About the Journal

Aim and scope

The Update Dental College Journal (UpDCJ) is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal, published biannually in April and October by Update Dental College (UpDC). The journal is dedicated to advancing scientific knowledge and clinical practices within the field of dentistry. It primarily publishes original research, case reports, and review articles, with a focus on clinical, laboratory, and translational studies that address the challenges and innovations in oral health care.

While the journal’s primary focus is on the discipline of dentistry, it also welcomes high-quality contributions from other areas of medical and health sciences. 

The UpDCJ seeks to provide a platform for the global exchange of scientific research and knowledge, welcoming submissions from both domestic and international authors. The journal maintains a strong commitment to the highest ethical standards in scientific publishing and adheres to the guidelines set by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Publication Frequency: 

The journal is published biannually, in April and October.

Anti-plagiarism Policy:

Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others.  Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

All manuscripts submitted to The Update Dental College Journal will undergo a plagiarism check with commercially available software. Based on the extent of plagiarism, authors may be asked to address any minor duplication or similarity with the previously published work. If plagiarism is detected after publication, the journal will investigate. If plagiarism is established, the journal will notify the authors’ institutions and funding bodies and retract the plagiarised article. 

To report plagiarism, contact the journal office. 

Email: updcj@hotmail.com

Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submissions or publications

Papers that fundamentally describe the same study should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. As a result, authors should not submit an article that has previously been published in another journal for consideration. Submission of a manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.

Specific types of papers (such as clinical recommendations or guidelines) may be published in more than one journal if certain requirements are satisfied. The authors and editors of the relevant journals must consent to secondary publication, which must have the same data and interpretation as the initial paper. In the secondary publication, the primary reference must be cited.

Open Access and Copyright Policy: 

UpDCJ is an Open Access Journal (Libre Open Access): This kind of Open Access has no price barriers and removes at least some of the permission barriers depending on user rights through licensing and copyright ownership.

licensing, and copyright: 

Articles in Update Dental College Journal are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License CC BY-4.0. This license permits 

• Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the following license terms.

Ownership Rights: UpDC journal retains all copyright after submission and Authors retain copyright after publications

Originality: The authors assure that this submission is an original work and that neither this work nor one with substantially similar content has been published elsewhere in whole or in part (except in abstract form), that it has only been submitted for this publication, and that it will not be submitted elsewhere pending written notice of acceptance or rejection by this journal (please express explicitly if you have the plan to publish any more article based on partial data from this work).

Declaration of authorship: The undersigned certifies that all authors have participated sufficiently in the conception and design of this work and the analysis of the data (when applicable), as well as the writing of the manuscript, to take public responsibility for it. The undersigned believe the manuscript represents valid work, have reviewed the final version of the manuscript, and have approved it for publication.

Data availability: The undersigned attests that they shall produce the data upon which the manuscript is based for evaluation by the Editors of their assignees should it be requested.

Disclaimer: The undersigned assures that the manuscript contains no libelous or unlawful statements and does not infringe on the rights of others. If excerpts (text or artwork) from copyrighted works are included, written permission will be secured by the authors and proper credit will be shown in the manuscript.

 

Charges and Fees: 

There are no article processing charges (APCs) or article submission fees. Charges may apply for Print issues . 

Peer Review :

Update Dental College Journal (UpDCJ) is a  peer-reviewed journal in Bangladesh.

Manuscripts submitted to journals are privileged communications that are authors’ private, confidential property, and authors may be harmed by premature disclosure of any or all of a manuscript’s details.

We guide our Reviewers therefore should keep manuscripts and the information they contain strictly confidential. Reviewers are prohibited from publicly discussing authors’ work and must not appropriate authors’ ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers must not retain the manuscript for their personal use and should destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting their reviews.

Reviewers are expected to respond promptly to requests to review and to submit reviews within the time agreed. Reviewers’ comments should be constructive, honest, and polite.

Reviewers should declare their conflicts of interest and refuse themselves from the peer-review process if a conflict exists.

Stepwise Peer Review Process of UpDCJ:

1. Submission of Manuscript via  https://www.banglajol.info/index.php/UpDCJ/login as an Author. 
2. Editorial Review if Article is as per UpDCJ Instructions; otherwise, the manuscript is returned to the author for a technical correction.
3. Editorial Review: 5-7 Days (If sent for revision, it should be submitted again as the time given as per instructions UpDCJ)
4. External Peer Review: 30 Days (If sent for Revised should be submitted again as the time given as per instructions UpDCJ)

• Publication on acceptance shall depend on the manuscript's date of acceptance and category (original research, review, case reports, etc.)
• The author can track the entire process through their log in the dashboard, and in case of queries, they can email the editor through their login page of the journal software ( editor query)
• Any query to the editor shall be responded to by email in 5 -7 working days

 Selection of the Reviewers

Reviewer selection is a critical and important part of the publication process. The choice of selection is based on several factors, including a) expertise, b) reputation, c) capability of giving recommendations, d) giving enough time to review and e) our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics.

General and ethical guidelines to the reviewer for Review manuscript:

1. When you receive an invitation to peer review, you should be sent a copy of the manuscript – this will help you determine whether you wish to do the review. You should try to respond to every peer review invitation you receive.
2. If you feel the paper is outside your area of expertise or you are unable to devote the necessary time, please let the editorial office know as soon as possible so that they can invite an alternative reviewer.
3. If you intend to decline the invitation, you could consider nominating a colleague for the editor to contact directly.
4. The reviewer usually gets 1-2 weeks’ time for the review.

Usually, as a minimum, UpDCJ asks reviewers to check the following:

1. The article’s premise is well-founded.
2. The hypotheses are properly addressed.
3. The conclusions are supported by the data.
4. Subjectively assess whether the article is suitable for publication or not.
5. Detailed edits are always appreciated; it makes our job easy.
6. Research can be a small world. This means many reviewers will know the author, either because their name is revealed (through a single-blind or open peer review) or out of familiarity with their work. You can certainly give a fair assessment of an article that is written by a friend or competitor, but:

• If there’s a significant conflict of interest, you should reveal this to the editor.
• If the conflict of interest causes a large positive or negative bias, then it is better to decline the review request
• Avoid personal judgment and criticism at all times—judge the article. This is more likely to be well received by the author and lead to better work by them.
• Every editor will appreciate honesty about conflicts of interest, even if they then have to look for a replacement reviewer.

As a reviewer, you have a duty of confidentiality to the journal.

Remember that the editor is there to ensure a smooth peer review, so don't be shy about asking the editor to help supply missing information, such as a reference you cannot locate. The editor will normally request the items from the author, who will generally want to respond quickly. The author may also expand their supporting information file as a result, which in turn improves the article.

Timing for review:

Update Dental College Journal (UpDCJ) is committed to rapid editorial decisions and publications. To achieve the goal, an efficient editorial process is a valuable service both to our authors and to the scientific community as a whole. Therefore, we request that the reviewers respond promptly within 3 days to agree to the review process. If a reviewer does not agree or respond to reviewing a manuscript, then we request another reviewer. Once a reviewer agrees to review, the maximum allocated time period for review is 2 weeks. A soft reminder email is sent to the reviewer when the allocated time is over. 

Editorial Decision The chief editor makes the final decision based on the reviewers' comments. The decision may be any one of the following:

1. Accept for publication, with or without any minor editorial revision
2. Inform the corresponding author to revise the manuscript to address the specific concerns before a final decision is reached. Submission of the revised manuscript does not ensure acceptance.
3. Reject, but inform the corresponding author that further writing might justify a resubmission.
4. Decline Submission, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance, or major technical and/or interpretational problems

Confidential

Editors, editorial board members, authors, and reviewers keep confidential all details of the editorial and peer review processes for submitted manuscripts. Even the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the corresponding author. In addition, reviewers maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript.

Policies on Conflict of Interest, Human and Animal Rights, and Informed Consent:

Conflict of Interest: A Declaration of Conflicting Interests policy outlines a formal requirement for authors to provide a statement or disclosure regarding any potential conflicts of interest. Conflicts arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have undisclosed interests that may affect their judgments, causing readers to feel misled if revealed later.

Reviewers: To maintain a conflict-free review process:

• Editors select a guest editor in case of conflicts with authors.
• Reviewers must declare potential conflicts before reviewing an article.
• Minor conflicts don't disqualify a reviewer but are considered in recommendations.

Authors: All authors must transparently disclose potential conflicts, such as employment, consulting fees, or stock ownership, during article submission. Accepted articles should include this information in the end section.

Editors: Editors refrain from making editorial decisions if they have conflicts related to a submitted manuscript.

Human and Animal Rights 

In adherence to rigorous ethical standards, all research endeavors involving human subjects or human data within our esteemed Update Dental College Journal undergo a meticulous evaluation, securing approval from a responsible Institutional Review Board (IRB). Researchers are strongly encouraged to align their investigations with the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki, providing a guiding framework for studies involving human materials.

Upon request, authors are required to submit a statement from the IRB, or ethics committee, confirming the approval of their research. Our journal upholds the authority to decline work that falls short of the elevated ethical standards, even after formal approval has been granted.

Participants involved in research must receive detailed instructions, expressing their informed consent by signing relevant documentation. Authors may also need to submit a sample copy of the subject consent form for thorough review.

In the case of animal experiments, approval must be sought from the authors' Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or equivalent ethics committee(s). Research must align meticulously with applicable national and international guidelines, securing approval before embarking on the research journey. Studies involving pathogens with elevated biosafety requirements should undergo review by a relevant committee (IBC), with detailed approval descriptions outlined in the manuscript's Methods section. 

Informed Consent procedure

All participants, termed subjects, must undergo thorough instructions regarding the study's objectives, procedures, and potential risks before participation. Their explicit consent is paramount, symbolized by their willingness to engage in the study through the endorsement of the informed consent paperwork. Authors aiming to publish their research outcomes may be requested to submit a sample of the subject consent form, a pivotal document delineating subjects' comprehension and agreement to partake in the study.

To safeguard patient privacy and anonymity, authors are advised to follow the guidelines outlined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors on Privacy and Confidentiality. These guidelines serve as a crucial framework for preserving the confidentiality of subjects' personal information while ensuring transparent and accurate reporting of research findings.

Through unwavering commitment to these rigorous ethical considerations and privacy guidelines, researchers demonstrate their dedication to upholding the integrity of their studies, respecting the rights and well-being of their subjects, and thereby building trust and credibility within the scientific community.

Advertising Policy

The Update Dental College Journal endorse product or service marked as an advertisement or promoted by a sponsor in its print publications.

Editorial content is not compromised by commercial or financial interests or by any specific arrangements with advertising clients or sponsors.

The editorial board of the journal does not accept for consideration and does not print advertising articles  free basis.

The authors of the scientific articles cannot link to ads using keywords.

Publisher

Update Dental College