All TPB articles published open access under the Creative Commons CC-BY license (the current version is CC-BY, version 4.0). This means that the author(s) retains copyright, but the content is free to download, distribute, and adapt for commercial or non-commercial purposes, given appropriate attribution to the original article.

Authors must mention that the protocol for the research study has been authorized by a properly formed Ethics Committee of the institution where the work was done and that it complies with the rules of the Human Subjects Protection Act. Declaration of Helsinki. All human subjects research must contain a statement stating that the subject granted informed permission. The privacy of patients should be protected. Photographs must be edited in such a way that human subjects are not identifiable (or an eye bar should be used). Any animal trials must be shown to be ethically appropriate and, when applicable, follow national criteria for animal use in research.

This journal is published with regard to the ethical rules mentioned in the journal and all  N A. Foundation Press journals are published with free access under CC-BY permission (the current version is CC-BY, version 4.0). The readers, authors, reviewers, and editors of the journal should follow ethical politics. The ethical policy and strategy of the journal could determine the submitted articles to be reviewed, accepted, and published. All the submitted articles to the journal are monitored and examined using the reliable Plagiarism Checker Software (iThenticate,i.e.) to ensure the originality of the manuscript. Then, the article is precisely reviewed by the expert reviewers, and practical recommendations are proposed to promote the article.

Responsibilities of Publisher

1. This journal is undertaken that decisions made for the submitted articles merely relied on expert and professional reviewers and are far from any biased and personal viewpoints.
2. It is committed to preserving the authors’ individual, academic, and research experiences.
3. The submitted articles are monitored and examined in terms of plagiarism in this publication.
4. In this journal, following the ethical principles is strictly monitored and reviewed by the editing manager as well as scientific editors, the editorial board, and the reviewers.
5. The necessary modifications, explanations, and withdrawals will be done in the journal if needed.
6. Any proven misconduct will be disposed of in the journal.
7. The publisher commits to publish and provide any necessary modifications, clarifications, and reviews relevant to its publications if needed.

Responsibilities of Editors

1. The Editors of the journal should have the full authority to reject/accept a manuscript.
2. The Editors of the journal should maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts under review or until they are published.
3. The Editor-in-Chief should decide on submitted manuscripts, whether published or not, with other editors and reviewers.
4. The Editors of the journal should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
5. The Editors of the journal should disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.
6. The Editors of the journal should maintain academic integrity and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
7. The journal editors should be willing to investigate plagiarism and fraudulent data issues and be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
8. The Editors of the journal should limit themselves only to the intellectual content.
9. The journal editors must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
10. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the editorial board members for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. The Reviewers of the journal should assist the Editors in deciding to publish the submitted manuscripts.
2. The Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts, that they are invited to review.
3. The Reviewers should provide comments in time that will help editors make a decision on whether the submitted manuscript is to be published or not.
4. The Reviewers are bound to treat the manuscript received for peer reviewing as confidential and must not use the information obtained through peer review for personal advantage. 
5. The Reviewers' comments against each invited manuscript should be technical, professional, and objective.
6. The Reviewers should not review the manuscripts in which they have found conflicts of interest with any authors, companies, or institutions.
7. The Reviewers should disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.

Responsibilities of Authors

1. Manuscripts must be submitted only in English and should be written according to sound grammar and proper terminology.
2. Manuscripts must be submitted to understand that they have not been published elsewhere and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by or any other publisher.
3. The submitting corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all the other coauthors have approved the manuscript article's publication.
4. To sustain the peer review system, authors have an obligation to participate in the peer-review process to evaluate manuscripts from others. 
5. It is also the author's responsibility to ensure that the manuscripts emanating from a particular institution are submitted with the approval of the necessary institution.
6. It is a condition for submitting a manuscript that the authors permit editing of the paper for readability.
7. Authors are requested to clearly identify who provided financial support for the conduct of research and/or preparation of the manuscript and briefly describe the role of the founder/ sponsor in any part of the work.
8. All authors have agreed to allow the corresponding author to correspond with the editorial office to review the edited manuscript and proof.
9. When the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher to retract or correct the manuscript. 
10. All authors must know that the submitted manuscripts under review or published with TPB are subject to screening using Plagiarism Prevention Software. Plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics. 
11. All authors must ensure that all authors have read the submission final checklist before being submitted to the TPB.

Principles of Transparency

1. Peer review process: TPB is a double-blind peer-reviewed electronic and print Quarterly publication concerned with all aspects of pharmaceutical biotechnology sciences. This process, as well as any policies related to the journal’s peer review procedures, is clearly described on the journal’s Web site (Peer Review Process).
2. Governing Body: TPB has a solid editorial board whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas included within the journal’s scope. The full names and affiliations of the journal’s editors are provided on the journal’s Web site (Editorial Board).
3. Contact information: The Journal provided the contact information for the editorial office of TPB (Contact us).
4. Author fees / Access: The Journal database is fully open access. Full text of published articles is available for everyone who can access the Journal website free of cost. Besides, the authors should pay the (APC).
5. Identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct: Editor-in-Chief takes reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others.
6. Web site: A journal’s Website (https://tpb.nabea.pub) contains that care has been taken to ensure high ethical and professional standards.
7. Name of journal: The Journal name of the Journal of Biomedicine and Biochemistry (TPB) is unique and not one that is easily confused with other journals
8. Conflicts of interest: Authors are asked whether impending conflicts do or do not exist while submitting their articles to TPB through the Conflict of Interest Disclosure form.
9. Publishing schedule: The periodicity at which a journal publishes is clearly indicated (https://tpb.nabea.pub).
10. Archiving: A journal’s plan for electronic backup and preservation of access to the journal content is clearly indicated (https://tpb.nabea.pub).

Violation of Publication Ethics

1. Plagiarism: Plagiarism intentionally uses someone else’s ideas or other original material as if they are one's own. Copying even one sentence from someone else’s manuscript, or even one of your own that has previously been published, without proper citation, is considered by TPB Journals as plagiarism. All manuscripts under review or published with TPB are subject to screening using plagiarism-prevention software. Thus, plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics. The development of CrossCheck is a service that helps editors to verify the originality of papers. CrossCheck is powered by the Ithenticate software from iParadigms, known in the academic community as a provider of Turnitin. For a searchable list of all journals in the CrossCheck database, please visit www.ithenticate.com.

2. Data Fabrication and Falsification: Data fabrication and falsification mean the researcher did not carry out the study but made up data or results and recorded or reported the fabricated information. Data falsification means the researcher did the experiment but manipulated, changed, or omitted data or results from the research findings.

3. Simultaneous Submission: Simultaneous submission occurs when a manuscript (or substantial sections from a manuscript) is submitted to a journal when it is already under consideration by another journal.

4. Duplicate Publication: Duplicate publication occurs when two or more papers, without full cross-referencing, share essentially the same hypotheses, data, discussion points, and conclusions.

5. Redundant Publications: Redundant publications involve the inappropriate division of study outcomes into several articles, most often consequent to the desire to plump academic vitae.

6. Improper Author Contribution or Attribution: All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims. Don’t forget to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

7. Citation Manipulation: Citation Manipulation includes excessive citations in the submitted manuscript that do not contribute to the scholarly content of the article and have been included solely to increase citations to a given author’s work or articles published in a particular journal. This leads to misrepresenting the importance of the specific work and journal in which it appears and is thus a form of scientific misconduct.

8. Sanctions: If there are documented violations of any of the above-mentioned policies in any journal, regardless of whether or not the violations occurred in a journal, the following sanctions will be applied: (i) Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript, (ii)Immediate rejection of every other manuscript submitted to any journal published by any of the authors of the infringing manuscript, (iii) Prohibition will be imposed for a minimum of 36 months against all of the authors for any new submissions to any journal, either individually or in combination with other authors of the infringing manuscript, and (iv) Prohibition against all of the authors from serving on the Editorial Board of any journal.

Handling Cases of Misconduct

Once TPB confirms a violation against TPB publication ethics, TPB addresses ethical concerns diligently, following an issue-specific standard practice as summarized below.

1. The first action of the journal Editor is to inform the Editorial Office of TPB by supplying copies of the relevant material and a draft letter to the corresponding author asking for an explanation in a nonjudgmental manner.
2. If the author’s explanation is unacceptable and it seems that serious unethical conduct has occurred, the matter is referred to the Publication Committee via the Editorial Office.  After deliberation, the Committee will decide whether the case is sufficiently serious to warrant a ban on future submissions. 
3. If the infraction is less severe, the Editor, upon the advice of the Publication Committee, sends the author a letter of reprimand and reminds the author of TPB publication policies; if the manuscript has been published, the Editor may request the author to publish an apology in the journal to correct the record.
4. Notification will be sent to the corresponding author. Any work by the author responsible for the violation or any work these persons coauthored under review by the TPB journal will be rejected immediately.
5. The authors are prohibited from serving on the TPB editorial board and serving as a reviewer for the TPB Journal. However, TPB reserves the right to take more action.
6. In extreme cases, notifications will be sent to the authors' affiliations, and the authors are prohibited from submitting their work to TPB for 5 years.
7. In serious fraud cases that result in the retraction of the article, a retraction notice will be published in the journal and linked to the article in the online version. The online version will also be marked “retracted” with the retraction date.

Ethical principles in editorial Management

1. The editorial manager of the journal should have perfect authority to accept/reject the received manuscript.
2. The editorial manager of the journal should maintain the confidentiality of the received manuscripts under review until their publication.
3. The editorial manager of the journal should decide on the received manuscript and, if necessary, consult with other editors and reviewers for their publications.
4. The editorial manager and editors of the journal should consider the reviewers’ confidentiality and are eager to free reviews based on the reviewers’ satisfaction.
5. The editorial manager and editors of the journal must avoid any conflict of interest.
6. The editorial manager and editors of the journal must preserve the scientific integrity and attempt to meet the readers and authors' requirements.
7. The editorial manager and editors of the journal must carry out a perfect review of plagiarism, scientific, and data falsification cases, as well as publish modifications, explanations, collection of content, articles withdrawal, and apologies if needed.
8. The editorial manager and editors of the journal must be restricted to the intellectual content.
9. The editorial manager of the journal must not disclose any data about the received manuscript to others except the corresponding author, reviewers, potential editors, editorial consultants, and the publisher.
10. Manuscripts and unpublished materials, without the evident written consent of the author, should not be utilized by the editorial manager or members of the editorial board for their own or others' research objectives.
11. The scientific editors of this journal will determine possible plagiarism, falsification, and fraud, and will make modifications, explanations, and withdrawals if needed.
12. In addition, to ensure the scientific quality of the submitted manuscripts achieved through different methods, especially peer review and getting advice from the editorial board, the editorial manager of the journal should be sufficiently confident in the observance of ethical standards in the published materials.
13. The editorial manager is obliged to perfect effort to ensure the ethical correctness of the published materials, including the authors’ adherence to the general and specific guidelines of the journal’s ethics.
14. Directly or based on the received reports, the editorial manager can check the possible occurrence of research discharges and fraud in the received manuscripts, and if there is a possibility of research discharges and fraud, the editorial manager is obliged to notify the responsible author(s) and all the manuscript authors to ask them to explain about the issue. In case of not receiving the explanations within a deadline of two months or if the explanations of the responsible author(s) are not convincing, with maximum confidentiality as the case may be, inform about the occurrence of a research discharge so that it can be ascertained or resolved by conducting research and investigation. The examination and review of the received report will rely on the regulations and instructions for handling research discharges.
15. The occurrence of a research discharge is recognized by the editorial manager independently or based on the viewpoints of the ethics committee in valid research, while examining other articles of the author(s) or possible responsible author(s) published in that journal or under examination, according to the discharge severity, one or more of the measures include withdraw from publishing the manuscript if it is not published and is under examination, the editorial manager can withdraw the published article from the journal by proposing the reason for its withdraw in such a way that the history of article withdrawal is available to the public, the publication of a modification or withdraw in the next issue of the journal if the article has been published, and avoid the acceptance of future articles by the author(s) for a specified period.
16. The editorial manager is responsible for reviewing, selecting, and prioritizing manuscripts submitted for publication fairly and impartially and merely with regard to the scientific and technical features, including the topic’s significance, innovation, transparency, credibility, and the degree of conformity of the articles with the journal’s objectives and prospects and unrelated factors should not have any impact on this issue.
17. The editorial manager must ask the corresponding author to mention the sort and range of participation and contribution of each author in the research implementation and the writing manuscript in a table that has been signed by all the authors.
18. The editorial manager or the editorial board must select the one or ones to review each manuscript that is as capable and expert as possible in the relevant scientific field. The selected reviewer(s) should have no known conflict of interest in the reviewed manuscript as much as possible.
19. The editorial manager is obliged to provide them with sufficient data about the journal’s working process and what is expected from the editorial board and reviewers, as well as to emphasize and remind them of the requirement for data confidentiality of the submitted manuscripts and make an arrangement so that their information is up to date about the journal’s policies.
20. The relationship of editorial managers with journal’s publishers, owners, and owners should be perfectly based on the principle of "editorial independence", in the sense that they are perfectly independent in deciding to accept or reject articles and not be impacted or pressured by journal’s publishers or owners, and freedom and have sufficient authority to make decisions and independently perform their duties.
21. The editorial manager is obliged to ensure data confidentiality related to the individuals and patients who participated in the research as well as whose data may be disclosed as a result of the manuscript publication. Therefore, if needed, the editorial manager can ask the authors to reveal their identity in the informed consent forms signed by the study subjects, which may be while printing the article.
22. The editorial manager must have specific policies to manage any conflict of interest related to themselves, employees, authors, reviewers, and the editorial board.

Review Process

1. The reviewers of this journal should cooperate with the scientific editors to make decisions regarding the publication of the submitted manuscripts.
2. This journal’s reviewers should preserve the data confidentiality.
3. The reviewers should submit the viewpoints to the scientific managers at a specific time to make a decision regarding the manuscript publication or non-publication.
4. The reviewers should keep the submitted articles confidential and not use their data for personal purposes.
5. The reviewers’ viewpoints regarding the submitted manuscripts should be scientific, technical, and professional.
6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts with conflicts of interest with one of the authors, companies, or institutions. The one who is offered a peer review of a manuscript can refrain from accepting that manuscript for review if there is any conflict of interest. Otherwise, the reviewer should inform the journal’s editor about their conflict of interest.
7. Reviewers and author(s) of a manuscript must refrain from communicating with each other (regarding the review of that manuscript) during the review process. If the reviewer deems it necessary to consult with another person for review, and this consult involves disclosing the content of the manuscript, this can only be conducted with the permission of the journal’s editorial manager.
8. The reviewer who accepts a peer review of a manuscript reviewed by a journal should conduct their own review impartially and merely based on the scientific and technical features of the manuscript and should not be impacted by their own individual relationship with the author(s) of the manuscript or other irrelevant agents.
9. Reviewers should accept manuscripts for review in which they are professional. Otherwise, the reviewer must inform this issue to the editorial manager of the journal.
10. In peer review, the reviewer must consider the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses and, if possible, recommend some strategies to the author(s) to solve the issues. This should be conducted with respect to the author(s) intellectual independence.
11. In addition to the scientific and technical examinations in the review, the reviewer must inform the editorial manager of any non-compliance with the provisions of this guideline.

Conflict of Interest

Conflict of interest refers to any financial or non-financial interest that may impact the author(s) in presenting their trustworthy viewpoint. Although the conflict of interest is not an ethical issue for an article, its author(s) must declare any conflict of interest hidden from the audience, except for the evident cases, in the text, or at the end of the manuscript. One of these cases is the obvious introduction of funding sources for research and writing manuscripts by the author(s).

1. The contract between the authors and the research sponsors should not include any condition preventing the declaration of a conflict of interest in the manuscript or an obligation to remove or not publish findings that are not desired from the research sponsor’s viewpoint. Authors must avoid accepting such conditions at the time of contract signature.
2. Authors have discretion and freedom of action in selecting scientific journals to publish their manuscripts and any individual’s obligations to publish articles in particular journals to enhance the credibility of academic journals is prohibited.

Special Issue

Special issues are those in the journal dedicated to the publication of articles collected relevant to a particular topic or of a conference in a way that is related to the prominent subjects mentioned in the journal. The special issue is often sponsored by sources other than the journal publisher. The journal’s editorial manager is in charge of special issues’ contents as well as the regular issues of the journal.

1. The journal’s editor should retain the authority to submit any manuscript to independent reviewers for publication in the special issue, as well as the right not to accept them, just like the journal’s regular issues.
2. The sponsor of the special issue, if any, should be determined.
3. In special issues, like the regular issues, other materials of this guide should be followed.