At Enviro Dental Journal (EDJ), we treat every complaint with utmost seriousness and professionalism.

Guided by the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), we are committed to resolving issues in a transparent, fair, and timely manner.

Our goal is to ensure that every concern is investigated thoroughly, and appropriate action is taken.

All decisions, once finalized, are clearly communicated to the complainant.

Types of Complaints

The journal recognizes and addresses complaints related to:

• Authorship Disputes: Issues concerning proper attribution of authorship or unauthorized inclusion/exclusion of contributors.
• Plagiarism: Reuse of others’ work or ideas without appropriate credit.
• Duplicate, multiple or Concurrent Publication: Submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals or overlapping publication of content.
• Misappropriation of Research Results: Unethical use of data or findings without consent.
• Research Errors and Fraud: Concerns about falsified or fabricated data.
• Violations of Research Standards: Non-compliance with ethical standards in research or publication.
• Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failure to disclose relationships or factors that could bias the research.
• Reviewer Bias or Misconduct: Instances where reviewers may act unfairly, display bias, or compromise the review process for competitive reasons.

Guiding Principles

We acknowledge that mistakes or disputes may arise during the rigorous process of compiling and publishing complex academic material.

To address such issues effectively, we adhere to the following principles:

1. Acknowledgment: Every complaint is taken seriously and acknowledged promptly.

2. Investigation: Complaints are investigated thoroughly by the editorial team, and significant concerns are referred to the Senior Editors for review.

3. Timeliness: We strive to resolve complaints as quickly as possible without compromising the quality of our investigations.

4. Transparency: Throughout the process, the complainant is kept informed of the status and outcome of their complaint.

5. Fairness: Our decisions are impartial and guided by COPE’s ethical standards.

6. Prevention and Improvement: Addressing complaints helps us improve our processes, reducing the likelihood of recurring issues.

Application of Guiding Principles to Complaint Types

1. Authorship Disputes: The editorial team follows COPE guidelines on authorship disputes. Each author’s contribution is reviewed, and communication with all involved parties is prioritized to ensure fairness and clarity.

2. Plagiarism: We use plagiarism detection tools to evaluate submitted manuscripts. Confirmed cases are addressed with corrections, retractions, or rejections, as appropriate. Authors are provided with a clear explanation of the outcome.

3. Duplicate or Concurrent Publication: If duplicate publication is identified, the duplicate article is retracted, and the authors are notified. Future submissions from the same authors may be subject to additional scrutiny.

4. Misappropriation of Research Results: Complaints are thoroughly investigated, with findings communicated to both the complainant and the accused. Disciplinary actions may be taken if misconduct is confirmed.

5. Research Errors and Fraud: Errors are corrected via corrigenda or errata. Fraudulent cases result in retractions, and relevant institutions may be informed.

6. Violations of Research Standards: Non-compliance with research ethics is reviewed against institutional and journal policies. Cases may involve consultation with the author’s institution or ethics committee.

7. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Submissions with undisclosed conflicts are reassessed. Appropriate actions, such as retractions or expression of concern, are taken based on the severity of the issue.

8. Reviewer Bias or Misconduct: Complaints are investigated confidentially. If bias or misconduct is confirmed, the reviewer is removed from the process, and their future involvement with the journal may be reconsidered.

Reporting a Complaint

If you wish to raise a concern or make a complaint, please follow these steps:

1. Prepare Your Query:
Provide a detailed description of the issue, including the following information:

• Manuscript ID, if applicable.
• Title and author details of the paper in question.
• A clear summary of the complaint.
• Relevant evidence or supporting documents.

2. Submit Your Complaint:
Direct all complaints to complaints@enviropublishers.com

3. Acknowledgment and Review:

• Your complaint will be acknowledged within five working days of receipt.
• The editorial team will review the issue, and significant cases will be escalated to the Senior Editors.

4. Resolution:

• After thorough investigation, a resolution will be communicated to you within a reasonable timeframe.
• For complex cases, we may require additional time and will keep you informed about progress.

Continuous Improvement

We believe that addressing complaints promptly and effectively minimizes the impact of errors and fosters trust with our authors, reviewers, and readers.

By acknowledging and resolving concerns, we ensure that our publication processes meet the highest standards of academic integrity.

For any further inquiries, feel free to contact us at complaints@enviropublishers.com