The Second Mediterranean Seminar on Science Writing, Editing and Publishing (SWEP - 2018), Sarajevo, December 8th, 2018

WHY SWEP 2018?

Title of Days of AMNuBiH 2018” and “SWEP 2018” is “Ethical Dilemmas in Science Editing and Publishing”. Why? If one wants to create a scientific work, must have on his mind that creating a scientific work requires creativity and openness, honesty, trust, and obeying the ethical principles for writing a scientific paper. While working on a an biomedical research involving human subjects medical workers should have on mind that it is the duty of the physician to remain the protector of the life and health of that person on whom biomedical research is being carried out (1, 2).

The World Medical Association (WMA) has developed the Declaration of Helsinki as a statement of ethical principles to provide guidance to physicians and other participants in medical research involving human subjects (1) (Figure 1).

Figure 1. The Declaration of Helsinki. Retrieved from: New edition of Declaration of Helsinki Available: http://www.hopitalmontfort.com/en/new-edition-declaration-helsinki.

Medical research involving human subjects includes research on identifiable human material or identifiable data. It is the duty of the physician to promote and safeguard the health of the people. The physician’s knowledge and conscience are dedicated to the fulfillment of this duty. The Declaration of Geneva of the World Medical Association binds the physician with the words, „The health of my patient will be my first consideration“(Declaration of Geneva, Adopted by the 2nd General Assembly of the WMA, Geneva, Switzerland, September 1948) (1, 2)., and the International Code of Medical Ethics declares that, „A physician shall act only in the patient’s interest when providing medical care which might have the effect of weakening the physical and mental condition of the patient“ (2).

Medical progress is based on research which ultimately must rest in part on experimentation involving human subjects. In medical research on human subjects, considerations related to the wellbeing of the human subject should take precedence over the interests of science and society. The primary purpose of medical research involving human subjects is to improve prophylactic, diagnostic and therapeutic procedures and the understanding of the etiology and pathogenesis of disease. Even the best proven prophylactic, diagnostic and therapeutic methods must continuously be challenged through research for their effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility and quality. In current medical practice and in medical research, most prophylactic, diagnostic and therapeutic procedures involve risks and burdens. Medical research is subject to ethical standards that promote respect for all human beings and protect their health and rights. Some research populations are vulnerable and need special protection. The particular need of the economically and medically disadvantaged must be recognized. Special attention is also required for those who cannot give of refuse consent for themselves, for those who may be subject to giving consent under duress, for those who will not benefit personally from the research and for those for whom the research is combined with care (1).

Research investigators should be aware of the ethical, legal and regulatory requirements for research on human subjects in their own countries as well as applicable international requirements. No national ethical, legal or regulatory requirement should be allowed to reduce or eliminate any of the protections for human subjects see forth in Helsinki Declaration. In any research on human beings, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible, conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort if may entail. The subject should be informed of the right to abstain from participation in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. After ensuring that the subject has understood the information, the physician should then obtain the subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be obtained in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed. Research on individuals from whom it is not possible to obtain consent, including proxy or advance consent, should be done only if the physical/mental condition that prevents obtaining informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research population. The specific reasons for involving research subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent should be stated in the experimental protocol for consideration and approval of the review committee. The protocol should state that consent to remain in the research should be obtained as soon as possible from the individual or a legally authorized surrogate.

Both authors and publishers have ethical obligations. In publication of the results of research, the investigators are obliged to preserve the accuracy of the results. Negative as well as positive results should be published or otherwise publicly available. Sources of funding, institutional affiliations and any possible conflicts of interest should be declared in the publication.

The principles described above. Extracted from the document of Helsinki and other declarations, are rules for every author, editor and publisher who want that their results of research and investigation make visible for national or international academic community via scientific or professional journals or via on-line data bases (3). Unfortunately a lot of unethical behaviors today are very common and used in practice that COPE, ICMJE, EASE, WAME and other associations which try to avoid and prevent it have a lot of troubles to fight with it (4).

Title of the Second SWEP “Ethical dilemmas in Science Editing and Publishing” and presentations of authors at this conference tried, with their personal experiences, a to help solve this great problem, at least in our environment. Good publication practices do not develop by chance, and will become established only if they are actively promoted. Good decisions and strong editorial precesses designed to manage these interests will foster a sustainable and efficient publishing system, which will benefit academic societies, journal editors, authors, research funders, readers and publishers.

This conference followed our intention to spread out our tasks and conclusions established at SWEP 2016 described in “Sarajevo Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Journals”, published in Croatian Medical Journal in December of 2016, a lot of biomedical journals accepted as official document and included in their Instructions for authors in journals which edited and printed (3, 4). This year, at SWEP 2018, active participation have taken by editors of the journals: Medical Archives, Acta Informatica Medica, Materia Socio-Medica, Croatian Medical Journal, Psichiatria Danubina, Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences, Medicinski Glasnik, Acta Medica Saliniana, Medicinski Zurnal, Donald School Journal of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, etc. The Seminar SWEP 2018 gathered prominent editors of biomedical journals, and also, distinguished professors and scientists who are interesting in the field of Science editing and publishing (A-BT).

The aim of the meeting is to provide fundamental help to PhD students in their PhD thesis, because we all hope that their current topics in the field of scientific publishing will at least be a road sign, how to act, and what to avoid. Our desire is that these meetings become a tradition, and promote scientific excellence, as the only weapon in the hands of science in the modern world. The tendency towards scientific publication should be a universal idea, a way of communication, and the instillation of this tendency to young colleagues, should be the goal of every professor and academic person.

Even when many say that science does not pay off, that it is a hard-laboring job, which ultimately is in the end gets recognized, the obligation of this meeting is evidence to all participants, that it is quite worth it, because of personal satisfaction, what essentially cannot be bought, and what essentially does not have a price.

SWEP 2018 is one of the contributors to the development of science in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia, Macedonia, and both the region and the Europe.