Managing Directors of Publisher Prof. Dr Shiming Han (hanshiliang888@163.com), Liupanshui Normal University, China Prof. Dr. Ajaz Ahmad (ajukash@gmail.com), King Saud University, Saudi Arabia Qurban Ali (editorbbasr@gmail.com), Pakistan Dr. Adnan Iqbal (editor@bbasr.com), Poland BBASR Publishers Head Office 18B IHAR, Radzików 05-870 Blonie, Poland Phone: 0048780 589 255 WhatsApp: +966596587323 For article status submitted in journals can contact at editor@bbasr.com For general information contact at editorbbasr@gmail.com About publisher Articles for BBASR Publishers must be original reports of research not simultaneously submitted to or previously published in any other scientific or technical journal and must make a significant contribution to the advancement of knowledge or toward a better understanding of existing scientific concepts. The study reported should be applicable to a sizable geographic area or an area of ecological or economic significance and of potential interest to a significant number of scientists. Each calendar year will have one volume. BBASR journals publishes articles as soon as the final copy-edited version is approved by the authors rather than waiting for a collection of articles for a specific issue. Also, each article is published in its respective category. BBASR journals consider the following categories of articles; Original research Article, Short Research Article, Short communications, Review Article, Minireview Article, Systematic Reviews, Policy Papers, Commentaries / Opinion Article, Data Notes, Study Protocols, and pre-protocols, Method Article, Data Article, Case reports / Case studies, Grey literature government reports, Abstracts of scientific meetings, Letter to the Editor, Scholarly Book Review, Technical Note, Perspective, Correspondence, and News and Views. As a result, the page numbers in the ‘Table of Contents’ displayed for each issue will reflect this rather than numerical order. The inclusion of multiple academic disciplines helps in pooling the knowledge from two or more fields of study to handle better-suited problems by finding solutions established on new understandings. The authors can submit manuscripts online through OJS System of respective journals. Authors can submit their queries to the editorial office of publisher through email at, editor@bbasr.com Journals list Journal of Life and Social Sciences (J. Life. Soc. Sci. eISSN: 3006-2675) Bulletin of Biological and Allied Sciences Research (Bull. Biol. All. Sci. Res. eISSN: 2521-0092) Journal of Physical, Biomedical and Biological Sciences (J. Phys. Biomed. Biol. Sci. eISSN: 3005-6489) Author Instructions 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 Open Office, Microsoft Word. Where available, URLs for the references have been provided. The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end. The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines. Author Guidelines General Author Instructions Submission Manuscripts should be submitted by one of the authors of the manuscript through email to the editorial office. Regardless of the source of the word-processing tool, only electronic Word (.doc, .docx) files can be submitted. Only email submissions are advised strongly to facilitate rapid publication and minimize administrative costs. Submissions by anyone other than one of the authors will not be accepted. The submitting author takes responsibility for the paper during submission and peer review. The author can send the manuscript as an email attachment. Manuscript Submission Department Online Submission: The authors can submit online using OJS, however, if feel problem with online submission can also send through editor@bbasr.com Types of Papers Original research papers: Papers that include original empirical data that have not been published anywhere earlier (except as an abstract). Null/negative findings and replication/refutation findings are also welcome. This type of paper normally should not exceed 25 double-spaced pages of text (including references) and should contain no longer than 15 figures/tables. We advise a length of 3000-6000 words (including everything). This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables. Short Research Articles: These may be small single-result findings. Such articles can be brief but need to include enough information, particularly in the methods and results sections, that a reader could understand what was done. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables. Short communications: Short Communications are urgent communications of important preliminary results that are very original, of high interest and likely to have a significant impact on the subject area of the journal. A Short Communication needs only to demonstrate a ‘proof of principle’. Authors are encouraged to submit an Original Research Paper to the journal following their Short Communication. We advise a length of 2500-3500 words, plus 2-3 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. This type of paper should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Methodology, Results, and Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables. Review papers: These papers will not have empirical data acquired by the authors but will include a discussion of papers published and data acquired in a specific area. We advise a length of 5000-9000 words, (including 50-150 references plus 3-5 figures and/or tables (if required). Minireview papers: Minireviews are brief historical perspectives or summaries of developments in fast-moving areas covered within the scope of the journal. They must be based on published articles; they are not outlets for unpublished data. We advise a length of 3000-6000 words, (including 30-70 references plus 2-3 figures and/or tables (if required). They may address any subject within the scope of the journal. The goal of the Minireviews is to provide a concise summary of a particular field in a manner understandable to all readers. Case reports / Case studies (Mainly for bio-medical journals): Case reports describe patient cases which are of particular interest due to their novelty and their potential message for clinical practice. While there are several types of case reports, originality and clinical implications constitute the main virtues by which case reports are judged. (Ref: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18677298). Case studies are an invaluable record of the clinical practices of a profession. While case studies cannot provide specific guidance for the management of successive patients, they are a record of clinical interactions which help us to frame questions for more rigorously designed clinical studies. Case studies also provide valuable teaching material, demonstrating both classical and unusual presentations which may confront the practitioner. (Ref: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2597880/). Case Reports should follow the structure of Abstract, Introduction, Presentation of Case, Discussion, Conclusion, Acknowledgements, Competing Interests, Authors’ Contributions, Consent (where applicable), Ethical approval (where applicable), and References plus figures and/or tables. Abstract (not more than 250 words) of the Case reports should have the following sections: Aims, Presentation of Case, Discussion, and Conclusion. Only Case Reports have word limits: Papers should not exceed 2000 words, 20 references or 5 figures. Systematic Reviews: Systematic Reviews should usually be based on medical interventions or animal model studies. We recommend that authors consult the PRISMA guidelines for reporting in Systematic Reviews. Systematic Reviews should deal with a clearly formulated question and use systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and critically assess the relevant research. We advise a length of 5000-9000 words, (including 50-150 references plus 3-5 figures and/or tables (if required). Policy Papers: The purpose of the policy paper is to provide a comprehensive and persuasive argument justifying the policy recommendations presented in the paper, and therefore to act as a decision-making tool and a call to action for the target audience. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. Commentaries / Opinion Articles: An opinion-based article on a topical issue of broad interest that is intended to engender discussion. We advise a length of 2500-3500 words, plus 2-3 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. Data Notes: Data Notes are brief descriptions of scientific datasets that include details of why and how the data were created; they do not include any analyses or conclusions. Study Protocols and pre-protocols: We welcome protocols for any study design, including observational studies and systematic reviews. All protocols for randomized clinical trials must be registered and follow the proper Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines; ethical approval for the study must have been already granted. Study pre-protocols (i.e. discussing provisional study designs) may also be submitted and will be clearly labeled as such when published. Study protocols for pilot and feasibility studies may also be considered. Method Articles: These articles describe a new experimental or computational method, test or procedure, and should have been well tested. This includes new study methods, substantive modifications to existing methods or innovative applications of existing methods to new models or scientific questions. We also welcome new technical tools that facilitate the design or performance of experiments and data analysis such as software and laboratory devices, or of new technologies to assist medical treatment such as drug delivery devices. We advise a length of 3000-4000 words, plus 3-4 figures and/or tables, and 15-20 key references. Data Articles: A dataset (or set of datasets) together with the associated methods/protocol used to create the data. No analysis of the data, results or conclusions should be included. Clinical Practice Articles: A short article relating to a specific clinical problem or scenario that discusses issues relating to patient management and treatment pathways using an evidence-based approach. Clinical Practice Articles include case series (i.e. group or series of case reports involving patients who were given similar treatment), but should not be based on a single case (see Case Reports). Abstracts of scientific meetings: Abstracts of oral presentations and posters (within the scope of the journal) can be published in discussion with the academic editors. Standardized abstracts (prepared in accordance with journal guidelines) need to be in English language and will be peer-reviewed prior to publication. It is recommended to contact the editor before submitting abstracts of a scientific meeting. Normally a collection of the abstracts (minimum 10 abstracts) will be published in a special issue. Abstracts are not considered for regular issues of the journal. Publication of ‘collection of abstracts of a conference, symposium, etc’ requires a guest editorial board. Normally the ‘Review committee / Screening committee’ of the conference will form the guest editorial board. A list of the guest editors also will be published in the special issue. Letter to the Editor: A letter to the editor provides a means of communication between the author of an article and the reader of a journal, allowing continued dialogue about journal content to take place. Although not original research per se, a letter may provide new insight, make corrections, offer alternate theories, or request clarification about content printed in the journal. Letters to the Editor are considered for publication (subject to editing and abridgment) provided they do not contain material that has been submitted or published elsewhere. Letters in reference to a Journal article must not exceed 600 words (excluding references). Letters not related to a Journal article must not exceed 600 words (excluding references). A letter can have no more than eight references and one figure or table. A letter can be signed by no more than four authors. Financial associations or other possible conflicts of interest must be disclosed. This type of article will be fully peer-reviewed. Scholarly Book Review: The scholarly book review is considered by some to be a form of academic writing that serves to describe and critically evaluate the content, quality, meaning, and significance of a book. A well-constructed book review can provide a thoughtful perspective and will be appreciated. Scholarly Book Review should be within 1800 words. Scholarly Book Review must have to be systematic and structured and proper references (2-5 numbers) should be cited during the review. Scholarly Book Review must be avoided to advertise the book. A normal peer review process will be followed to ensure the academic quality of such book reviews. An only academically important and critical review of books will be considered for publication. There will be restrictions on a number of such articles to be published per year. Units of Measurement Units of measurement should be presented simply and concisely using System International (SI) units. Title and Authorship Information The following information should be included Paper title. Full author names. Full institutional mailing addresses. Email addresses of all the authors. Manuscript Structure The manuscript should be written in English with a simple layout. The text should be prepared in single-column format. The text, excluding the abstract, if required, can be divided into numbered sections with brief headings. Starting from the introduction with section 1, subsections should be numbered (for example 2.1 (then 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 2.2, etc.), up to three levels. Title The title should be without any abbreviations and it should enlighten the contents of the paper. Abstract The abstract should be concise and informative. It should be between 300-500 words in length. It should briefly describe the purpose of the work, techniques, and methods used, major findings with important data and conclusions. Different sub-sections, as given below, should be used. No references should be cited in this part. Generally, non-standard abbreviations should not be used, if necessary they should be clearly defined in the abstract, at first use. Keywords Immediately after the abstract, about 4-8 keywords should be given. Use of abbreviations should be avoided, only standard abbreviations, well known in the established area may be used, if appropriate. These keywords will be used for indexing. Abbreviations Non-standard abbreviations should be listed and the full form of each abbreviation should be given in parentheses at first use in the text. Introduction Provide a factual background, clearly defined problem, proposed solution, a brief literature survey, and the scope and justification of the work done. Material and methods Give adequate information to allow the experiment to be reproduced. Already published methods should be mentioned with references. Significant modifications of published methods and new methods should be described in detail. This section will include sub-sections. Tables & figures should be placed inside the text. Tables and figures should be presented as per their appearance in the text. It is suggested that the discussion about the tables and figures should appear in the text before the appearance of the respective tables and figures. No tables or figures should be given without discussion or reference inside the text. Tables should be explanatory enough to be understandable without any text reference. Double spacing should be maintained throughout the table, including table headings and footnotes. Table headings should be placed on the table. Footnotes should be placed below the table with superscript lowercase letters. Each figure should have a caption. The caption should be concise and typed separately, not in the figure area. Figures should be self-explanatory. Information presented in the figure should not be repeated in the table. All symbols and abbreviations used in the illustrations should be defined clearly. Figure legends should be given below the figures. Some guidelines for Medical papers: Randomized controlled trials should follow the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines (http://www.consort-statement.org). Case reports, case series, cross-sectional, and other observational studies should follow the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines (http://www.strobe-statement.org). If the detailed methods are explicitly stated in the manuscript for single case studies, STROBE may be avoided. Authors producing systematic reviews and meta-analyses should follow the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines (http://www.prisma-statement.org). Results & Discussion Results should be clearly described in a concise manner. Results for different parameters should be described under subheadings or in a separate paragraph. Table or figure numbers should be mentioned in parentheses for better understanding. The discussion should not repeat the results, but provide a detailed interpretation of data. This should interpret the significance of the findings of the work. Citations should be given in support of the findings. The results and discussion part can also be described as separate, if appropriate. Tables & Figures Tables & figures should be placed inside the text. Tables and figures should be presented as per their appearance in the text. It is suggested that the discussion about the tables and figures should appear in the text before the appearance of the respective tables and figures. No tables or figures should be given without discussion or reference inside the text. Tables should be explanatory enough to be understandable without any text reference. Double spacing should be maintained throughout the table, including table headings and footnotes. Table headings should be placed on the table. Footnotes should be placed below the table with superscript lowercase letters. Vertical rules should not be used. Each figure should have a caption. The caption should be concise and typed separately, not in the figure area. Figures should be self-explanatory. Information presented in the figure should not be repeated in the table. All symbols and abbreviations used in the illustrations should be defined clearly. Figure legends should be given below the figures. Upon submission of an article, authors are supposed to include all figures and tables in the PDF file of the manuscript. Figures and tables should not be submitted in separate files. If the article is accepted, the authors will be asked to provide the source files of the figures. Each figure should be supplied in a separate electronic file. All figures should be cited in the paper in consecutive order. Figures should be supplied in either vector art formats (Illustrator, EPS, WMF, FreeHand, CorelDraw, PowerPoint, Excel, etc.) or bitmap formats (Photoshop, TIFF, GIF, JPEG, etc.). Bitmap images should be of 300 dpi resolution at least. Guideline for Reporting P values: P is always italicized and capitalized. i) Correct expression: (P = .05). Wrong Expression: (P < .05), unless P < .001. ii) The P value should be expressed to 2 digits whether or not it is significant. If P < .01, it should be expressed to 3 digits. iii) When rounding, 3 digits is acceptable if rounding would change the significance of a value (eg, P = .049 rounded to .05). iv) Expressing P to more than 3 significant digits does not add useful information since precise P values with extreme results are sensitive to biases or departures from the statistical model. v) Reporting actual P values avoids this problem of interpretation. P values should not be listed as not significant (NS) since, for meta-analysis, the actual values are important, and not providing exact P values is a form of incomplete reporting. vi) Do not use 0 before the decimal point for statistical values P, alpha, and beta because they cannot equal 1. Conclusions This should briefly state the major findings of the study. Acknowledgments A brief acknowledgment section may be given after the conclusion section just before the references. The acknowledgments of people who provided assistance in manuscript preparation, funding for research, etc. should be listed in this section. All sources of funding should be declared as an acknowledgment. Authors should declare the role of the funding agency, if any, in the study design, collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript. If the study sponsors had no such involvement, the authors should so state. Competing Interests Declaration of ‘competing interest’ should be placed here. All authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could inappropriately (or appropriately) influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Authors’ Contributions Authors may use the following wording for this section: “ ‘Author A’ designed the study, performed the statistical analysis, wrote the protocol, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. ‘Author B’ and ‘Author C’ managed the analyses of the study. ‘Author C’ managed the literature searches…… All authors read and approved the final manuscript.” Ethical Approval This section is compulsory for medical journals. Other journals may require this section if found suitable. If human subjects are involved, informed consent, protection of privacy, and other human rights are further criteria against which the manuscript will be judged. It should provide a statement to confirm that the authors have obtained all necessary ethical approval from a suitable Institutional or State or National or International Committee. This confirms either that this study is not against the public interest, or that the release of information is allowed by legislation. All manuscripts which deal with animal subjects must be approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Ethical Committee, or an Animal Utilization Study Committee. , and this statement, and the approval number must accompany the submission. If required, the author should be ready to submit a scanned copy of the IRB or Ethical Committee Approval at any stage of publication (Pre or post-publication stage). The manuscript should contain information about any post-operative care and pain management for the animals. For manuscripts involving animal experiments, Authors may use the guidelines given by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also endorses the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Policy Statement on Geopolitical Intrusion on Editorial Decisions, as well as specific national laws where applicable. All experiments have been examined and approved by the appropriate ethics committee” All manuscripts which deal with the study of human subjects must be accompanied by Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethical Committee Approval, or the national or regional equivalent. The name of the Board or Committee giving approval and the study number assigned must accompany the submission. If required, the author should be ready to submit a scanned copy of the IRB or Ethical Committee Approval at any stage of publication (Pre or post-publication stage). For manuscripts involving human experiments, Authors may use the following wording for this section: “All authors hereby declare that all experiments have been examined and approved by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.” Reference Style Authors are responsible for ensuring that the information in each reference is complete and accurate. All references must be numbered consecutively and citations of references in the text should be identified using numbers in small brackets (e.g., “as discussed by Gaskin et al., 2005); “as discussed elsewhere (Gaskin et al., 2005; Steel et al., 1997). All references should be cited within the text; otherwise, these references will be automatically removed. References must be listed at the end of the manuscript and numbered in the order that they appear in the text. Gaskin, J. F., Zhang, D. Y., and Bon, M. C. (2005). Invasion of Lepidium draba (Brassicaceae) in the western United States: distributions and origins of chlorokplast DNA haplotypes. Molecular Ecology 14, 2331-2341. Steel RGD, Torrie JH and Dicky DA (1997). “Principles and procedures of statistics: a biometrical approach,” McGraw-Hill, New York New York, USA, pp: 400-428. Weaver, S. E., and Riley, W. R. (1982). The Biology of Canadian Weeds.: 53. Convolvulus arvensis L. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 62, 461-472. S.A.S. Institute. 2001. SAS/STAT software: Changes and enhancement through release 9.1. SAS Inst Cary NC. Soyars, C. L., Peterson, B. A., Burr, C. A., and Nimchuk, Z. L. (2018). Cutting edge genetics: CRISPR/Cas9 editing of plant genomes. Plant and Cell Physiology 59, 1608-1620. Wilson, C. J., Fennell, T., Bothmer, A., Maeder, M. L., Reyon, D., Cotta-Ramusino, C., Fernandez, C. A., Marco, E., Barrera, L. A., and Jayaram, H. (2018). Response to “Unexpected mutations after CRISPR–Cas9 editing in vivo”. Nature methods 15, 236-237. Zeng, Y., Cui, Y., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Y., Liang, M., Chen, H., Lan, J., Song, G., and Lou, J. (2018). The initiation, propagation and dynamics of CRISPR-SpyCas9 R-loop complex. Nucleic acids research 46, 350-361. Zuo, Z., and Liu, J. (2017). Structure and dynamics of Cas9 HNH domain catalytic state. Scientific reports 7, 1-13. Proofs A PDF file of proof will be sent to the corresponding author as an e-mail attachment. Authors will be asked to check any typographical or minor clerical errors in the manuscript at this stage. No other major alteration in the manuscript is allowed. Disclaimer Articles in BBASR Publishers are Open Access contents published under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. This license permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work and source are properly cited. BBASR Publishers shall not take any responsibility for the contents of articles published in the journal and all such responsibility shall lie with the author/s. The opinions, thoughts, language, and examples expressed and published in the articles are solely/entirely of the author/s and BBASR Publishers may not agree with such opinions in part or in full. It is not necessary that both Editors and Editorial Board are satisfied by the article/s. The responsibility of the matter of the article is entirely of the author. Scientific knowledge is ever-changing. As new research and experiences broaden our knowledge, old concepts may be required to be looked into afresh. The editors herein have consulted sources believed to be reliable in their efforts to accept the information in the articles that is complete and in accord with the standards accepted at the time of publication. In view of the possibility of human error by the editors or the publisher, nor any other who has been involved in the process and preparation of the work warrants that the information contained herein in every aspect is accurate or complete, and they are not responsible for any errors or omissions or the results obtained from the use of such information. Readers are advised to confirm the information contained herein with other sources. License Policies Articles in BBASR are Open Access contents published under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. This license permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work and source are properly cited. Advertising policy All advertisements and commercially sponsored publications are independent from editorial decisions. BBASR does not endorse any product or service marked as an advertisement or promoted by a sponsor in BBASR publications. Editorial content is not compromised by commercial or financial interests, or by any specific arrangements with advertising clients or sponsors. BBASR reserves the right to decline any type of advertising that is damaging to the brand of BBASR or is inappropriate to the content held on the BBASR network. BBASR will not accept advertising for products or services known to be harmful to health (e.g. tobacco and alcohol products). Advertisements may not be deceptive or misleading, and must be verifiable. Advertisements should clearly identify the advertiser and the product or service being offered. Exaggerated or extravagantly worded copy will not be allowed. Advertisements will not be accepted if they appear to be indecent or offensive in either text or artwork, or if they relate to content of a personal, racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, or religious nature. Once an advertisement has been deployed online, it will be withdrawn from the journal site at any time if the Editor(s)-in-Chief or Publisher request its removal. BBASR will not allow any treatment-specific or drug-specific campaign to be targeted to a specific article(s) or on any page where content relates to the product(s) being advertised. (Advertisers may not link to articles using keywords; they may not target advertising for a specific product on the condition that it appear in the same location and at the same time as a specific article mentioning that product and they may not refer to an article published at the same time as the advertisement appears). All advertisements for drug-specific campaigns must comply with the relevant European and UK legislation that regulates advertising. Information about the latest legislation, as well as good practice guidelines, can be found on the MHRA website. Advertisers should make available to BBASR the marketing authorization and summary of product characteristics when submitting their advertisement. In the case of drug advertisements, the full generic name of each active ingredient should appear. Each page of an advertisement for a prescription-only medicine should be clearly labeled as intended for health professionals. All advertisements for drug specific campaigns should encourage correct and rational use and must not be misleading. Advertisements and editorial content must be clearly distinguishable. BBASR will not publish “advertorial” content, and sponsored supplements must be clearly indicated as such. If a supplement did not undergo peer review or underwent a peer review-process different from the rest of the journal that should be explicitly stated. Editorial decisions will not be influenced by current or potential sponsors and advertisers, and will not be influenced by marketing decisions. Advertisers and sponsors have no control or influence over the results of searches a user may conduct on the website by keyword or search topic. If any advert is requested outside of BBASR standard advertising positions then a request should be made to editorial who will respond with a full and final decision within two business days. Information about complaints concerning advertisements will be included in the Advertisements page. We partner with third-party advertising companies to serve ads and/or collect certain information when you visit our website. These companies may use cookies or web beacons to collect non-personally identifiable information [not including your name, address, email address or telephone number] during your visit to this website to help show advertisements on other websites also likely to be of interest to you. To learn more about this “behavioral advertising” practice or to opt-out of this use of your anonymous information. Advertising complaints policy Please send any complaints about advertising to: editor@bbasr.com Advertising Standards Authority(ASA) The Advertising Standards Authority investigates complaints about published medicines advertisements and ensures compliance with the British Codes of Advertising and Sales Promotion which include a section on medicines advertising. It also monitors advertising in the press, direct marketing and sales promotion and on the Internet. Advertisements directed at health professionals are exempt from the British Codes of Advertising and Sales Promotion. The Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority (PMCPA) Complaints about the advertising of medicines supplied on prescription are considered by the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority under the ABPI Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry. Complaints which are made under the Code about promotional activities and promotional material are considered by the Code of Practice Panel, the decisions of which can be appealed to the Code of Practice Appeal Board. Reports on completed cases are published quarterly in the Code of Practice Review. Open Access Policies BBASR provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. BBASR is an “open access” journal that gives online access, free of charge, and other access barriers. BBASR supports the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing which defines an open access journal as one which grants a "free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit, and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship" and from which every article is "deposited immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository". As an open-access publication model, BBASR enables the free-of-cost dissemination of refereed research to the global community. BBASR is committed to achieving the highest quality of scientific research to drive progress in academic research with innovation. BBASR partially levies article-publishing charges to cover the cost of the publication. Authors publishing with BBASR retains the copyright to their work allowing the articles to be re-used and re-distributed without restriction, as long as the original work is correctly cited. BBASR supports the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing. BBASR has been helping students, scholars, researchers, professionals, scientific societies, and academic institutions to achieve their goals in an ever-changing world. By partnering with learned institutions and societies, BBASR support researchers to communicate discoveries that make a difference. Author Copyright Policies Authors retain the copyright of all open access articles published by BBASR. The users may use, reproduce, disseminate or display the article(s) provided that the author(s) are attributed as the original creators and that the reuse is restricted to non-commercial purposes, i.e., research or other educational use. Authors are encouraged to familiarise themselves with the various creative commons licenses. Readers are advised to consult the licensing information embedded in each published work to ensure that they are familiar with the terms of use that apply. Article Withdrawal Policy It is a general principle of scholarly communication that the Chief Editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal shall be published. In making this decision the editor is guided by policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. An outcome of this principle is the importance of the scholarly archive as a permanent, historic record of the transactions of scholarship. Articles that have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as far as is possible. However, very occasionally circumstances may arise where an article is published that must later be retracted or even removed. Such actions must not be undertaken lightly and can only occur under exceptional circumstances. This policy has been designed to address these concerns and to take into account current best practice in the scholarly and library communities. As standards evolve and change, we will revisit this issue and welcome the input of scholarly and library communities. We believe these issues require international standards and we will be active in lobbying various information bodies to establish international standards and best practices that the publishing and information industries can adopt. Article Withdrawal Only used for Articles in Press which represent early versions of articles and sometimes contain errors, or may have been accidentally submitted twice. Occasionally, but less frequently, the articles may represent infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Articles in Press (articles that have been accepted for publication but which have not been formally published and will not yet have the complete volume/issue/page information) that include errors, or are discovered to be accidental duplicates of other published article(s), or are determined to violate our journal publishing ethics guidelines in the view of the editors (such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like), may be “Withdrawn” from BBASR. Withdrawn means that the article content (PDF) is removed and replaced with a PDF simply stating that the article has been withdrawn according to the BBASR Policy on Article in Press Withdrawal with a link to the current policy document. Article Retraction Infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Occasionally a retraction will be used in case of failing to reproduce the results or correct errors in submission or publication. The retraction of an article by its authors or the editor under the advice of members of the scholarly community has long been an occasional feature of the learned world. Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this best practice is adopted for article retraction by BBASR: A retraction note titled “Retraction: [article title]” signed by the authors and/or the editor is published in the paginated part of a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list. In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article. The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note. It is to this screen that the link resolves; the reader can then proceed to the article itself. The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the .pdf indicating on each page that it is “retracted.” Article Removal: Legal limitations In an extremely limited number of cases, it may be necessary to remove an article from the online database. This will only occur where the article is clearly defamatory, or infringes others’ legal rights, or where the article is, or we have good reason to expect it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk. In these circumstances, while the metadata (Title and Authors) will be retained, the text will be replaced with a screen indicating the article has been removed for legal reasons. Article Replacement In cases where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk, the authors of the original article may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. In these circumstances the procedures for retraction will be followed with the difference that the database retraction notice will publish a link to the corrected re-published article and a history of the document. Review Policy The journal follows a strict double blindfold review policy to ensure neutral evaluation. During this review process identity of both, the authors and reviewers are kept hidden to ensure an unbiased evaluation. All manuscripts are subject to peer review and are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. Submissions will be considered by an editor and “if not rejected right away” by peer-reviewers. High-quality manuscripts are peer-reviewed by a minimum of two peers in the same field. The reviewers submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor: Publish “As it is” Consider after Minor Changes Consider after Major Changes Reject: Manuscript is flawed. When all reviewers have submitted their reports, the Editor can make one of the following editorial recommendations: Publish “As it is” Consider after Minor Changes Consider after Major Changes Reject If the Editor recommends “Publish “As it is”,” the manuscript is accepted for publication. If the Editor recommends “Consider after Minor Changes,” the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested. The Editor reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted. If the Editor recommends “Consider after Major Changes,” the recommendation is communicated to the authors. The authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the changes recommended by the reviewers and to submit their revised manuscripts in a timely manner. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the Editor can then make an editorial recommendation which can be “Publish “As it is”,” “Consider after Minor Changes,” or “Reject.” If the Editor recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Also, if the majority of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. The editorial workflow gives the Editors the authority to reject any manuscript because of the inappropriateness of its subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of its results. The Editor cannot assign himself/herself as an external reviewer of the manuscript. This is to ensure a high-quality, fair, and unbiased peer-review process of every manuscript submitted to the journal, since any manuscript must be recommended by one or more (usually two or more) external reviewers along with the Editor in charge of the manuscript in order for it to be accepted for publication in the journal. This journal believes that no manuscript should be rejected only on the basis of ‘lack of Novelty’, provided the manuscript is sufficiently robust and technically sound. Too often a journal’s decision to publish a paper is dominated by what the Editor/reviewer thinks is interesting and will gain greater readership – both of which are subjective judgments and lead to decisions that are frustrating and delay the publication. This journal will rigorously peer-review your submissions and publish all papers that are judged to be technically sound. Peer review All research articles, and most other article types, published in BBASR journals undergo thorough peer review. This usually involves review by two independent peer reviewers. Individual journals may differ in their peer review processes; for example, some journals operate an open and others a closed peer review system. For an individual journal’s peer review policy, please see the journal's 'About' page. Peer review policy All submissions to BBASR journals are assessed by an Editor, who will decide whether they are suitable for peer review. Where an Editor is on the author list or has any other competing interest regarding a specific manuscript, another member of the Editorial Board will be assigned to assume responsibility for overseeing peer review. Submissions felt to be suitable for consideration will be sent for peer review by appropriate independent experts identified by the Handling Editor. Editors will make a decision based on the reviewers’ reports and authors are sent these reports along with the editorial decision on their manuscript. Authors should note that even in light of one positive report, concerns raised by another reviewer may fundamentally undermine the study and result in the manuscript being rejected. Open peer review For journals operating an open peer review process, the reviewers' names are included on the peer review reports. In addition, if the manuscript is published, the named reports are published online alongside the article. On rare occasions, information from the pre-publication history may not be available for a specific article. Authors will be aware of the reviewers’ names during the peer review process and vice versa. However, there should not be direct correspondence between authors and reviewers. Any correspondence between the authors and the reviewers during or after the review process should be made through the journal Editors. Transparent peer review For journals operating a transparent peer review process, if the manuscript is published, the peer review reports are published online alongside the article. The name of the reviewer is not published. On rare occasions, information from the pre-publication history may not be available for a specific article. Closed peer review Most journals operate a closed peer review process. Reviewers will be treated anonymously and the pre-publication history of each article will not be made available online. Peer reviewers Authors may suggest potential reviewers if they wish; however, whether or not to consider these reviewers is at the Editor's discretion. Authors should not suggest recent collaborators or colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves. Authors who wish to suggest peer reviewers can do so in the cover letter and should provide institutional email addresses where possible, or information which will help the Editor to verify the identity of the reviewer (for example an ORCID or Scopus ID). Authors may request exclusion of individuals as peer reviewers, but they should explain the reasons in their cover letter on submission. Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this may hinder the peer review process. Please note that the Editor may choose to invite excluded peer reviewers. Intentionally falsifying information, for example, suggesting reviewers with a false name or email address, will result in rejection of the manuscript and may lead to further investigation in line with our misconduct policy. Portability of peer review Within BBASR To support efficient and thorough peer review, we aim to reduce the number of times a manuscript is re-reviewed after rejection from a BBASR journal, thereby speeding up the publication process and reducing the burden on peer reviewers. If a manuscript does not reach the interest criteria of a given BBASR journal, but is sound and in scope for another BBASR journal, we offer authors the option to transfer the manuscript together with the reviewer reports to the other journal. Editors may share manuscripts with Editors of other BBASR journals before contacting authors in order to assess suitability for transfer to another journal. Authors who do not wish their manuscript to be shared with other BBASR journals should indicate this in their cover letter on submission. Reviewers who do not wish us to share their report with another BBASR journal should indicate this in the confidential section of their report. Transfer of a manuscript does not imply that it will be automatically accepted by the receiving journal, and on some occasions the Editor of the receiving journal may need to conduct their own peer review and/or reject the manuscript if it is not suitable. If a manuscript is transferred to, and published in, a journal with open peer review, we will, wherever possible, make the reviewers' reports available through the pre-publication history of the article (see ‘Open peer review’ above). On some occasions this will not be possible; for example, when the manuscript has been peer reviewed in a closed peer review journal first. Although we will ask reviewers to make their reports available, reviewers providing reports for closed peer review journals will sometimes prefer to maintain this confidentiality and their anonymity. Where a manuscript was initially reviewed in an open peer review journal and is subsequently transferred to a closed peer review journal and published, the reviews will not be published alongside the article. Between BBASR and other publishers/third parties BBASR supports innovations in peer review which can improve efficiency and save peer reviewers’ time and effort. Some BBASR journals will consider manuscripts from other publishers, for example journals in the Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium and from journals in the eLife consortium. We are also willing to consider manuscripts which have been reviewed by third parties. However, submission of a manuscript with reviewer reports from another journal or an independent review service does not imply that it will be automatically accepted by the receiving journal and additional peer review may be required. Confidentiality Editors will treat all manuscripts submitted to all BBASR journals in confidence. BBASR adheres to COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewers are therefore required to respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond the information released by the journal. If reviewers wish to involve a colleague in the review process they should first obtain permission from the journal. The Editor should be informed of the names of any individuals who assisted in the review process when the report is returned. BBASR will not share manuscripts with third parties outside of BBASR except in cases of suspected misconduct. See our Misconduct policy for further information. Manuscripts may be shared with other Editors at BBASR, unless authors indicate on submission that they do not wish for their manuscript to be passed on beyond the journal they submitted to. See portability of peer review for more information. BBASR regularly undertakes research projects designed to help improve processes for authors, reviewers and editors, and how science is communicated in our journals. Participation in this research will not affect the editorial review of manuscripts, the consideration given to reviewer reports by Editors or the confidentiality of the submission and review process. Depending on the nature of the research project we may seek ethical approval and may need to contact you for consent to participate. Research may be undertaken retrospectively after the publication of manuscripts; in all cases details of manuscripts will be kept confidential. Publication Ethics Statement BBASR Publishers is following the publication guidelines given by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also endorses the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Policy Statement on Geopolitical Intrusion on Editorial Decisions. BBASR Publishers also endorses the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Submission of a manuscript to a BBASR Publishers journals implies that all authors have read and agreed to its content and that the manuscript conforms to the journal’s policies. BBASR Publishers remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Ethics approval Research involving human participants, human material, or human data, must have been performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing this, including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate, must appear in all manuscripts reporting such research. If a study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this should also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee that granted the exemption). Further information and documentation to support this should be made available to the Editor on request. Manuscripts may be rejected if the Editor considers that the research has not been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework. If a study has not been granted ethics committee approval prior to commencing, retrospective ethics approval usually cannot be obtained and it may not be possible to consider the manuscript for peer review. The decision on whether to proceed to peer review in such cases is at the chief Editor's discretion. Similarity-Plagiarism Policy It is the author(s)' responsibility to ascertain that s/he has submitted an entirely original work, giving due credit, by virtue of proper citations, to the works and/or words of others where they have been used. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable by BBASR. Material quoted verbatim from the author(s)' previously published work or other sources must be placed in quotation marks and be properly cited. In case the manuscript has a similarity index of more than 19%, it will either be rejected or left at the discretion of the Editorial Board for the purposes of a conditional acceptance. Author declaration Conflict of Interest Potential conflict of interest exists: We wish to draw the attention of the Editor to the following facts, which may be considered as potential conflicts of interest, and to significant financial contributions to this work: The nature of potential conflict of interest is described below: No conflict of interest exists. We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome. Funding Funding was received for this work. All of the sources of funding for the work described in this publication are acknowledged below: [List funding sources and their role in study design, data analysis, and result interpretation] No funding was received for this work. Intellectual Property We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property. In so doing we confirm that we have followed the regulations of our institutions concerning intellectual property. Research Ethics We further confirm that any aspect of the work covered in this manuscript that has involved human patients has been conducted with the ethical approval of all relevant bodies and that such approvals are acknowledged within the manuscript. IRB approval was obtained (required for studies and series of 3 or more cases) Written consent to publish potentially identifying information, such as details or the case and photographs, was obtained from the patient(s) or their legal guardian(s). Authorship The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends that authorship be based on the following four criteria: Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND Final approval of the version to be published; AND Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. For more information on authorship, please see http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html#two. All listed authors meet the ICMJE criteria. We attest that all authors contributed significantly to the creation of this manuscript, each having fulfilled criteria as established by the ICMJE. One or more listed authors do(es) not meet the ICMJE criteria. We believe these individuals should be listed as authors because: [Please elaborate] We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all named authors. We confirm that the order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all named authors. Contact with the Editorial Office The Corresponding Author declared on the title page of the manuscript. This author submitted this manuscript using his/her account in OJS. We understand that this Corresponding Author is the sole contact for the Editorial process (including direct communications with the office). He/she is responsible for communicating with the other authors about progress, submissions of revisions and final approval of proofs. We confirm that the email address shown below is accessible by the Corresponding Author, is the address to which Corresponding Author’s OJS account is linked, and has been configured to accept email from the editorial office of BBASR: We understand that this author is the sole contact for the Editorial process (including direct communications with the office). He/she is responsible for communicating with the other authors, including the Corresponding Author, about progress, submissions of revisions and final approval of proofs. Acknowledgement The authors should give acknowedgement section if applicable. Data Availability statement The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS] • The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. • All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files]. • The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due [REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. • The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party name] but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of [third party name]. Ethics approval and consent to participate Applicable or Not applicable Consent for publication Applicable or Not applicable Misconduct BBASR takes seriously all allegations of potential misconduct. As members of COPE, all BBASR journals will follow the COPE guidelines outlining how to deal with cases of suspected misconduct. In cases of suspected research or publication misconduct, it may be necessary for the Editor to contact and share manuscripts with third parties, for example, author(s)’ institution(s) and ethics committee(s). BBASR may also seek advice from COPE and discuss anonymized cases in the COPE Forum. The editor may consult BBASR Publishers’s Research Integrity Group. A notice of suspected transgression of ethical standards in the peer review system may be included as part of the author’s and article’s bibliographic record. Research misconduct All research involving humans (including human data and human material) and animals must have been carried out within an appropriate ethical framework (see our Ethics policy for further information). If there is suspicion that research has not taken place within an appropriate ethical framework, the Editor may reject a manuscript and may inform third parties, for example, author(s)’ institution(s) and ethics committee(s). In cases of proven research misconduct involving published articles, or where the scientific integrity of the article is significantly undermined, articles may be retracted. See our Retraction policy for further information. Data falsification and fabrication Data falsification is manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images, removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc. Data fabrication means the making up of research findings. Any questions regarding data integrity raised during or after the peer review process will be referred to the Editor. The Editor may request (anonymised) underlying study data from the author(s) for inspection or verification. If the original data cannot be produced, the manuscript may be rejected or, in the case of a published article, retracted. Cases of suspected misconduct will be reported to the author(s)’ institution(s). Publication misconduct As members of COPE, all BBASR journals will follow the COPE guidelines outlining how to deal with cases of potential publication misconduct. Plagiarism BBASR is a member of CrossCheck’s plagiarism detection initiative and uses plagiarism detection software. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed. Corrections and retractions Rarely, it may be necessary for BBASR to publish corrections to, or retractions of, articles published in its journals, so as to maintain the integrity of the academic record. In line with BBASR’s Permanency policy, corrections to, or retractions of, published articles will be made by publishing a Correction or a Retraction note bidirectionally linked to the original article. Any alterations to the original article will be described in the note. The original article remains in the public domain and the subsequent Correction or Retraction will be widely indexed. In the exceptional event that material is considered to infringe certain rights or is defamatory, we may have to remove that material from our site and archive sites. Authors, readers or organizations who become aware of errors or ethics issues in a published article are encouraged to contact the individual journal in the first instance via the contact details available on the journal website. All reports will be considered by the Editors; additional expert advice may be sought when deciding on the most appropriate course of action. The BBASR Publishers Research Integrity Group provides support to Editors in addressing publication ethics issues in a COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)-compliant manner. Corrections Changes to published articles that affect the interpretation and conclusion of the article, but do not fully invalidate the article, will, at the Editor(s)’ discretion, be corrected via publication of a Correction that is indexed and bidirectionally linked to the original article. For authors who’ve changed their name and wish to correct it on their published works, please see SNCS Contact Form: Inclusive Name Change Policy : BBASR Publishers Support. Retractions On rare occasions, when the interpretation or conclusion of an article is substantially undermined, it may be necessary for published articles to be retracted. BBASR will follow the COPE guidelines in such cases. Retraction notices are indexed and bidirectionally linked to the original article. The original article is watermarked as retracted and the title is amended with the prefix “Retracted article:” Editorial Expressions of Concern When an Editor becomes aware of serious concerns regarding interpretation or conclusion of a published article, they may choose to publish a statement alerting the readership. Scenarios in which Editorial Expressions of Concern may be published include prolonged investigations of very complex cases and when the concerns may have a significant and immediate impact on public health or public policy. An Editorial Expression of Concern may be superseded by a subsequent Correction or Retraction, but will remain part of the permanent published record. Removal of published content In exceptional circumstances, BBASR Publishers reserves the right to remove an article, chapter, book or other content from BBASR Publishers’s online platforms. Such action may be taken when (i) BBASR Publishers has been advised that content is defamatory, infringes a third party’s intellectual property right, right to privacy, or other legal right, or is otherwise unlawful; (ii) a court or government order has been issued, or is likely to be issued, requiring removal of such content; (iii) content, if acted upon, would pose an immediate and serious risk to health. Removal may be temporary or permanent. Bibliographic metadata (e.g. title and authors) will be retained, and will be accompanied by a statement explaining why the content has been removed. Appeals and complaints Appeal against a rejection If you wish to ask the Editor or Editorial Board to reconsider a rejection of a manuscript, you should, in the first instance, contact the Editor through the instructions on the journal website. These are considered appeals, which, by policy, must take second place to the normal workload. In practice, this means that decisions on appeals often take several weeks. Only one appeal is permitted for each manuscript. Final decisions on appeals will be made by the Editorial Board Member handling the paper or the Editor. In general, an appeal against a rejection decision on a manuscript will only be considered if: the authors can demonstrate that an error that determined the final decision has been made - by a referee or the Editors - during review or if important additional data can be provided or if a convincing case of bias in the process can be demonstrated Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision should submit a formal letter of appeal to the journal by contacting the journal editorial office. Include the manuscript tracking number in the email subject line and the appeal letter. Most BBASR journals use an appeal and will not consider an appeal without it. If appeals are successful, then authors will be given instructions on how to proceed. If an appeal merits further consideration, the Editor may send the authors' response and the revised paper out for further peer review. For all other feedback and complaints, please check individual journal’s ‘About’ pages for more information. Complaints Complaints about our processes or about publication ethics will in the first instance be handled by the Editor responsible for the journal. If the Editor is the subject of the complaint, please approach the editorial and publishing management team by email to editor@bbasr.com. For complaints about processes, such as time taken for review, the Editor will review and respond to the complainant's concerns. This feedback will be provided to relevant stakeholders to guide improvements to processes and procedures. For complaints about publication ethics or scientific content, the Editor will follow guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics as by COPE. The Editor may request advice from the BBASR Publishers Research Integrity Group on difficult or complicated cases. The Editor then decides on a course of action and provides feedback to the complainant. If the complainant remains dissatisfied with the handling of their complaint, it will be escalated to the journal's editorial and publishing management team for investigation. If no publishing contact is identified send the query to editor@bbasr.com Collections and Special Issues All manuscripts submitted to BBASR Journal Collections or Special Issues are assessed according to the journal’s standard editorial criteria and are subject to all of the standard Editorial Policies, including the Competing Interests policy. The content of the submission will also be assessed to ensure it lies within the scope of the Collection or Special Issue. All submissions that meet the journal’s criteria for peer review will undergo the journal’s standard peer review process. Please visit the journal’s website for information on the review process used. The peer review of any submissions for which the Editors of the Collection or Special Issue, have competing interests is handled by another Editor, who has no competing interests, to ensure the evaluation of these submissions is objective.