1) ABOUT (Journal information)
I) ABOUT (Journal information) II) editorial policies III) submission
I ABOUT (Journal information)
NEMESIS – full open access journal . Editor-in-Chief: Prof Raphael Olszewski, DDS, MD, PhD, DrSc, Department of oral and maxillofacial surgery, Cliniques universitaires saint Luc, UCLouvain, Belgium (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Editorial board: Prof Etienne Danse, MD,PhD, Department of medical imaging, Cliniques universitaires saint Luc, UCLouvain, Belgium (email@example.com); Prof Joel Ferri, MD,PhD, Department of oral and maxillofacial surgery, Université Lille II, France (firstname.lastname@example.org), Dr Michèle Magremanne, MD, Department of oral and maxillofacial surgery, Cliniques universitaires saint Luc, UCLouvain, Belgium (email@example.com)
Currently most of the scientific journals accept to publish only positive effects of experimental and clinical research. Only successful studies have the right to be published and cited.
However, positive effects in research are frequently achieved after years of negative results. The negative results should also be accessible for scientific community as they represent the main source of progress, of inspiration, and of hope.
2. Aim and scope
Nemesis (Negative Effects in MEdical ScIenceS) is free, open-access journal (there are not charges for authors neither for readers). With post-publishing open evaluation peer-review, using creative common license CC-BY-SA. Nemesis accepts for publication: original contribution in the field of oral and craniomaxillofacial surgery and pathology, three-dimensional dentomaxillofacial imaging, and physical anthropology and archeology around the head. Some work previously presented in scientific blogs and conferences may be considered for publications.
The first scope of Nemesis is to accept studies providing with negative results obtained after applying a correct methodology.
Nemesis journal accepts also studies describing complications and their management, the worst cases, diagnostic and treatment failures, devices and implants failures, orphan diseases, neglected areas of research related to our journal scope, drugs adverse effects, technical problems, relapse and failures in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Finally, the role of Nemesis is to share the knowledge, and the journal accepts shorts radiological case reports on normal variants of radiological anatomy from skull, face, head and neck areas.
Nemesis publishes articles in two languages: English and French with an abstract in English.
Nemesis journal is continuously improving to guarantee the readers and the authors the best quality. Nemesis journal is following the guidelines of ICMJE (International Committee of medical journal editors; www.icmje.org/) (http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf).
Nemesis is fully supporting the concept of open science, we would like to shape new way of publishing scientific results. We encourage our readers to join us in the scientific community; we would like to publish not only results, but also share knowledge and ideas. The idea is to share and make your research open at the very early stage, e.g. by posting with us a concept note, conference presentation, partial results. We are ready to enable space for sharing research.
Research published in Nemesis journal must have been conducted to the highest ethical standards. We reserve the right to reject any submission that does not meet these standards. Approval from the relevant body is required for studies involving: Humans (live or tissue), including studies that are observational, survey-based, or include any personal data.
We adhere to its Code of Conduct (https://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct) and to its Best Practice Guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines). Authors are expected to comply with best practices in publication ethics, specifically regarding authorship, dual publication, plagiarism, figure manipulation, and any competing interests.
4. Open evaluation external peer-review process
A true scientific peer-review starts after publication of the article. Therefore, Nemesis journal applies the concept of a full post-publishing open-evaluation peer-review. Each submission to Nemesis journal passes through a rigorous quality control process before receiving a first decision. The initial in-house quality control deals with issues such as: 1) Compliance with the aim and scope of Nemesis journal, 2) Compliance with the instructions for authors (ORCID number for first and/or equivalent author and/or corresponding author, use of a correct template, compliance with styles, and references, language correctness), 3) Compliance with ethics in medical publication (ethical committee approval if needed, competing interests disclosure); 4) Check of article with anti-plagiarism software Compilatio; 5) Signing of copyright license CC-BY-SA 4.0 by corresponding author.
Submissions may be returned to authors for queries. Then, the submission is published as version n°1. All readers can apply for a open-evaluation peer-review of any published submission in Nemesis journal. An open-evaluation peer-review is also considered as a publication itself and must follow specific instructions and must use a open-evaluation template form. An open-evaluation peer-review cannot be anonymous as it will receive indexation, pagination, archiving and Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number. Each received open-evaluation peer-review will be checked by editorial team for compliance with Nemesis journal scope, for editorial policies, for ORCID ID, and for competing interests. The open-evaluation peer-reviewer cannot be any author or co-author of present or of any previous articles written by the same authors. The open-evaluation peer-reviewer must be at least the first author of at minimum one article in the area of oral and maxillofacial surgery with abstract accessible on PubMed or published in any open access journal related to oral and maxillofacial surgery belonging to Directory of open access journals (DOAJ). An open-evaluation peer-review must be polite, and bring added-value for the article or for the discussed topic. We can accept only one open-evaluation peer-review from the same reviewer for a single article. Each further version of a single initial article can be again open evaluated once by the initial open-evaluation peer-reviewer. The time for sending an open-evaluation peer-review for any published article is not limited. At any time in the future, the authors may submit a new version of their initial article, called version n°2, n°3, etc. All versions of the same article together with all related open-evaluation peer-reviews belonging to these versions will be fully and freely accessible for all readers of Nemesis journal. Open-evaluation process guarantees a transparent peer-review of the author’s article. In Nemesis journal the reviewer is truly scientifically acknowledged for his/her intellectual work by a formal publication and archiving of his/her open-evaluation peer-review. The learning of medical reviewing is also made possible with this type of open evaluation system.
4.1 In-house quality control
New submission go through an in-house quality control to ensure adherence to our policies and requirements, including: 1) Relationship with Aims and scopes of Nemesis journal; 2) Correct use of instructions for authors (Author names, affiliations, and emails, ORCID Id provided by the first author, correct template use, figures and tables formatting, language correctness.); 3) Ethical requirements for human experimentation; 4) Patient informal consent; 5) Financial disclosures; 6) Competing interests; 7) Checking the manuscript with anti-plagiarism software Compilatio, 6) Signature of creative common license CC-By-SA by the corresponding author.
4.2 Indexing and archiving
All published articles and open-evaluation peer-reviews articles will be deposited in Université catholique de Louvain university library depository system.
If you have any question at any stage please email us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Authors may submit a formal appeal for rejected submissions. Appeal requests must be made in writing to email address email@example.com with the word “appeal” in the subject line.
4.5 Guidelines for reviewers in open-evaluation peer-review system
All readers can access all content of the Nemesis journal (full open access) without registration.
All reader which want to perform an open-evaluation peer-review needs to register and log in through the Nemesis webpage and provide with current institutional or private practice affiliation, current professional email, ORCID number, and competing statement. Open-evaluation peer-reviewing reader is called “active reader”. The open-evaluation peer-review is NOT anonymous and needs to use a open-evaluation template document to fill in. Tables and figures are allowed. There is no limitation for words, pages, figures, tables in open-evaluation peer-review article. Open-evaluation peer-review articles are free of charges.
4.6 Competing interests
You should not open evaluate and peer-review an article if you have a potential competing interest, including the following: 1) Prior or current collaborations with the author(s), 2) You are a direct competitor, 3) You may have a known history of antipathy with the author(s), 4) You might profit financially from the work. When submitting your open-evaluation peer-review, you must indicate whether or not you have any competing interests.
Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium
6. Article submission
6.1 Is the author list confirmed?
Do you have the following information for all authors listed on the manuscript: 1) Full names, including initials if using, 2) All academic titles, 3) Current professional affiliations, 4) Email address, 5) Any potential competing interests, 6) Funding information, 7) Author contributions: Are all authors aware of the submission? Is the order of authors confirmed? Does the corresponding author and first equivalent authors have an ORCID iD?
6.2 Have your read the license agreement?
Nemesis journal applies the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-SA 4.0) license to works we publish. You must be prepared as corresponding author to sign the license agreement on behalf of all the authors, and send the signed license to the Editor in Chief.
6.3 Can you access the submission system?
All manuscripts (articles and open-evaluation peer-reviews) must be submitted in the online submission system. If you are a new user, click “Register Now” to create an account. If you are having trouble accessing an existing account, click “Login Help” or email firstname.lastname@example.org.
7. No publication fees
Nemesis journal is independent from editorial Majors of medical scientific publication. Nemesis journal receives support from Université catholique de Louvain, and adheres to open science initiative. Therefore, Nemesis journal publish articles for free without any author publication charges. There are no charges when authors submit further revised versions of the initial article. There are no charges on open-evaluation peer-review articles related to primary articles. There are no charges on correspondence with Editor-in-Chief. There are no charges based on color, length, figures, or other elements.
8. Indexing and archiving
Nemesis journal preserves articles on the journal website, on Université catholique de Louvain repository, and will work with all new technologies to provide safe archiving for authors published articles and open-evaluation peer-reviews. The archives of Nemesis journal are free and open access. Permanent preservation of a journal total content is the responsibility of the journal publisher (Presses universitaires de Louvain) (ICMJE). In the event of Nemesis journal termination the journal publisher (Presses universitaires de Louvain) will transfer journal files to the Library of Université catholique de Louvain who can make the content available.
Nemesis journal have print-ISSN: 2593-3604 and electronic-ISSN: 2593-3612.
II EDITORIAL POLICIES
1. Best practices in research reporting
Research submitted to Nemesis must comply with internationally- accepted standards for research practice and reporting (EQUATOR Network [http://www.equator-network.org/], CONSORT for randomized control trials, PRISMA for systematic reviews), including data management, figure preparation, reproducibility, and reporting guidelines. Issues discovered after publication will be addressed according to guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) and may lead to a correction, retraction, or expression of concern. We may also contact authors’ institutions as appropriate.
2. Human subject research
1) Obtain prior approval for human subjects research by an institutional or national review board (IRB) or equivalent ethics committee(s), 2) Declare compliance with ethical practices upon submission of a manuscript, 3) Report details on how informed consent for the research was obtained (or explain why consent was not obtained), 4) Submit, upon request from the journal, documentation from the review board or ethics committee confirming approval of the research, 5) For clinical trials, provide trial registration details, the study protocol, and CONSORT documentation, 6) Confirm that an identified individual has provided written consent for the use of that information.
All submissions describing clinical research and/or research on human subjects will be checked by Nemesis editorial staff to ensure that the requirements above are met. Failure to meet requirements may be grounds for rejection. If issues are discovered after publication, we may issue a correction or retraction as appropriate. We also reserve the right to contact the author’s institution.
2.2 Clinical studies
Clinical investigations must be conducted according to the principles expressed in the Declaration of Helsinki [http://irb.sinica.edu.tw/doc/regulation/DECLARATION%20OF%20HELSINKI%20(2013).pdf]..
Nemesis follows the World Health Organization’s (WHO) definition of a clinical trial [http://www.who.int/ictrp/en/]. Nemesis will publish the trial registration number [http://www.who.int/ictrp/network/primary/en/] at the end of the abstract. Nemesis policies for clinical trial submissions are designed to promote transparency and reproducibility and to ensure the integrity of the reporting of patient-centered trials. Compliance with Nemesis policies is required at submission in order for a manuscript to be processed. Editors and open-evaluation peer-reviewers should carefully review trial protocols and registration details and assess manuscripts according to CONSORT or other relevant guidelines. Concerns about clinical trial submissions should be brought to the attention of the editorial office as quickly as possible.
2.3 Patient privacy and informed consent for publication
Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Patient consent is required in all human experiments (Nuremberg Code) and also when there is a concern about maintaining patient anonymity. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, will not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published.
Authors should disclose to their patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with Nemesis and by the authors. Patient consent file can be downloaded from Nemesis webpage. Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are de-identified, authors should provide assurance, and editors will so note, that such changes do not distort scientific meaning. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the published article.
3. Competing interests
A competing interest is anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to Nemesis. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Declaring all potential competing interests is a requirement at Nemesis and is integral to the transparent reporting of research. All potentially competing interests (see below) must be declared if they occurred within 5 years of conducting, or preparing for publication, the research under consideration. Interests outside the 5-year time frame must also be declared if they could reasonably be perceived as competing according to the definition above.
3.1 Financial competing interests
Financial competing interests include but are not limited to: 1) Ownership of stocks or shares, 2) Paid employment or consultancy, 3) Board membership, 4) Patent applications (pending or actual), including individual applications or those belonging to the institution to which the authors are affiliated and from which the authors may benefit, 5) Research grants (from any source, restricted or unrestricted), 6) Travel grants and honoraria for speaking or participation at meetings, 7) Gifts.
3.2 Non-financial competing interests
Non-financial competing interests include but are not limited to: 1) Acting as an expert witness, 2) Membership in a government or other advisory board, 3) Relationship (paid or unpaid) with organizations and funding bodies including nongovernmental organizations, research institutions, or charities, 4) Membership of lobbying or advocacy organizations, 5) Writing or consulting for an educational company, 6) Personal relationships (i.e. friend, spouse, family member, current or previous mentor, adversary) with individuals involved in the submission or evaluation of a paper, such as authors, peer-reviewers, editors, or members of the editorial board of Nemesis, 7) Personal convictions (political, religious, ideological, or other) related to a paper's topic that might interfere with an unbiased publication process (at the stage of authorship, open-evaluation peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication).
4. Ethical Publishing Practice
Nemesis journal adheres to principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) [https://publicationethics.org/], respects its Code of Conduct [https://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct], and aim to adhere to its Best Practice Guidelines [https://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf]. Authors are expected to be aware of, and comply with, best practice in publication ethics specifically but not limited to authorship (for example avoidance of ghost or guest authorship), dual submission, plagiarism, manipulation of figures, competing interests and compliance with policies on research ethics. Open-evaluation peer-reviewers and editors are required to treat manuscripts fairly, and to declare any competing interests. Nemesis will vigorously investigate allegations of research or publication misconduct and reserve the right to contact authors’ institutions, funders or regulatory bodies if needed. In cases of suspected or alleged misconduct, Nemesis will follow the COPE flowcharts and may also seek advice at the COPE forum. If Nemesis journal finds conclusive evidence of misconduct it will take steps to correct the scientific record, which may include issuing a correction or retraction. If you have any concerns about potential misconduct, please email email@example.com. address correspondence to the journal’s Editor-in-Chief.
Plagiarism is not acceptable in Nemesis submissions. If plagiarism is identified, we will follow COPE guidelines [https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/02A_Plagiarism_Submitted.pdf].
The exception that is acceptable is the reusing text from the methods section in the author’s previous publications, with attribution to the source. Nemesis uses Compilatio software [https://www.compilatio.net/inscription/3g9wp]to screen submitted content for originality. We will do a follow-up investigation if the software raises any concerns. If plagiarism is detected during the open-evaluation peer-review process, we may issue a correction or retract the paper, as appropriate. We reserve the right to inform authors' institutions about plagiarism detected either before or after publication. We expect that editors and open evaluation peer-reviewers will be vigilant in their evaluation of Nemesis submissions and articles and will notify the journal about any plagiarism identified.
6. Author requirements
Upon submission of a manuscript, authors must indicate whether there are any related manuscripts under consideration or published elsewhere. If related work has been submitted or published elsewhere, authors must include a copy of it with their submission and describe its relation to the submitted work. Prior publication of research as a master thesis, presentation at medical or scientific conferences, or posting on preprint servers will not preclude consideration of the manuscript. Nemesis supports the public disclosure of all clinical trial results, as mandated, for example, by the 2007 FDA Amendments Act. Prior disclosure of results on a clinical trial registry site will not affect consideration.
7. Editor and open-evaluation peer-reviewer requirements
Open-evaluation peer-reviewers and editors should evaluate any related content and notify the journal of overlap. Editors and open-evaluation peer-reviewers should alert the journal if they identify duplicate submissions or publications.
If related content is found to be too similar to the Nemesis submission, or if a duplicate submission is discovered, we will reject the manuscript if submitted. Duplicate content discovered after publication will be addressed depending on the degree of overlap. The journal may issue a correction or a retraction as appropriate.
Everyone listed as an author should meet our criteria for authorship. Everyone who meets our criteria for authorship must be listed as an author. We expect that all authors will take public responsibility for the content of the manuscript submitted to Nemesis. The contributions of all authors must be described. All authors will be contacted by email at submission to ensure that they are aware of and approve the submission of the manuscript, its content, and its authorship.
8.1 Qualifying for Authorship
Authorship criteria are based on the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals [http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html#two]. The ICMJE lists four conditions for authorship credit. Authors must meet all four conditions in order to be listed: 1) Substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, and, 2) Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, and 3) Final approval of the version to be published, and 4) 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.
Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship.
8.2 Author contributions
The contributions of all authors must be described according to Nemesis journal instructions for authors criteria. Nemesis has adopted the PLOS one taxonomy which is based on CRediT taxonomy, and which describes each author’s individual contributions to the work. The submitting author is responsible for providing the contributions of all authors at submission. We expect that all authors have reviewed, discussed, and agreed to their individual contributions ahead of this time. Contributions will be published with the final article, and they should accurately reflect contributions to the work.
Roles of contributors
Ideas, formulation, of evolution of overreaching research goals and aims
Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data and maintain research data (including software code, where it is necessary for interpreting the data itself) for initial use and later reuse
Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data
Acquisition of the financial support for the project to this publication
Conducting a research and investigation process, specifically performing the experiments, or data/evidence collection
Development of design of methodology, creation of models
Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution
Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools
Programming, software development, designing computer programs, implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms, testing of existing code components
Oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution, including mentorship external to the core team
Verification, whether as a part of the activity or separate, of the overall replication/reproducibility of results/experiments and other research outputs
Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/data presentation
Writing-original draft preparation
Creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft (including substantive translation)
Writing-review and editing
Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary or revision-including pre- or post-publication stages
Contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be mentioned in the Acknowledgments. It is expected that those being acknowledged have given their permission to be named.
8.4 Corresponding author responsibilities
The corresponding author takes responsibility for and speaks on behalf of all authors.
The corresponding author: 1) Ensure that the manuscript is in full adherence with all Nemesis editorial and publishing policies, 2) Ensure that all authors have access to the final version of the manuscript that is submitted to the journal, and agree to the author list and author contributions, 3) Ensure that all authors have seen the final draft of the manuscript before it is published, 4) Provide to the journal written confirmation that all authors consent to any requested changes in the manuscript’s authorship, 5) Provide with copyright license agreement signed on behalf of all authors.
8.6 Author Identification
Nemesis endorses ORCID [https://orcid.org/] and requires that corresponding author, and all first equivalent authors provide an ORCID iD when submitting a manuscript. We publish all the authors ORCID iD if the manuscript is accepted.
1. Style and format
Manuscript files should be send in word doc file format to check it at Nemesis journal. We do not accept LaTeX manuscripts. There are no restrictions on word count, number of tables or number of figures. For font, layout, and spacing please follow the Nemesis journal article template to write your manuscript. Limit manuscript sections and sub-sections to 2 heading levels. Make sure heading levels are clearly indicated in the manuscript text. Page numbers and line numbers are included in the manuscript file for more accurate open-evaluation peer-review process. The continuous line numbers is used. Footnotes are not allowed. If your manuscript contains footnotes, move the information into the main text or the reference list, depending on the content.
Nemesis journal accepts articles in French and in English. Please check the language with professional editors before submitting your manuscript. Articles in French should be accompanied by an abstract in English. Define abbreviations upon first appearance in the text. Do not use non-standard abbreviations unless they appear at least three times in the text. Keep abbreviations to a minimum. Use SI (standard international) units. If you do not use these exclusively, provide the SI value in parentheses after each value [http://www.bipm.org/en/measurement-units/]. Provide the Recommended International Non-Proprietary Name for drugs.
2. Reference style
Do not use references without authors. Please indicate all authors. Add clinical trial registration number for randomized control trials after the page numbers.
Example of standard journal articles:
Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med 2002;347:284-287.
Example of open database: Who's Certified [Internet]. Evanston (IL): The American Board of Medical Specialists. c2000 [cited 2001 Mar 8]. Available from: http://www.abms.org/newsearch.asp
3. Manuscript organization
Manuscripts should be organized as follows. Instructions for each element appear below the list.
The following elements are required in order: 1) Title page: list title, authors, and affiliations as first page of manuscript, 2) Abstract, 3) Introduction, 4) Materials and methods, 5) Results, 6) Discussion, 7) conclusions (optional), 8) Acknowledgements, 9) Competing interests disclosure, 10) Funding statement, and compliance with ethical standards: 11) Ethical approval, 12) Informed consent, 13) Authors contribution, 14) References.
Figure captions are inserted in the text immediately after the first paragraph in which the figure is cited. Figure files are inserted in the main manuscript.
4. Title page
Please use the template for article or for open-evaluation peer-review. Include a full title (250 characters maximum including spaces). It should be specific, descriptive, concise, and comprehensive to readers outside the field. The title provides a distilled description of the complete article and should include information that, along with the Abstract, will make electronic retrieval of the article sensitive and specific. Titles should be written in sentence case (capitalize only the first word of the title, the first word of the subtitle, and any proper nouns and genus names). Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible. For clinical trials, systematic reviews, or meta-analyses, the subtitle should include the study design. Short title is not required. Italics, bold type, symbols and other text formatting will all be reproduced in the published article as submitted.
5. Authors list
Enter author names on the title page of the manuscript. On the title page, write author names in the following order:1) Last name (surname, family name), 2) Initials of first name, 3) Initials of middle name if used, Each author’s academic degrees should be listed. Author names will be published exactly as they appear in the manuscript file. Please double-check the information carefully to make sure it is correct.
Each author on the list must have an affiliation (private, public, university). Affiliations will be published as they appear in the accepted manuscript. The affiliation includes department, university, or organizational affiliation and its location, including city, state/province (if applicable), and country. Authors have the option to include a current professional address in addition to the address of their affiliation at the time of the study. The current address should be listed in the byline and clearly labeled “current address.” At a minimum, the address must include the author’s current institution (or private practice), city, and country. If an author has multiple affiliations, enter all affiliations on the title page only. Include each component in order of small to large (Private practice, Department, Division section, Institution, City, (State), Country). Do not include ZIP or postal codes, street addresses, or building/office numbers. Do not use abbreviations (e.g., Dept.). Do not list positions within an institution (e.g., Department Chair, Professor, etc.). List each affiliation individually and in full.
5.1 Corresponding author
The submitting author is automatically designated as the corresponding author in the submission procedure. The corresponding author is the primary contact for the journal office and the only author able to view or change the manuscript while it is under editorial consideration. The corresponding author role may be transferred to another coauthor. However, note that transferring the corresponding author role also transfers access to the manuscript. Only one corresponding author can be designated, but this does not restrict the number of corresponding authors that may be listed on the article in the event of publication. Whoever is designated as a corresponding author on the title page of the manuscript file will be listed as such upon publication. Include an email address for each corresponding author listed on the title page of the manuscript.
The Abstract should: 1) Describe the main objective(s) of the study, 2) Explain how the study was done (material and methods), including any model organisms used, without methodological detail, 3) Summarize the most important results and their significance (results), 4) Provide with one or two sentence(s) conclusion. Do not exceed 360 words. Abstracts should not include: 1) Citations, and 2) Abbreviations, if possible. Structured abstract should accompany clinical research and experimental articles, and systematic reviews. We accept non structured abstract for not systematic reviews, case reports, and case series.
Provide up to five keywords best describing the content of your article.
The introduction should: 1) Provide background that puts the manuscript into context and allows readers outside the field to understand the purpose and significance of the study, 2) Define the problem addressed and why it is important, 3) Include a brief review of the key literature, 4) Note any relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, 5) Conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the work, the null hypothesis to be tested, and a comment about how that aim will be achieved.
9. Materials and Methods
The Materials and Methods section should provide enough detail to allow suitably skilled investigators to fully replicate your study. Specific information and/or protocols for new methods should be included in detail. If materials, methods, and protocols are well established, authors may cite articles where those protocols are described in detail, but the submission should include sufficient information to be understood independent of these references. Protocol documents for clinical trials, observational studies are to be included in the main template as Nemesis journal does not accept supplementary information. This section can have subheadings such as, for example: 1) material, 2) methods, 3) statistical methods. These sections have no word limit, but the language should be clear and concise.
10. Results, Discussion, Conclusions
These sections must be separated. These sections may be further divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading, as appropriate. These sections have no word limit, but the language should be clear and concise. Together, these sections should describe the results of the experiments, the interpretation of these results, and the conclusions that can be drawn. Authors should also discuss all relevant limitations of the study.
Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Do not include funding sources in the Acknowledgements.
12. Funding sources statement
This information will be published with the final manuscript, if accepted, so please make sure that this is accurate and as detailed as possible. Your statement should include relevant grant numbers and the URL of any funder's web site. Please also state whether any individuals employed or contracted by the funders (other than the named authors) played any role in: study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. If so, please name the individual and describe their role. For funded studies, the authors need to explain the access to study data, with an explanation of the nature and extent of access, including whether access is on-going. To support the above statements, authors of a study sponsored by a funder with a proprietary or financial interest in the outcome, are asked to sign a statement: “I had full access to all the data in this study and I take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis”.
If you received no funding for your study please state the following: ”This study does not receive any funding”.
13. Competing interests
All potential competing interests must be declared in full. A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients’ welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Financial relationship (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership or options, honoraria, patents, and paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, and of the authors. If the submission is related to any patents, patent applications, or products in development or for market, these details, including patent numbers and titles, must be disclosed in full. Read the policy on competing interests. The corresponding author is responsible for providing information on competing interests for all authors. If there are competing interests to disclose, please provide them in the following table:
Author first name, author last name
If all authors have no competing interests to disclose please state the following: “all authors have no competing interests related to this study”.
14. Compliance with ethical standards
14.1 Ethical approval
When reporting research involving human data, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed have been assessed by the responsible review committee (institutional and national), or if no formal ethics committee is available, were in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 2013. If the doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. Approval by a responsible review committee does not preclude editors from forming their own judgment whether the conduct of research was appropriate. For research related to human participants, all authors should agree to these rules and the following sentence should be added to the manuscript: “All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.”
14.2 Informed consent
Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should disclose to these patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with the authors. Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are de-identified, authors should provide assurance, and editors should so note, that such changes do not distort scientific meaning. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated as a following statement: Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study “
15. Author Contributions
Provide at minimum one contribution for each author. Use the CRediT taxonomy to describe each contribution. Read the policy and the full list of roles. Contributions will be published with the final article, and they should accurately reflect contributions to the work. The submitting author is responsible for completing this information at submission, and we expect that all authors will have reviewed, discussed, and agreed to their individual contributions ahead of this time. Nemesis journal will contact all authors by email at submission to ensure that they are aware of the submission.
Acceptable sources in Nemesis journal are: 1) published or accepted manuscripts with DOI number, patents, laws, and databases. Other sources are not to be cited.
References are listed at the end of the manuscript and numbered in the order that they appear in the text. In the text, cite the reference number in square brackets (e.g., “We used the techniques developed by our colleagues  to analyze the data”). Make sure the parts of the manuscript are in the correct order before ordering the citations. A DOI number for the full-text article is acceptable as an alternative to or in addition to traditional volume and page numbers.
File format accepted should be TIFF with a resolution of 300-600 dpi, file size per figure of <10 MB, text within figure should be limited. Figure captions should be in manuscript immediately below the figure. Do not use Mac (apple) system. Do not use alpha channels.
For figure caption be succinct: Avoid lengthy descriptions of methods. Describe the key messages of a figure: provide a description of the figure that will allow readers to understand it without referring to the text. Describe each part of a multipart figure with a lettered panel label: for example, (A) or (a). Define all non-standard symbols and abbreviations. Add arrows on figures to underline the interesting area or detail.
Name figure labels using Arabic numerals, and abbreviate the word “Figure” to “Fig” (e.g., Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3, etc.). The title should be concise and descriptive. Place the legend directly after the title of the figure to which it belongs. Place any figure credits in the last sentence of the legend.
Authors submitting manuscripts that include identifying or potentially identifying information must comply with our requirements for informed consent. Identifying information includes, but is not limited to: 1) photographs, 2) radiographs, 3) pedigrees (family trees).
Image files should not be manipulated or adjusted in any way that could lead to misinterpretation of the information present in the original image. Inappropriate manipulation includes, but is not limited to: 1) the introduction, enhancement, movement, or removal of specific feature(s) within an image, 2) Unmarked grouping of images that should otherwise have been presented separately (for example, from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels, fields, or exposures), 3) Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance that obscure, eliminate, or misrepresent any information. Digital images in manuscripts nearing acceptance for publication may be scrutinized for any indication of improper manipulation. If evidence is found of inappropriate manipulation, we reserve the right to ask for original data and, if that is not satisfactory, we may decide not to accept the manuscript and may also contact the authors’ institutions to ask them to assist with investigation.
Please use only the template form for manuscript, tables and figures. The instructions provided here pertain to tables included in the main article. Cite tables in ascending numeric order upon first appearance in the manuscript file. Place each table in your manuscript file directly after the paragraph in which it is first cited (read order). Do not submit your tables in separate files. Tables require a label (e.g., “Table 1”) and brief descriptive title to be placed above the table. Place legends, footnotes, and other text below the table.
19. Authors of instructions for authors
The authors of instructions for authors are Olszewski Raphael and Hebda Aleksandra.
The last review of the instructions for authors was performed on 11.02.2020.