(in which event we should ensure that this is also reflected in the journal’s “instructions to authors”). come in go away doormat If there is a group of journals where the duplicate publication is occurring,
come in go away doormat
We’re fixing it quickly. And I want to just thank the American people for what they’ve been through and what they’re doing. We are going to save American workers, and we’re going to save them quickly. come in go away doormat And we’re going to save our great American companies, both small and large. This was a medical problem. We are not going to let it turn into a long-lasting financial problem. It started out as a purely medical problem, and it’s not going to go beyond that. We’re just not going to allow that to happen. My administration continues to work with Democrats and Republicans to reach an agreement on an urgent relief bill for the millions of American workers and small businesses and large businesses that were badly affected by the medical difficulty that we’ve had.
We would like to ask you for a moment of your time to fill in a short questionnaire, at the end of your visit. No, the editor has no such obligation, only under legal procedures if required by applicable law. In specific cases, it may be appropriate and beneficial to the publisher’s internal truth finding process to share with the alleged fraudulent author’s institution specific information, subject to confidentiality. This is ultimately an editorial question, and not necessarily an ethical matter. Our copyright policy notes that authors may post pre-prints and that this will not disqualify the paper from being considered for publication. It could be that presenting original data at a meeting is somewhat like posting a pre-print. The editor however must decide whether, for each journal, such a pre-publication of data would somehow compromise the publication of the article