Ethical issues


The Editorial Committee of the Bulletin de la Dialyse à Domicile (BDD) is committed to maintaining a high level of integrity on published content. It has a conflict of interest policy in place and requires respect of the international standards of research involving the participation of humans and / or animals and informed consent.
The BDD commits itself to respect the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning the code of conduct and the guidelines of good practice. In case of conflict with authors ofr ethical issue, we follow the decision tree published on Elsevier site at URL
The BDD uses plagiarism detection software to check the submissions it receives.

We also use CrossRef Similary check with Inthenticate

 Retraction :

In case of a published paper demonstrating error, plagiarism, misconduct etc..we apply the procedure of COPE :
Responsibilities of the editors

 Publication Decision: The publisher decides which of the submitted articles will be forwarded to the review process and subsequently published. Gender, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religious beliefs, citizenship and the author's policy will not influence the publisher's assessment. The publication decision is based on the compliance of the article with the purpose of the journal and the recommendations of the peer review.
Obligation of confidentiality: the publisher and the editorial team must not disclose any information on documents submitted to persons other than the corresponding author, and the reviewers.

  Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest before agreeing to review an article. Unpublished articles when submitting an article will not be used by the publisher or members of the editorial board.
Responsibilities of the reviewers

  Contributing to editorial decisions: The double-blind peer review process helps the publisher and the editorial committee make editorial decisions. Authors have the opportunity to improve their submissions using reviewers’s comments.

  Confidentiality: All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential data. Disclosure of any material is prohibited.

  Objectivity: reviewers must evaluate objectively. Personal questions about the author should not influence the review decision.

 Conflict of interest: Reveiwers are required to disclose any conflict of interest regarding a particular manuscript. This includes any link with the authors, companies and institutions associated with the submission. Any information received during the peer review should not be used for personal purposes.

Duties of authors

 Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication: Articles containing the same search should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals is unethical and unacceptable for publication. Articles previously published elsewhere as copyrighted material should not be submitted. In addition, documents under examination must not be submitted to other copyrighted publications. By submitting a manuscript, the author (s) retain the rights to the document. In the event of publication, the author (s) accept the use of a CC-BY license, which allows others to copy and distribute the work.

In case fo misconduct

In the event of a breach of ethical rules, of plagiarism, of the use of fabricated data, the editorial committee will ask the author to retract and publish the reasons. In case of refusal by the author, the editorial committee will decide itself on the retraction of the article after having informed the author.
In the event of an author's complaint, or of a dispute, the editor will seek any means of reaching an agreement by following the international procedures recommended by COPE. The contact person will be the official representative of the RDPLF or the editor-in-chief, as stipulated in the about section.

Complaint process :

If a reader or an author wishes to file a complaint, he can send it to the RDPLF secretariat (secretary @ who will forward it to the legal representative of the association which publishes the journal, or to its president. He will receive a response within 2 or 3 working days to examine the reasons and possible solutions. In the event of a persistent disagreement, we will follow the process recommended by COPE.