Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

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 OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect document file format.
  • Title page is separately prepared and uploaded. The title page indicates complete name, surname (family name) and affiliation of Authors. The corresponding author's email is included
  • The text of the manuscript is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points. The manuscript must contain no references to Authors to allow blind review process
  • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Authors' Guidelines described below.
  • Reference list adheres to Vancouver style (e.g. PubMed style). Only official abbreviations of journal should be considered. DOI number and/or URLs for the references should be indicated where available, .
  • Figures must have high resolution (> 300 dpi) and must be separately uploaded (jpg, TIFF, etc) with the related caption.

Author Guidelines

Before you begin

Thank you for your interest in submitting an article to the Journal of Forensic Odonto-Stomatology.

According to the Open Access Policy and free APC policy, JFOS is a No-Fee Open Access Journal for authors. 

Before preparing your manuscript for submission, please carefully consider the following Author Instructions, and Author Guidelines and Ethical Policy for Authors.

 

Author Instructions for Submission

Papers submitted for publication in this Journal may be accepted on condition that they have not been published elsewhere and are not currently being considered by other journals. The Journal Management reserves the copyright of all material published. Final publication, after peer review is at the discretion of the Editor.

On receipt of a manuscript, you will receive confirmation of its safe arrival and be given a reference number for all further correspondence.

Manuscripts should ideally be no longer than 3000 words and include no more than 30 references.

1. All copies should be word-processed in Arial 12, with no indented paragraphs, single spaced and with 2.54cm margins. All section headings to be in capital letters and bold. Please number the pages consecutively in the top right hand corner.

2. The “title page”, shows the title of the manuscript, along with the author(s) name, surname (family name)  qualifications and affiliations and indicate clearly the name and contact details for the corresponding author, keywords and running title. Incomplete data of Authors obstruct proper indexing, therefore the submission will not undergo a review process and declined.

The title page should be uploaded as a separate file in step 4 of the submission process: Uploading supplementary file.

3.The “manuscript” includes:

3.1 The title of the manuscript.

3.2 The abstract:
A short and concise abstract (150 – 300 words depending on manuscript length/complexity), giving a review of the main text should be prepared for all submissions, including case reports. Abbreviations or the insertion of references in the abstract are not allowed. Briefly state the purpose of the manuscript/research along with the principal results and major conclusions. Emphasize new and important aspects of the study or observations when relevant. Note: The abstract should explain the manuscript – should it be published separately elsewhere.

3.3 Keywords:
At least 4 and maximally 6 keywords should be given.

3.4 The main manuscript (text):
Suggested headings for research manuscripts: introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, conclusion(s). Included journal titles should be abbreviated according to the Index to Dental Literature and the Index Medicus. Proprietary Names must state the manufacturer and the place of manufacture.

3.5 Acknowlegments:
Place any acknowledgements at the end of the article, but before the reference list. Acknowledge those whose contributions do not justify authorship, for example: general support by a department chair, technical assistance, data collection etc. Their permission must be requested before they are named. The acknowledgments header should be italicized and bold.

3.6 References:
All references to the literature should be inserted in the text as a superior number (superscript 1 or 1,2 or 1-3) and references should be numbered consecutively. All punctuation marks should precede the numbers, for example; ………. as early as 1971,5 ; ….. for this factor.3 ; ….. molar mineralisation.1-9 Even if the author is named in your text, a number must still be used. Personal communications should be cited in the text, in parentheses, at the appropriate location – and not in the reference section. If citing several pieces of work in the same sentence, a hyphen should be used to link numbers which are inclusive, and use a comma when numbers are not consecutive. For example: Where works 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15 and 19 have been cited in the same place in the text: Several studies 4-8, 15, 19 have discussed the use of reference scales in bite mark photography.
See point 4 for reference guidelines.

3.7 Tables, photographs, and illustrations:
Should be prepared on separate pages and should be identified and numbered clearly. All photographs need to be of high resolution: image files at least 6cm wide and 300 dpi, JPEG. Line drawings should be clear and on a white background, and should include lettering large enough to allow reduction without becoming illegible. Figures and tables are to be numbered using Arabic numerals and referred to in the text as Fig. 1 (Figs. 1 and 2) and Table 1 (Tables 1 and 2). and placed below the figure. Table legends are included at the top of each table.

3.8 Explanatory legends:
Lists explanations of the figures numbered using Arabic numerals as referred to in the text. The manuscript should be uploaded as a separate file in step 2 of the submission process: Uploading the submission.

The manuscript shall contain no data or references to authors in order to allow blind review process. 

4. Reference guidelines

References must be conform to the Vancouver style (PubMed style, e.g.)  as follows (note spacing, punctuation and Book titles and Journal article titles should be in italics):

*Journal articles (print)

Author
Title of article
Title of Journal (in italics)
Year of publication
Volume number (issue number if present)
Page numbers
DOI if available

Rontogianni A, Mitsea A, Karayianni K. The role of orthodontics in children identification: a case report of two victims of mass disaster. J Forensic Odontostomatol. 2024 Apr 30;42(1):2-11. doi: 10.5281/zenodo

Indicate DOI number and URLs of references where available; uncitable references should normally be limited.

Use only official abbreviation of journals.

*Journal articles (electronic)
Author
Title of article
Title of Journal (in italics)
Year of publication
Volume number (issue number if present)
Page numbers
URL or DOI
Date of access
Arrami M, Garner H. A tale of two citations. Nature 2008;451(7177):397-°©‐9.
Available from: www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7177/full/451397a.html [cited 20 January 2008].

*Books (print)
Author/Editor (editor/editors put ed./eds. after the name).
Book title (in italics)
Edition (if not the first edition)
Place of publication (more than one place – use the first named)
Publisher
Year of publication
Page numbers where relevant
Bowers CM. Forensic Dental Evidence – An Investigator’s Handbook. San Diego, California. Elsevier; 2004.

*Books (chapter in an edited book)
Author of chapter
Title of chapter, followed by, In:
Editor
Title of book (in italics)
Edition (if not the first edition)
Place of publication
Publisher
Year of publication
Page numbers (use ‘p’ before the page numbers).
Palmer RN. Fundamental Principles. In: Stark MM (ed.). Clinical Forensic Medicine – A Physicians Guide.
2nd ed. Totowa, New Jersey. Humana Press; 2005. p 47-51.

*Corporate author
Tariffs, Instruments, Materials and Equipment Committee, Australian Dental Association Inc.
Cotton pellets and gingival retraction cords. Clinical Notes No.2 Aust Dent J 1984;29:279.

*For Editor or Compiler
Meyer J, Squier CA, Gerson SJ, eds. The structure and function of oral mucosa.Oxford: Permagon;1984.

 *Websites
Medecins sans Frontieres [Internet]. [updated 2006 Jul 8; cited 2009 Mar 23];
Available from: http://www.msf.org/home-uk.cfm.

*Newspaper articles
Author (if no author, use the name of the newspaper)
Title of article
Title of newspaper (in italics)
Day, month and year of publication
Page number
Lawrence F. School meal spending: aces and dunces. The Guardian. Thursday Mar 24 2005: 6

*Newspaper Articles (electronic)
Author (if no author, use the name of the newspaper)
Title of article
Title of newspaper (in italics)
Day, month and year of publication
Page number
URL
Date of access
Lawrence F. School meal spending: aces and dunces. The Guardian. Thursday Mar 24 2005: 6
Available from: www.nature.com/nature/journal/v451/n7177/full/451397a.html [cited 20 January 2008].

*Audiovisual material
Chason KW, Sallustio S. Hospital preparedness for bioterrorism [videocassette]. Secaucus (NJ): Network for Continuing Medical Education; 2002.

5. Authors should have WRITTEN PERMISSION to use illustrations that may identify human subjects or to disclose sensitive personal information about identifiable persons. Please send a copy of this document with your manuscript.

6. It is important that the manuscript be submitted in its final form and that the author(s) keep copies of all material provided.

7. Please state any conflict of interest.

8. Confidentiality of your manuscript will be maintained at all times during the review process. Manuscripts should be submitted electronically using the instructions on the IOFOS.eu website. This facility is available since January 2012.xc

 

 

Author Guidelines and Ethical Policy

Research and Publication Ethics for authors

As outlined in the General Constitution (section 2.b), the mission of IOFOS is “to foster goodwill, progress, and research in forensic odontology” (https://iofos.eu/the-i-o-f-o-s-constitution/). This objective is pursued by gathering and publishing pertinent research and scientific papers in Forensic Odonto-Stomatology.

All research and scientific papers submitted must comply with the principles set forth in the Helsinki Declaration (World Health Organization – 1975). Articles failing to meet these principles will be rejected by the International Editorial Board.

Research involving human participants, human materials, human data, or animals must meet the ethical standards of the relevant committee on human experimentation (institutional or regional) and adhere to the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, revised in 2013 (accessible at https://www.evidence.it/articoli/pdf/e1000059.pdf). If there is suspicion that the research did not conform to appropriate ethical standards, Editors will follow the Misconduct Policy (https://ojs.iofos.eu/index.php/Journal/about/privacy) and may reject the manuscript and/or contact the authors’ institution or Ethics Committee. Occasionally, if the Editor has serious ethical concerns about a study, the manuscript may be rejected on ethical grounds even with prior Ethics Committee approval.

Under no circumstances should personal details of research participants, such as names, initials, or hospital numbers, be disclosed, particularly when using illustrative materials. For research involving animals, it must be clearly stated that the study complies with relevant institutional, regional, or national regulations or guidelines on the care and use of laboratory animals.

Authors must ensure the authenticity and originality of their work, while reviewers and the Editorial Team are responsible for upholding anti-plagiarism standards.

 

Research Ethics for authors

  • Research Involving Human Subjects

When conducting research involving human subjects, materials, tissues, or data, authors must adhere to the Declaration of Helsinki, last revised in 2013. This entails obtaining approval from a local institutional review board (IRB) or Ethics Committee prior to commencing the study, as per point 23 of the declaration. The manuscript should include essential details such as the project identification code, approval date, and the name of the reviewing body.

Example of an ethical statement: “All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code).”

If ethical approval is unnecessary, authors must provide either an exemption letter or cite relevant legislation.

 

  • Informed Consent

In any research involving human subjects, participants must be fully informed about the research purpose, data usage, and potential risks. Written informed consent is required, especially for case reports and series, with consent forms granting permission for publication in various formats and a statement should be included in the manuscript. For publication in JFOS, the consent form should include unlimited permission for publication in all formats (including print, electronic, and online), sublicensed and reprinted versions (including translations and derivative works), and other works and products under an open access license.

Private information identifying participants should be avoided unless relevant to the research, and anonymization is necessary. Specific consent for publication must be obtained for any case details, personal information, or patient images included in manuscripts. Additional review may be conducted for studies involving vulnerable groups, and manuscripts must justify any categorization based on race, ethnicity, gender, or other factors. Compliance with these requirements is necessary for publication in JFOS.

 

  • Ethical Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research

Editors evaluate whether the potential benefits of animal research outweigh the harm and ensure procedures are unlikely to offend readers. Authors must follow the '3Rs' principle: replace animals when possible, reduce their number, and refine conditions to minimize harm. Details on housing, husbandry, and pain management should be included, and authors can consult guidelines for further assistance Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Used in Scientific Procedures, American Association for Laboratory Animal Science, or European Animal Research Association..

If national law mandates ethical approval, studies involving certain animals require approval from an Ethics Committee. The manuscript should include project details and confirm compliance with regulations. In cases involving client-owned animals, informed consent is necessary. Authors must ensure accuracy.

Example of an ethical statement: “The study was conducted in accordance with the commonly-accepted ‘3Rs’, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code).”

If no ethical approval is needed by law, authors must provide an exemption with justification. If no Ethics Committee exists, ethical aspects are evaluated by Reviewers and Editors. Submissions violating these principles may be rejected.

 

  • Research Involving Cell Lines

Methods sections should detail the origin of each cell line in research submissions. For established cell lines, provenance should be specified with references to published papers or commercial sources. For unpublished de novo cell lines, including those obtained from other labs, institutional review board or Ethics Committee approval documentation is necessary. Written informed consent is required for human-origin cell lines.

 

  • Research Involving Plants

Experimental research on plants, including collection, must adhere to institutional, national, or international guidelines, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Genetic information and origin must be provided for each manuscript. For rare and non-model plants, voucher specimens should be deposited in accessible herbariums or museums, with detailed population sampling information. Exceptions may be made for rare, threatened, or endangered species, provided justification is provided.

 

  • Sex and Gender in Research

Authors should follow the ‘Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER – guidelines’ (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6) and incorporate sex and gender considerations where relevant. Clarity in the use of terms sex and gender is advised, with clear indication in titles or abstracts of the relevant sexes addressed in the study. Authors should detail how sex was considered in study design, provide disaggregated data, and justify any lack of sex analysis in the discussion. Reviewing the full guidelines before submission is recommended.

 

  • Borders and Territories

Authors should recognize the potential importance of disputes over boundaries and territories when describing their research or providing addresses in correspondence. Editorial decisions are within the Editorial Team's purview, and they aim to resolve disputes satisfactorily. The Jfos remains neutral regarding jurisdictional claims depicted in published maps and institutional affiliations.

 

Publication Ethics for authors

Authors submitting to JFOS must ensure their manuscripts adhere to ethical standards outlined in JFOS policies. Key requirements include accurately presenting research findings, disclosing potential conflicts of interest, and obtaining permission for previously published content. Plagiarism, data fabrication, and image manipulation are prohibited, and any errors found post-publication must be promptly communicated. Original research results must be novel and not previously published. The authors must provide an explicit declaration in the Title Page that the paper is original and does not replicate neither in part nor totally previous publications (in journals, website, final thesis, etc) authored by these or different authors. Simultaneous submission to multiple journals is not allowed, and authors must affirm the originality of their work. Quoted reuse of text from another source must be accompanied by quotation marks, and proper citation of the original source is required. If a study’s design or the structure or language of the manuscript has been influenced by prior works, these sources must be explicitly referenced. Additionally, authors must comply with JFOS copyright policies and advertising guidelines, and release the copyright rights for publication to the journal to complete the submission process with final authority resting with the Editorial Board.

JFOS does not permit any advertising that could influence Editorial decisions. Advertisements should be clearly identifiable as advertisements. The Editorial Board has full and final authority in the approval and Editors should consider all criticisms of advertisements prior to inclusion for publication.

 

  • Compliance with ICMJE Recommendations

JFOS adheres to the guidelines set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) concerning manuscript preparation and authorship. According to these guidelines, authors must fulfill four criteria to qualify for authorship, including substantial contributions to the work’s conception, drafting or critical review of the manuscript, final approval of the version to be published, and accountability for the work’s integrity. Contributors who do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged. Authorship entails making a significant contribution to the research and being responsible for the work undertaken. Any changes to the author list during or after publication undergo careful evaluation by the Editorial Team, with final decisions made regarding modifications. Requests to change author names post-publication are typically declined unless all authors provide valid and justified consent. For more detailed information, visit https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/. 

If a manuscript is submitted with a deceased author included in the authorship, or if an author passes away during peer review, the corresponding author, or co-authors, should inform the Editorial Team. If the deceased author was a corresponding author, the authorship group should nominate a co-author for this role. The corresponding author should confirm the contribution of the deceased author and any potential conflicts of interest. Upon publication, a note will be added under the author list.

Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made during the Editorial process only before the manuscript has been accepted. Authorship changes, including any addition, removal, or rearrangement of author names will require the approval of all authors including any to be removed. To request any change in authorship, the Editorial Team must receive from the corresponding author: (a) the reason for the change in author list and (b) written confirmation (e-mail, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed.

Occasionally, authors may desire to alter their name post-publication. Typically, such requests are declined by the Editorial Team unless a valid and well-justified request is unanimously approved by all authors involved

Author contributions encompass various aspects such as conceptualization, methodology, data analysis, and funding acquisition, among others. It’s crucial to limit authorship to those who have made significant contributions to the reported work. The corresponding author serves as the liaison between the Editor and other authors, ensuring communication and involvement in major publication decisions. If authorship is attributed to a consortium or group, individual members listed must meet authorship criteria. The consortium/group will not retain authorship but may be acknowledged separately if provided.

 

  • Policies on Conflict of Interest

JFOS, as per the ICMJE guidelines, mandates authors to disclose all competing interests, including financial and non-financial, before submitting their manuscripts. Conflicts of interest can arise from various relationships and can potentially bias actions. Financial ties are common but conflicts can stem from personal, academic, or intellectual reasons. Disclosure of funding sources and conflicts, including consultancy work and patents, is necessary. Authors with no conflicts must explicitly state so. Editors and reviewers must also declare any competing interests to maintain the integrity of the peer review process. For more information please visit http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/author-responsibilities–conflicts-of-interest.html

 

  • Authorship and the Use of AI or AI-Assisted Technologies

JFOS adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://doi.org/10.24318/cCVRZBms) stance regarding the utilization of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technology in manuscript preparation. AI tools like ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs) are not eligible for authorship recognition. Authors must explicitly declare the use of AI or AI-assisted tools in their manuscript submissions, providing detailed information in the cover letter. Transparency is key, with authors required to disclose how these tools were employed in the "Materials and Methods" section and acknowledge the AI tool's product details in the "Acknowledgments" section. Authors bear full responsibility for the originality, validity, and integrity of their manuscript content, including contributions from AI or AI-assisted tools, and must ensure compliance with JFOS's publication ethics policies. The Editorial Team may request additional information, and editorial decisions will align with JFOS's Editorial Process.

 

  • Authenticity and originality of the work

Research findings must be novel, original and unpublished. Authors must explicitly declare on the Title Page that the paper is original and does not replicate any previous publications, whether in part or in whole, authored by themselves or others, in journals, websites, final theses, etc.

 

Example of an authenticity and originality statement:

“STATEMENT OF AUTHENTICITY AND ORIGINALITY

I affirm that the manuscript submitted to the JFOS journal represents entirely my/our original work unless otherwise stated and properly cited. This statement covers all aspects of the manuscript, including text, figures, tables, data, and any accompanying materials. I confirm that:

  1. All external sources utilized in this manuscript have been duly acknowledged and cited following accepted academic standards. Proper referencing and attribution have been provided for all sources of information, including but not limited to books, articles, websites, and other resources.
  2. Contributions from co-authors, supervisors, or other individuals have been explicitly recognized in the manuscript. Proper credit has been given to all individuals who have made significant contributions, and their consent for inclusion has been obtained.
  3. The manuscript has not been previously submitted, either partially or entirely, for any other academic qualification at any other institution. Furthermore, it has not been previously published, in whole or in part, unless specific permissions and acknowledgments are provided.
  4. Any third-party materials incorporated in this manuscript have been used with the permission of the copyright holders, and appropriate acknowledgments have been made in the text and reference sections.
  5. The manuscript does not violate any individual’s, entity’s, or organization’s intellectual property rights, copyright, trademark, or any other rights. The necessary permissions and rights have been obtained for the inclusion of copyrighted materials, where applicable.
  6. I acknowledge that any breach of academic integrity, including plagiarism or misrepresentation of sources, constitutes a serious offense, and I understand the consequences of such actions.
  7. I am aware that the JFOS reserves the right to conduct plagiarism checks and verify the originality of this manuscript using appropriate software or other methods.

By endorsing this statement, I confirm that the manuscript is my/our original work, and I/we assume full responsibility for its content and authenticity. I recognize the significance of honesty and integrity in academic research and pledge to uphold these principles.

Full name of corresponding author:

Signature:

Date:”

 

  • Intellectual Property and Copyright

For articles published in JFOS journals, authors retain the copyright. The articles are licensed under Open Journal Systems, allowing free downloading and reading. Additionally, the article may be reused and quoted with proper citation of the original published version. These terms facilitate widespread use and visibility of the work while ensuring authors receive due credit.

In special cases, different licensing may apply. Authors with specific conditions, such as funding-related restrictions, incompatible with this license should notify the Editorial Office during submission [please refer to Conflict of Interest section]. Exceptions are granted at the publisher’s discretion.

Authors must obtain permission for reproducing any previously published material (figures, tables, text, etc.) not in the public domain or without copyright ownership before submission.

 

Permission is necessary for:

  • Using your own work previously published by other publishers without retaining copyright.
  • Incorporating substantial extracts from anyone else’s work or a series of works.
  • Utilizing tables, graphs, charts, schemes, and artworks if they remain unaltered or minimally modified.
  • Using photographs for which you lack copyright ownership.

 

Permission is not required for:

  • Recreating your own table using data already published elsewhere, with proper citation.
  • Employing very short quotes under fair use guidelines.
  • Redrawing and significantly altering graphs, charts, schemes, and artwork to the extent that they are unrecognizable, but verifying copyright permissions for underlying data may be necessary.

Once permission is obtained, the copyright holder may specify the acknowledgment format, or authors can use the suggested style: “Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year].”

Authors, through a publishing agreement, grant JFOS the right to publish their original work, ensuring it hasn’t been previously published. Depending on the chosen Creative Commons end user license, authors grant exclusive or non-exclusive rights to JFOS, allowing readers to reuse and share the article while ensuring proper attribution.

Authors retain various rights, including patent and trademark rights, the freedom to use their research data, and the ability to reuse their material in new works with proper acknowledgment. They can also publicly share preprints, accepted manuscripts, and final published articles. Regardless of publication choice, their institution can use articles for teaching and training purposes.

Institutions, with proper acknowledgment, can distribute copies electronically or physically for teaching purposes, incorporate material into coursework and courseware programs, but not in Massive Open Online Courses, and include articles in grant funding applications.

 

  • Plagiarism, Data Fabrication and Image Manipulation

Plagiarism is not acceptable in JFOS journals. Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, images, or data from another source, even from your own publications, without giving credit to the original source.

Reuse of text that is copied from another source must be between quotation marks and the original source must be cited. If a study’s design or the manuscript’s structure or language has been inspired by previous studies, these studies must be explicitly cited.

All submissions are checked for plagiarism even using specific software.

If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, an investigation will take place and action taken in accordance with our policies.

JFOS recognizes various forms of plagiarism, including but not limited to:

- Verbatim Plagiarism: Copying text from another source without proper citation.

- Paraphrasing Plagiarism: Rewriting someone else’s work without proper attribution.

- Mosaic Plagiarism: Combining text from different sources without citation to create a new document.

- Self-Plagiarism: Reproducing one's own previously published work without proper acknowledgment.

- Idea Plagiarism: Using someone else's ideas, concepts, or research findings without appropriate credit.

 

  • Patent

JFOS offer prompt, thorough peer review and swift publication upon acceptance. Accepted articles are swiftly accessible online with a DOI, continuously published irrespective of issue release dates. Publication and editorial processes proceed independently of pending patent or intellectual property matters. Authors must resolve any such issues before publication and declare patent applications or registrations as per JFOS's Conflict of Interest Policy.

JFOS strictly prohibits plagiarism, encompassing the unauthorized use of text, ideas, images, or data from any source, including one’s own work, without proper attribution. Directly quoted text must be cited, and studies inspiring a manuscript’s design or language must be referenced. All submissions undergo plagiarism checks, and any detected plagiarism may lead to rejection during peer review or post-publication investigation. Various forms of plagiarism, such as verbatim, paraphrasing, mosaic, self, and idea plagiarism, are recognized.

Additionally, JFOS mandates the submission of original, unprocessed image files and data, and prohibits manipulation that could distort the original information. Undeclared image modifications prompt investigation, requiring authors to provide original images and data. Any irregular image manipulation may result in manuscript rejection or post-publication correction or retraction. Data integrity is crucial, prohibiting inappropriate selection, manipulation, enhancement, or fabrication, including exclusion of data points, data fabrication, biased result selection, and selective analysis methods. Authors are encouraged to retain unprocessed data for at least five years after publication, promoting transparency and reproducibility.

 

  • Citation Policies

Authors must cite sources properly and obtain permission when necessary, avoiding excessive self-citation and copying references without reading the cited work. They should refrain from preferential citation of their own, friends’, peers’, or institution’s publications, as well as advertisements. Following COPE position (https://doi.org/10.24318/raEKBDOK), direct quotations from other researchers’ publications, including the author’s own work, must be appropriately cited within quotation marks. COPE offers recommendations for best practices regarding citation manipulation in a discussion document.

JFOS is dedicated to promoting open scientific exchange and facilitating best practices in research data sharing and archiving. Authors are encouraged to share various research data, ensuring it is findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR principles). Depositing data and code in trusted repositories is recommended, with exceptions outlined in the Data Availability Statement. Ethical, legal, and privacy considerations dictate data sharing, with authors responsible for ensuring compliance with consent and privacy laws. Restricted access situations require clear explanations and data availability upon request for peer review. While some institutions have finite data retention requirements, authors are urged to archive data or provide minimal datasets within Supplementary Material.

Data availability statements are mandatory for all JFOS publications, facilitating transparency and reproducibility. During peer review, authors may be asked to provide existing datasets and details for analysis.

 

  • Data preservation

JFOS emphasizes the joint responsibility of researchers, institutions, journals, and data repositories for long-term data preservation. Authors are urged to choose data repositories or commit to preserving datasets on institutional servers for at least five years post-publication. If a chosen repository becomes inaccessible, authors may be asked to transfer data to another repository with a correction or update to the original publication.

When selecting a repository, authors should consider criteria such as long-term preservation, stable identifiers (e.g., DOIs), barrier-free public access, open licenses, and confidential review processes. Changes to data access criteria should be promptly communicated to the Editorial office.

Authors should formally cite any external repositories storing datasets mentioned in their manuscript, including the main datasets and any others used in the research. Citation enforcement is ensured by the Editorial Team prior to publication.

 

  • Supplementary Material

Supplementary material, including additional data and files, can be uploaded during manuscript submission. These files are accessible to referees during peer review and can be in any format, though common, non-proprietary formats are recommended. Citations and references in supplementary files are permitted if they appear in the main text’s reference list.

 

  • Unpublished Data

Authors should note any restrictions on data availability during submission and in the manuscript itself. Phrases like “Data not shown,” “Unpublished data,” “in preparation,” or “submitted” should be avoided, with authors encouraged to publish all relevant observations as supplementary material.

 

  • Reviewers Suggestion

Reviewer suggestions can be made during the submission process, with two potential reviewers recommended based on their expertise. Editors may not necessarily contact these referees. Detailed contact information, including name and email address, should be provided. Proposed reviewers should not be current collaborators or co-authors within the last three years. They should also be from different institutions than the authors. Editorial Board members and frequently cited authors can be suggested as potential reviewers. For more information on reviewer qualifications and responsibilities, refer to the relevant section in the Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers and Editors.

 

  • Editorial Decision and Revision

All articles, reviews, and communications submitted to JFOS undergo rigorous peer review, with a minimum of two reviews provided. Editorial decisions are communicated as follows:

  • Accept after Minor Revisions: The manuscript is conditionally accepted pending minor revisions based on reviewer feedback. Authors are allotted five days for revisions.
  • Reconsider after Major Revisions: Manuscript acceptance depends on substantial revisions. Authors must provide a detailed response or rebuttal to reviewers’ comments, with a maximum of two rounds of major revisions allowed. Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated by reviewers. Authors should inform the Editorial Team if revision time exceeds two months to avoid undue time pressure.
  • Reject and Encourage Resubmission: Manuscripts requiring additional experiments for conclusive findings are rejected but encouraged to resubmit after further experimentation.
  • Reject: Manuscripts with significant flaws or lack of original contribution are rejected without opportunity for resubmission.

Authors must address all reviewer comments systematically, providing clear responses even in cases of disagreement.

 

  • Author Appeals

Authors can appeal a rejection decision by emailing the Editorial Team with a detailed justification and point-by-point responses to reviewers’ and/or Editor’s comments using an appeal form. Appeals are only accepted after a “reject and decline resubmission” verdict and must be submitted within three months of the decision date. The consulting Editor provides an advisory recommendation, which is then validated by the Editor-in-Chief. Final rejection decisions at this stage are irreversible.

 

  • Production and Publication

Upon acceptance, manuscripts undergo professional copy-editing, English editing, and proofreading by authors before final corrections, pagination, and publication on the journal’s website. Authors have 48 hours to review and indicate corrections upon receiving the publication draft. Failure to respond within this timeframe implies consent to publish the manuscript as is.

 

For further information:

Contact address: Prof Vilma Pinchi 

The Editor, Journal of Forensic Odonto-Stomatology
vilma.pinchi@unifi.it

 

 

Privacy Statement

Privacy Statement/Editorial Policies and Ethics Statements for Reviewers and Editors

Privacy Statement

This website and publishing platforms are provided by Open Journal Systems, part of the PKP Publishing Services Network. PKP Publishing Services adheres to all relevant SFU policies related to data privacy, including compliance with the British Columbia Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA).

**EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)**: For PKP Publishing Services clients who need information on complying with the EU GDPR, please refer to PKP’s GDPR Guidebook for PKP Users.

PKP Services has taken the necessary steps to address its regulatory requirements, such as those imposed by the General Data Protection Regulation (EU 2016/679), Article 28, where customer data includes the personal data of residents of the European Union. PKP Services is committed to:

- Delivering only the services specified and mutually agreed upon in this contract, along with any additional services confirmed in writing by both parties.

- Ensuring all PKP Services staff, data service providers, and data subcontractors adhere to confidentiality commitments through signed agreements.

- Applying suitable technical and organizational security measures to safeguard customer data against accidental loss, theft, destruction, or damage within the systems and processes used to deliver the services.

- Mandating that its data service providers and data subcontractors implement adequate technical and organizational security measures to protect customer data.

- Supporting the customer, to the greatest extent possible, in fulfilling any legal responsibilities to respond to requests from individuals exercising their rights when their personal data is controlled by the customer.

- Notifying the customer of any known security incidents that could impact customer data within 24 hours of detecting the incident, particularly if the incident could lead to a data breach posing a significant risk of harm to individuals.

- Erasing and permanently deleting any data stored on its systems or servers upon the termination of this contract, except for residual copies of customer data that may temporarily remain in PKP Services’s backups. If the customer requests a copy of such data before termination, and if the services provided permit the retrieval of such data, PKP Services will make reasonable efforts to supply the customer with a copy, subject to the customer’s payment of any reasonable fees quoted by PKP Services in relation to the customer’s request.

For any further information please consult https://pkp.sfu.ca/privacy-policy/.

 

 

Publication Ethics Statement

All submitted manuscripts must adhere to JFOS’s editorial and ethical policies outlined on this page and in the Author Guidelines (https://ojs.iofos.eu/index.php/Journal/about/submissions). JFOS implements a stringent peer review process along with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure high-quality scientific works in accordance with the COPE Core Practices and Guidelines (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12). COPE provides guidance on handling conflicts of interest, authorship and contributorship issues, ethical disputes, misconduct allegations, data issues, overlap and plagiarism, and peer review integrity.

JFOS takes publishing ethics seriously, and Editors maintain a zero-tolerance policy for plagiarism, data falsification, or inappropriate authorship credit. It's important to note that JFOS may use software to detect plagiarism to verify the originality of submitted content. If plagiarism is detected with a previously published article, both the authors and the Editor of that article will be informed by JFOS.

The JFOS team manually checks all manuscripts to ensure they comply with the Publication Ethics Statement. If a manuscript does not meet policies or is flagged during the check, an Academic Editor is consulted. In cases of ethical or legal issues, Editors may reject the manuscript before the review process begins. If an ethical issue or conflict with JFOS ethical policies is identified, the acceptance of a manuscript may be revoked, and publication may be withdrawn by the publisher.

JFOS's ethical control methodology aims to uphold the integrity of the literature and ensure the safety of research authors by:

- Proactively preventing potential ethical issues through manual checks of both peer review and manuscripts, promptly detecting and reporting to the Editorial Board.

- Ensuring transparency of decisions and checks by updating and informing all concerned parties when feasible and appropriate.

- Upholding fairness and objectivity in evaluation and providing authors with the opportunity to correct certain issues where possible and time to respond.

- Standardizing the process for investigating ethical issues and policy applicability in accordance with COPE principles and flowcharts (https://doi.org/10.24318/AkFpEBd1).

 

 

Peer Review Process

JFOS ensures a double-blind review process in accordance with the Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9). Initially, Editors evaluate the suitability of all submissions for alignment with JFOS's scope and target audience. Papers deemed appropriate are anonymously sent to at least 2 independent expert reviewers to evaluate the scientific quality. Editors are ultimately responsible for the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of articles.

Editors and Reviewers abstain from decisions in cases involving:

- Papers they authored or were authored by family or research group members.

- Papers related to products or services in which they have a commercial interest, funding involvement, or any other conflict of interest.

Independent editors and peer reviewers are invited to handle these submissions, adhering to the blind review process established by standard review procedures. All Editors and Reviewers must carefully check for any conflict of interest before accepting an assignment.

The Editor conducts the initial review to ensure alignment with the journal's subject matter and editorial standards. Preference is given to articles significant and understandable to the IOFOS audience and readers interested in forensic odonto-stomatology, with clear writing and structured study design. Membership in IOFOS does not influence preliminary selection. IOFOS aims to publish high-quality articles with significant impact. Articles typically take a broad approach.

Reviewers are selected from experts in Forensic Odonto-Stomatology, holding academic degrees and/or positions in teaching or research at universities, academic or governmental institutions, or renowned researchers in the field. Reviewers provide feedback on compliance with the Journal Author’s guidelines, novelty of research, validity of experiments, scientific errors, appropriateness of references, soundness of conclusions, originality, and impact in the field of forensic odonto-stomatology and forensic sciences.

Reviewers provide comments and final recommendations on whether the paper should be accepted without revisions, resubmitted after revisions, or declined. If there is disagreement among Reviewers' recommendations, the Editor may invite additional reviewers and make a decision based on all recommendations collected.

Results of the peer review process are typically available within three months of submission, though additional rounds of review may extend this timeline. If authors are advised to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no assurance that the resubmission will undergo review by the same reviewers or that the revised submission will ultimately be accepted. Different reviewers may be invited for further rounds of revision.

Articles consistently rejected after peer review include those with a commercial tone, poor writing or organization, elementary content, excessive length, lack of novelty, or deviation from the scope of the journal. Such articles will not undergo re-review by JFOS.

 

 

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers and Editors

The Editorial Team (Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board members, Reviewers, and all participants in the peer-review process – hyperlinking to the above paragraph on peer review) bears responsibility for ensuring the integrity of the JFOS editorial process.

If any participant in the peer-review process harbors ethical concerns regarding a manuscript under review, final decision, or even post-publication, they should promptly contact the Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board to initiate an investigation in accordance with the JFOS Comments and Complaints Policy (see the section below "Comments and Complaints") and COPE Guidelines (https://doi.org/10.24318/B0fI5nuw).

Prior to and during peer review, the Editorial Team conducts the following checks:

  1. Ensuring the submission aligns with the scope and fields of the journal.
  2. Verifying that authors have obtained ethical approval from the regional ethics committee, including protocol number and authorizations for research involving human subjects, animals, or cell lines. In the case of reports on case or case series, ensuring authors have provided consent for the publication of personal data, or a valid reason for its absence.
  3. Verifying authors' declaration of the paper's originality and non-replication of previous publications, except for explicit citations, and confirming acceptance of JFOS's copyright policy.
  4. Confirming that authors have disclosed research funding and declared any conflicts of interest.
  5. Conducting checks for plagiarism, duplicate publications, and obtaining necessary permissions from copyright holders for previously published figures or images included in the manuscript.
  6. Performing other compliance, ethics, and research integrity checks in accordance with JFOS policies and guidelines.

In making recommendations or final acceptance decisions on a manuscript, Reviewers and Editors should consider:

  1. Disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest, with authors disclosing and addressing conflicts related to their manuscript or study before submission.
  2. Objective discussion of research findings' significance if the manuscript presents research findings.
  3. Presentation of materials and methods in sufficient detail for other researchers to replicate the work.
  4. Provision of timely and substantive feedback and comments by reviewers to facilitate an objective decision on the submission.

 

  • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

One of JFOS's primary objectives is to ensure transparency in the peer review and publication process. All individuals involved in the peer review process are expected to carefully consider and disclose any potential conflicts of interest when participating in the review, decision-making, and publication of an article. If a Reviewer or Editor believes that the potential existence of a conflict of interest, or multiple conflicts of interest, will not impact the peer review or decision-making process, they must first disclose the concern to the Editorial Team. Following a thorough evaluation, a decision will be made regarding whether to exclude the individual to uphold the integrity of the peer review process.

 

  • Definition of Potential Conflicts of Interest involving the Editorial Team in the peer review process:

- Personal or Academic Conflicts: Editors, Reviewers, and Editorial Team Members should abstain from participating in any phase of the review process for submitted manuscripts that they authored directly or by their family members, professional friends, colleagues at the same institution, or members of the same research group. Reviewers or editors should refrain from involvement in the review or decision-making of manuscripts submitted by authors who currently hold a mentor or mentee role or have had such a relationship in the past, or by those with whom they have ongoing collaborations. Although the peer review process is blind to reviewers, if a reviewer suspects such a conflict of interest, they must disclose it to be excluded from the process.

- Financial or Professional Conflicts: Financial conflicts encompass any professional or business relationships, financial or business interests, or other competing interests that could potentially introduce bias into the review process. Neither reviewers nor editors should receive professional or personal benefits, salary, board membership, funding, grants, honoraria, or hold any other interest in a company whose product is discussed in the article, or intellectual property rights such as patents, royalties, and copyrights as a result of their contribution. Reviewers and editors should refrain from participating in the review or decision-making of manuscripts where conflicts of interest could introduce bias.

- Other Conflicts: Any other conflicts of interest, whether real or potentially perceived, that could influence the outcome of the peer review and decision-making process should be disclosed. Reviewers and editors should assess the merit, originality, and suitability of the manuscript for the journal in accordance with JFOS editorial guidelines. Discrimination based on race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, religion, country of origin, physical ability, or socioeconomic status is not tolerated in JFOS journals. Reviewers and editors must disclose personal biases that could impact peer review.

In the event of a conflict of interest, alternative reviewers and/or editors will be sought. If an editor submits a manuscript to the journal, their submission will be handled by other editors who do not have a conflict of interest.

All editors and reviewers are required to declare no conflicts of interest, and a disclaimer will be included with each article.

 

  • Confidentiality and Anonymity

Reviewers and Editors are committed to maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscript, including the abstract. Reviewers should notify the Editors if they intend for a student or colleague to conduct the review on their behalf.

JFOS employs double-blind peer review, requiring Reviewers to refrain from disclosing their identities to authors, both in comments and in the metadata of reports submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format.

 

  • Comments and Complaints

Readers who have concerns or complaints about published papers should initially contact the corresponding author to attempt direct resolution before reaching out to the Editorial Team (Contact Section - https://ojs.iofos.eu/index.php/Journal/about/editorialTeam). 

In instances where contacting the authors is not feasible, if authors are unresponsive, or if concerns remain unresolved, the Editorial Team may be contacted. They will collaborate with the complainant, author/s, and Editors-in-Chief or Editorial Board members to investigate, address, or resolve any concerns or complaints.

Complaints, comments, or update requests related to scholarly validity, ethical or legal aspects of the paper, or its review process will be thoroughly investigated as necessary, with final approval by the Editor-in-Chief for update requests pertaining to published papers. For ethical concerns, decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board members, with support from the Editorial Team to uphold core principles of publication ethics as outlined by COPE (https://publicationethics.org/about/what-we-do/our-story/history-code-conduct). Other individuals and institutions may be consulted as needed, including academic authorities or experts in the field, with legal counsel sought if the complaint involves legal implications.

Personal comments or criticisms will not be entertained, and all complaints, including anonymous ones, will be investigated. Complainants may request that their complaint be handled confidentially, and the Editorial Office, Editors-in-Chief, or other Editorial Board members will endeavor to do so as appropriate and in line with internal procedures.

Decisions regarding Corrections, Comments and Replies, Expressions of Concern, or Retractions resulting from an investigation are made by Editors-in-Chief or Editorial Board members and communicated to authors. Updates must adhere to our policy on Updating Published Papers.

If a complaint is deemed unsubstantiated, further communication will only be considered upon presentation of additional information evidencing concerns. Complainants may not receive updates on the status of an investigation until a final decision is reached, though they will be notified if an update is published. The Editorial Team is not obligated to provide further detail, and communication may cease if it is deemed discourteous or disrespectful. Readers with complaints or concerns should understand that investigations take time to conduct.

When raising concerns with the Editorial Office, please use the contact details provided in the Contact Section, along with details about the paper, the complaint, its scholarly, scientific, or academic validity, a summary of the main points and any other issues, details of any prior correspondence with the authors, and a statement clarifying any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest.

 

  • Updating Published Papers

JFOS acknowledges its responsibility to rectify scientifically relevant errors or ethical issues brought to our attention. To ensure transparency for our authors and readers, we provide the following options for updates to our published papers:

- Direct Update: Updates are made directly to the publication when feasible and warranted by reasonable requests. Upon approval, a revised version of the paper will be updated and republished in the most current issue of the journal and on our website. Subsequently, all relevant indexing databases will be notified to ensure that their versions are also revised.

- Corrections with Distinction between Minor and Major Corrections:

  - Minor corrections address issues that do not impact the scientific content of an article but necessitate an updated version.

  - Major corrections aim to rectify issues and errors that could affect the scientific interpretation of an article.

If Minor and Major corrections are approved, they will be accompanied by the addition of a footnote in the PDF version and a "correction statement" in the backmatter of the website version, when feasible. Conversely, the paper will be updated and republished in the most current issue of the journal on our website as a separate publication of a corrected version of the paper, titled "Correction to..." followed by the original title of the manuscript. This notification alerts all readers to a significant change in the paper, with relevant indexing databases also being notified to ensure their versions are updated accordingly.

 

  • Retractions

Occasionally, a paper may require retraction from the body of research literature. This could result from inadvertent errors during the research process, serious ethical violations, data fabrication, extensive plagiarism, or other factors. Such articles jeopardize the integrity of scientific records and necessitate retraction.

JFOS adheres to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for retractions (https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4).

When a Retraction is issued, the original publication is annotated with a "RETRACTED" watermark but remains accessible on the journal's website for archival purposes. However, retracted articles should not be cited or utilized for further research, as they cannot be deemed reliable. Retractions are published with the same authorship and affiliation as the retracted paper, ensuring that both the notice and the original paper can be easily located by readers within indexing databases. The Retraction notice is also included in the current issue of the journal. Partial Retractions may be issued in cases where only certain aspects of the findings are incorrect.

A paper will only be completely removed from JFOS's website and relevant indexing databases under exceptional circumstances, such as when its continued presence online would constitute an illegal act or pose a significant risk of harm.

 

  • Comments and Replies

If a reader rises concerns about the reported results or methods employed in a specific paper, they should reach out to the journal's Editorial Office. If deemed warranted, a Comment may be submitted for potential publication. Comments constitute brief letters to the editors from readers seeking to publicly question a particular paper.

Once a Comment undergoes approval for further peer review, the Editorial Team will then contact the authors of the paper in question and extend an invitation for them to prepare a Reply to the Comment. The Reply affords the authors the opportunity to publicly address the concerns raised by the reader. If the reader's complaints are substantiated, and the authors fail to adequately address the concerns, a Correction of the original paper may be issued, or the paper may be retracted entirely.

Should authors fail to furnish a response by the provided deadline or opt not to respond, the Comment may be published alongside a note explaining the absence of a Reply.

Both Comments and Replies will be subject to review in accordance with the standard review procedure to ensure that:

- The Comment addresses significant aspects of the original paper without morphing into essentially a new paper.

- The Reply directly addresses any concerns raised without evasiveness.

- The tone of both publications is fitting for a scientific journal.

While Comments may critique the paper, they should refrain from criticizing the authors' work. Additionally, Comments should avoid reiterating previously published disagreements. Only one round of Comment and Reply will be facilitated when the discussion originates from the same reader/s.

 

  • Author Name Change Policy

Occasionally, authors may desire to alter their name post-publication. Typically, such requests are declined by the Editorial Team unless a valid and well-justified request is unanimously approved by all authors involved.