For Authors:
1. Provide accurate information in accordance with ethics and legal principles. Report data without distortion or manipulation, adhering to the format specified in the guidelines for authors. Important details such as research methods, research results, and issues of conflict of interest, as well as sources of research funding, must be clearly specified.
2. Have the document reviewed and approved by the ethics committee of the research institution.
3. The research work should not have been published in any journal, and there should be no concurrent or subsequent submissions for publication while the paper is under review or after it has been accepted by a journal.
4. The content of the report must include proper citations and references. Do not engage in plagiarism or misrepresentation of others' work, and include proper citations in the reference section at the end of the article.
5. All authors should actively contribute to the research. Each author should share responsibility for the data presented in the published report.
6. If the work is a clinical trial, it must be registered in a clinical trial registry.
7. If applicable, include sections on sources of funding and conflicts of interest.

For Reviewers:
1. Reviewers are responsible for evaluating assigned works that align with their expertise. The assessment should focus on the importance of the article, the benefits it provides, and the accuracy and appropriateness of its content. All information encountered during the review process is considered confidential and cannot be disclosed to the public or unrelated individuals.
2. Reviewers should assess the work impartially, without any conflicting interests or personal bias. They should not make judgments based on personal opinions, differences in nationality, or religion. However, if there are circumstances that could lead to a conflict of interest, reviewers should promptly inform the journal's editorial team and decline the review for the sake of fairness.
3. Provide recommendations for improving the article, including citing relevant literature or internationally accepted medical guidelines related to the work, even if the authors did not reference them.
4. Check for any instances of plagiarism or unauthorized copying of others' work. If plagiarism is detected, immediately report it to the journal's editorial team.

For Editors:
1. Oversee, improve, and correct publication errors while ensuring the quality of the journal aligns with its objectives. Evaluate articles based on their novelty (Originality), quality, and the potential impact of the research.
2. Verify the accuracy of authors' work and make decisions regarding publication or withdrawal of articles after the peer review process. Acceptance for publication should consider the significance of the work, ensuring no conflicting interests exist, and that it is a novel contribution not previously published elsewhere.
3. If there are concerns about an article, contact the authors for clarification or additional supporting evidence immediately. Emphasize the importance of a fair and open dialogue in addressing various aspects of the work.
4. Use reliable plagiarism detection software to check for potential plagiarism in submitted articles. In case of detection, clearly outline the process for addressing the issue and contact the authors for clarification promptly.
5. Keep the information of both authors and reviewers confidential throughout the review process, particularly to safeguard intellectual property from business interests.