lines.

Research involving animals

Experimental research on vertebrates or any regulated invertebrates must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines, and where available should have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. The Basel Declaration outlines fundamental principles to adhere to when conducting research in animals and the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) has also published ethical guidelines.

A statement detailing compliance with relevant guidelines (e.g. the revised Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 in the UK and Directive 2010/63/EU in Europe) and/or ethical approval (including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate) must be included in the manuscript. If a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption and the reasons for the exemption). The Editor will take account of animal welfare issues and reserves the right to reject a manuscript, especially if the research involves protocols that are inconsistent with commonly accepted norms of animal research. In rare cases, the Editor may contact the ethics committee for further information.

Manuscripts presenting studies that have employed anesthesia or euthanasia methods inconsistent with the commonly accepted norms of veterinary best practice (e.g. chloral hydrate, ether, and chloroform) will not be considered. Decisions to not consider manuscripts presenting such anesthesia or euthanasia methods are independent of the approving ethics committee and any previously published work. We recommend that authors consult the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals (2020), as a comprehensive resource for guidance on veterinary best practice for the anesthesia and euthanasia of animals.

For experimental studies involving client-owned animals, authors must also document informed consent from the client or owner and adherence to a high standard (best practice) of veterinary care.

Field studies and other non-experimental research on animals must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines, and where available should have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing compliance with relevant guidelines and/or appropriate permissions or licences must be included in the manuscript. We recommend that authors comply with the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction  and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

Research involving plants

Experimental research and field studies on plants (either cultivated or wild), including the collection of plant material, must comply with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation.  

Manuscripts should include a statement specifying the appropriate permissions and/or licences for collection of plant or seed specimens. We recommend that authors comply with the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

To support reproducibility, voucher specimens for all wild plants described in a manuscript must be deposited in a public herbarium or other public collection that provides access to deposited material. Information on the voucher specimen and who identified it must be included in the manuscript.

Research involving palaeontological and geological material

Details of palaeontological specimens and geological samples should include clear provenance information to ensure full transparency of the research. 

It is recognized that precise provenance information may not be available for older museum collections. In circumstances where providing specific provenance information may compromise the security of palaeontological or geological sites it may be appropriate to exclude detailed locality information. 

Samples must always be collected and exported in a responsible manner and in accordance with applicable local and national laws. Any submission detailing new material should include information regarding the requisite permissions obtained and the issuing authority. Authors may be required to provide specific supporting documentation upon request. 

Type, figured and cited palaeontological specimens, should be deposited in a recognised museum or collection to permit free access by other researchers in perpetuity. Sufficient information on the repository, including the assigned unique catalogue numbers (where applicable), should be provided to allow the specimens to be traced. 

We encourage deposition of 3-D scans of fossil specimens (where appropriate) within a permanent, accessible repository to facilitate study by the scientific community. 

Medeye Publishers requires that submitted content adheres to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) normative instruments for the protection of cultural heritage, and Resolutions, Motions, guidance and other statements of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 

Dual Use Research of Concern

Some manuscripts provide information that could be directly misapplied to pose a significant threat to public health, safety or security, agricultural crops and other plants, animals, or the environment. For such information to be published, the benefit to the research community, society, or to public health, must outweigh any risks. We reserve the right to take expert advice in cases where we believe that concerns may arise, and we may require a manuscript to undergo peer review specifically to assess the dual use risk. Where the risk of misuse outweighs any potential benefit, publication is declined; published content may be corrected, retracted or removed. 

Researchers are expected to comply with their institutional and funder’s requirements, as well as any national regulations. They should be aware of dual-use concerns related to their work and take steps to minimize misuse of their research. Such concerns include, but are not limited to, biosecurity, nuclear and chemical threats. Where relevant regulations exist, authors should disclose whether their study is subject to consideration as dual use research of concern; if it is, the manuscript should report the authority granting approval and reference number for the regulatory approval. When the study reports material that can be harmful outside the laboratory context, the manuscript should describe appropriate containment (e.g. biosafety) procedures. 

We recognize the widespread view that openness in science helps to alert society to potential threats and to defend against them, and we anticipate that only very rarely will the risks be perceived as outweighing the benefits of publishing a paper that has otherwise been deemed appropriate for publication.

Standards for research in complementary and alternative medicine

Medeye Publishers journals are committed to evidence-based research. We believe that Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) research should be held to the same standards and evidence threshold as those of medicine research.

We welcome manuscripts for submission which meet the following clinical research standards:

  • Clinical research manuscripts that comply with international and national standards for such work (such as the Declaration of Helsinki or relevant Governmental regulation e.g. the UK’s The Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations). 
  • Studies which are adequately controlled (be that compared to a placebo or conventional medicine), blinded (where appropriate), randomised and of sufficient statistical power to confidentially and accurately interpret the effect reported.  Studies reporting a CAM treatment/technique compared only to another CAM treatment/technique are not sufficient to test the efficacy of the CAM treatment in question. Studies in which a conventional treatment is supplemented with a CAM technique are only valid if compared to the same conventional treatment supplemented with a placebo.
  • CAM treatments/techniques tested on animal models and/or human patients: It is unethical for such work, on humans or animals, to have taken place without adequate prior evidence that the treatment/technique shows some potential of being therapeutic.  Manuscripts must include evidence that takes the form of objective, measurable data from previously published peer reviewed literature which adheres to scientific principles (for instance in vitro or cellular work). Other forms of evidence are not valid. Manuscripts describing work lacking this evidence will not be considered on ethical grounds.

Consent for publication

For all manuscripts that include details, images, or videos relating to an individual person, written informed consent for the publication of these details must be obtained from that person (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 18). The consent must be for publication of their details under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (such that they will be freely available on the internet). If the person has died, consent for publication must be obtained from their next of kin. The manuscript must include a statement that written informed consent for publication was obtained.

Human Research Participant Publication Approval Templates: English / German - can be used to obtain consent from human research participants/patients where there may be identifiable information and/or media. The consent form must state that the details/images/videos will be freely available on the internet and may be seen by the general public.

In cases where images are entirely unidentifiable and there are no details on individuals reported within the manuscript, consent for publication of images may not be required. The final decision on whether consent to publish is required lies with the Editor.

Further information, including Third Party Rights for dissemination, is available on the Medeye Publishers pages.

Trial registration

BBASR supports initiatives to improve reporting of clinical trials. This includes prospective registration of clinical trials in suitable publicly available databases. In line with ICMJE guidelines, BBASR requires registration of all clinical trials that are reported in manuscripts submitted to its journals.

The ICMJE uses the World Health Organization (WHO) definition of a clinical trial, which is "any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes". This definition includes phase I to IV trials. The ICMJE defines health-related interventions as "any intervention used to modify a biomedical or health-related outcome" and health-related outcomes as "any biomedical or health-related measures obtained in patients or participants". Authors who are unsure whether their trial needs registering should consult the ICMJE FAQs for further information.

Suitable publicly available registries are those listed on the ICMJE website as well as any of the primary registries that participate in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, including the ISRCTN registry, which is administered and published by BBASR.

The trial registration number (TRN) and date of registration should be included as the last line of the manuscript abstract.

Publication of study protocols reduces the risk of non-publication of research findings and facilitates methodological discussion, and is encouraged by a number of BBASR journals. If the study protocol for a trial has been published, then it should be cited in the manuscript. 

For clinical trials that have not been registered prospectively, BBASR encourages retrospective registration to ensure the complete publication of all results. Further information on retrospective registration is available from the AllTrials campaign, the Public Accounts Committee and the Department of Health.

Many journals published by BBASR will consider manuscripts describing retrospectively registered studies. The TRN, date of registration and the words 'retrospectively registered’ should be included as the last line of the manuscript abstract.

Registration of systematic reviews

BBASR supports the prospective registration of systematic reviews and encourages authors to register their systematic reviews in a suitable registry (such as PROSPERO). Authors who have registered their systematic review should include the registration number as the last line of the manuscript abstract.

Availability of data and materials

Submission of a manuscript to a BBASR journal implies that materials described in the manuscript, including all relevant raw data, will be freely available to any scientist wishing to use them for non-commercial purposes, without breaching participant confidentiality.

For all journals, BBASR strongly encourages that all datasets on which the conclusions of the paper rely should be available to readers, and where there is a community established norm for data sharing, BBASR mandates data deposition (for data types with required deposition, see below). 

We encourage authors to ensure that their datasets are either deposited in publicly available repositories (where available and appropriate) or presented in the main manuscript or additional supporting files, in machine-readable format (such as spreadsheets rather than PDFs) whenever possible. Please see the Data repository guidance page for further information. For several journals, deposition of the data on which the conclusions of the manuscript rely is required. Please check the individual journal’s Submission Guidelines for more information.

Authors who need help understanding our data sharing policies, finding a suitable data repository, or organising and sharing research data can access our Author Support portal for additional guidance.

Mandated data deposition based on community-established norms

For certain data types (for example genomic data, nucleic acid or protein sequences), BBASR mandates data deposition in a public access repository upon submission as there is a community-accepted standard of data deposition and data sharing. 

Please consult this list of mandated data types, ensuring any relevant data are deposited in an appropriate repository and linked from your manuscript.

Such data must be available to editors and reviewers to evaluate during peer review and has to be released without restriction to the public upon publication.

Publication Charges

Currently, the Bulletin of Biological and Allied Sciences Research (Bull. Biol. All. Sci. Res.  eISSN: 2521-0092) is publishing articles with minimal 180USD charging as a Publishing fee.

The authors have to give their funding statement, the fee waive off can be given on potential and high-quality manuscripts.