OFP Misconduct Policy

OFP takes seriously allegations of misconduct and investigates all allegations according to its procedures.

Any allegations of misconduct should be reported to the managing editor, who will refer the issue to the editor-in-chief. In the event that the editor is the accused, the managing editor shall refer the matter to the head of the editorial committee for investigation.

Misconduct may include but is not limited to:

1. Falsification of data: Willful fabrication, omission, or selective reporting of data. Peer reviewers in particular are asked to contact the editor if they have a suspicion of this type of occurrence.
2. Authorship: All authors should be acknowledged, and authors who did not contribute should not be listed.
3. Piracy and Plagiarism: Unauthorized material submitted without adequate permission or acknowledgment. Plagiarism generally involves the use of materials from others, but can apply to researchers' duplication of their own previously published reports without acknowledgment (self-plagiarism or duplicate publication). Reviewers will discuss this with the editors who will make a plan that may include confrontation of the authors with these concerns. Possible rejection of the article may be a result.
4. Inappropriate or fraudulent digital image manipulation: Fraudulent manipulation does not include adjustment of image data that does not affect the interpretation of the data. Other adjustments of digital images may be considered misconduct.
5. Violation of generally accepted research practices: Failure to use accepted practices in proposing or carrying out research or scholarly writing, improper manipulation or presentation of experiments or literature to obtain biased results, deceptive statistical or analysis, or improper reporting of results.
6. Failure to comply with legislative and regulatory requirements affecting research: This may include violations of applicable local regulations, or investigational review and law involving the use of funds, care of animals, human subjects, investigational drugs, recombinant products, new devices, or radioactive, biological, or chemical materials.
7. Inappropriate behavior in relation to misconduct: Alleging misconduct which is not valid is itself misconduct if the allegation is blatantly false. Withholding or destruction of information relevant to a claim of misconduct and retaliation against persons involved in the allegation or investigation are also misconduct.
   

OFP editors will review any allegations and determine the appropriate response. The response may include one or more of the following options:

1. Send a letter of explanation to the individual(s) against whom there is a complaint.
2. Send a letter of reprimand to the individual(s) against whom there is a complaint.
3. Send a letter of reprimand to all co-authors against whom there is a complaint.
4. Send a letter outlining the findings to the supervising institution and if appropriate the funding body.

The investigation will be completed even if the authors withdraw the submission.

Reviewers and editors may also be accused of misconduct. In this event, they will be replaced while the allegation is reviewed and may be removed from further association with the journal.