Ethical Aspects Prioritized by Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia

Authors

  • Andreia Pires Dantas Instituto Nacional de Câncer (INCA), Coordenação de Ensino (Coens), Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia (RBC). Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5965-5015
  • Mario Jorge Sobreira-da-Silva Instituto Nacional de Câncer (INCA), Coordenação de Ensino (Coens), Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia (RBC). Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0477-8595

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32635/2176-9745.RBC.2023v69n3.4371

Abstract

The “Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia (RBC)” values the integrity in research, encouraging the publication of open articles developed with honesty, rigor, transparency within strict ethical conduct. The journal revises the manuscripts without, however, interfering in the results or overall conclusion. Additionally, the journal favors retractions of manuscripts due to several reasons, including duplicity, plagiarism, unethical investigation practices or when the results or conclusions are unreliable As a federal government-funded journal, RBC does not reproduce or publish advertising in the articles or on its website and is dedicated to disclosing scientific knowledge to improve the services offered by the National Health System (SUS) and other national health systems. Always within strict ethical principles, RBC continues to grow with quality of its publications, and national and international acceptance expanding the disclosure of scientific evidences targeted to prevention, and cancer control globally and nationally.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Committee on Publication Ethics. Ethics toolkit for a successful editorial office: a cope guide [Internet]. [acesso em 2023 ago 22]. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.24318/AkFpEBd1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/AkFpEBd1

Bordewijk EM, Li W, van Eekelen R, et al. Methods to assess research misconduct in health-related research: A scoping review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;136:189-202. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.05.012

Committee on Publication Ethics. Guidelines: retraction guidelines. [Internet]. [acesso em 2023 ago 22]. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4

Wager E. How should editors respond to plagiarism? COPE Discussion Document [Internet]. 2011. [acesso em 2023 ago 22]. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.24318/EHhRmBWV DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/EHhRmBWV

Committee on Publication Ethics. Text Recycling Guidelines [Internet]. [acesso em 2023 ago 22]. Disponível em: https://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/Web_A29298_COPE_Text_Recycling.pdf

Downloads

Published

2023-09-01

How to Cite

1.
Dantas AP, Sobreira-da-Silva MJ. Ethical Aspects Prioritized by Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia. Rev. Bras. Cancerol. [Internet]. 2023 Sep. 1 [cited 2024 Dec. 24];69(3):e-004371. Available from: https://rbc.inca.gov.br/index.php/revista/article/view/4371

Issue

Vol. 69 No. 3 (2023): July/Aug./Sept.

Section

EDITORIAL

License

Os direitos morais e intelectuais dos artigos pertencem aos respectivos autores, que concedem à RBC o direito de publicação.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Most read articles by the same author(s)