Manuscript Submission

  Manuscripts are considered with the understanding that no part of the work has been published previously in print or electronic format and the paper is not under consideration by another publication or electronic medium. Prior publication could include, but is not limited to, deposition of all or part of the data in a publicly-accessible preprint or poster repository. Questions related to this policy should be directed to the editors. Related manuscripts that have been submitted elsewhere during the period of revision must accompany revised manuscripts. Failure to provide copies of related manuscripts under consideration elsewhere may delay the review process and may be grounds for rejection. Under no circumstances will any paper be considered that contains any data that have been submitted for publication elsewhere.

  The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate contributors are listed as authors and that all authors have agreed to the manuscript’s content and its submission to CCR. In a case where we become aware of an authorship dispute, authorship must be approved in writing by all of the parties.

Conflict of Interest
  A conflict of interest exists when an author, reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships with other persons or organizations that may inappropriately influence or bias his or her actions. There is a potential for a conflict of interest whether or not an individual believes that a relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. Conflicts can occur as the result of employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony or opinions, personal and family relationships, or academic competitive pressures.

Potential Author Conflicts
  Authors are responsible for disclosing any and all financial and personal relationships between themselves and others that might bias, or be perceived to bias, their work. When submitting a manuscript to CCR, authors must complete the Mandatory Checklist form, which asks for full disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest. Here authors must state whether potential conflicts do or do not exist. Financial arrangements between any author and any company whose product or competing product plays a prominent role in the manuscript must be noted on both the Mandatory Checklist and the title page of the manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted, the CCR editors will decide whether to publish information about potential conflicts. A statement either noting the potential conflict(s) or informing readers that none were disclosed will appear on the article.

Potential conflicts related to sponsorship or financial support
  Authors should describe the role of the study sponsor(s), if any, in study design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation, and the writing of the report. If the sponsor(s) had no such involvement, this should be clearly stated. Authors must attest that they had full access to all of the data in the study, and that they take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Potential Reviewer Conflicts
  Editors will not select peer reviewers who have potential conflicts of interest. Authors may provide editors with the names of persons they feel should not review their manuscript, because of a potential conflict. However, when possible, authors should explain the reason(s) for their concerns. Reviewers must disclose any conflicts that could bias their opinions, and they should disqualify themselves from reviewing when appropriate.

Potential Editor Conflicts
  Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts must have no personal, professional, or financial involvement with any of the subject matter in manuscripts they might judge. When the editor-in-chief (EIC) has a conflict of interest with authors of a new submission, but the co-editor (CE) does not have a conflict, the EIC assigns the paper to the co-EIC who does not have a conflict
  If the co-EIC decides the paper should be rejected without peer review, he/she asks another Editorial Board Member (EBM) (who also has no conflict) for a second opinion. If both agree, the paper is rejected without further review.
  When it has been decided that a manuscript should be peer reviewed, the co-EIC assigns it to reviewers. At least 2 reviews are obtained. If the reviewers are fundamentally in agreement, then the co-EIC may make the decision on the manuscript. If peer reviews differ, the co-EIC may ask 1 or more Editorial Board Members without a conflict for opinions before making his/her decision.

  1. Should both the co-EICs have a conflict with authors of a new submission:
The co-EICs assign the paper to an Associate Editor (AE) who does not have a conflict. The AE assigns the manuscript to reviewers. At least 2 reviews are obtained. If the reviewers are fundamentally in agreement, then the AE may make the decision on the manuscript. If peer reviews differ, the AE may ask 1 or more other Editorial Board Members for opinions before making his/her decision.
  Note that an AE is not given the option of rejecting a manuscript without peer review, since the AE does not have experience in judging the likelihood that a given manuscript will or will not be competitive for publication in CCR.
  If the manuscript is accepted for publication, a statement will appear on the title page saying that an outside editor entirely handled the peer-review and decision-making processes.
  2. When one of the co-EICs is an author of a manuscript submitted to CCR, then that co-EIC is not involved in the peer-review and decision-making processes for this manuscript. The non-author co-EIC oversees the peer review process for this paper.

Statement of Human and Animal Rights
  For manuscripts reporting experiments on human subjects, statements identifying the committee approving the studies and confirming that informed consent was obtained from all subjects must appear in the Methods and Material sections. The statements should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the institutional and national ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body (Institutional Review Board, IRB) explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.
For manuscripts reporting experiments on animals, statements identifying the committee approving the studies and confirming that informed consent was obtained from all subjects must appear in the Methods and Material sections. The statements should indicate whether the institutional, national and international guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.

Statement of Informed Consent
  Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper. Appropriate consents, permissions and releases must be obtained where an author wishes to include case details or other personal information or images of patients and any other individuals in CCR publication. Written consents must be retained by the author and copies of the consents or evidence that such consents have been obtained must be provided to CCR on request. Unless you have written permission from the patient (or, where applicable, the next of kin), the personal details of any patient included in any part of the article and in any supplementary materials (including all illustrations and videos) must be removed before submission.

Copyright form (dowmload)

  Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be asked to transfer copyright. This transfer will ensure the widest possible dissemination of information. A form facilitating transfer of copyright will be provided upon acceptance of the manuscript.  After transfer of copyright, authors retain rights as discussed below.

  The submitting author is responsible for obtaining agreement of all coauthors as well as any sponsors' required consent before submitting a paper. JASEI strongly discourages courtesy authorship. Authors are obliged to cite relevant prior work and they should consider the following points:

  1) Technical papers submitted for publication must advance the state of knowledge and must cite relevant prior work.

  2) The length of a submitted paper should suit its importance, or it should be appropriate to the complexity of the work.

  3) Authors must convince both peer reviewers and the editors about the scientific and technical merit of a paper; knowing that, the standards of proof are higher when extraordinary or unexpected results are reported.

  4) As any scientific progress requires replication, papers submitted for publication must provide sufficient information to allow readers to perform similar experiments or calculations and as well as to use the reported results. Although not everything is needed to be disclosed, a paper must contain new, useable, and fully described information.

    5) Unintelligible English is a valid reason for rejection.

  Every paper and contribution will become the legal copyright of the publisher unless it is otherwise agreed, in order to have an easily dissemination and to ensure proper policing of use.

Paper Instructions for Authors: CCR_Template.doc

Manuscripts should be sent via e-mail as attachment in .doc format to: