The Archives of Renal Diseases and Management (ARDM) is the premier, peer-reviewed scientific research publication. The Archives of Renal Diseases and Management is an initiative to encourage researchers, clinicians and individuals to share research advances that can be helpful in the treatment of problems and diseases related to renal disorders. ARDM is a unique platform that publishes current findings to promote health and wellness. The editorial board of ARDM is a committed team of experts that ensures quality publishing of complete and reliable sources of information on discoveries and current developments in the management of Renal Diseases.
The Archives of Renal Diseases and Management is a journal published by Peertechz Publications Pvt. Ltd. At Peertechz, we believe that education and prevention are the ultimate keys to extending good health. The journal responds to the need to dramatically increase applied and diagnostic methodologies, clinical prevention and treatment of the renal disorders. The Editorial Board of ARDM works to disseminate important developments in medical and surgical management and treatment of patients with diseases and disorders of kidney.
Archives of Renal Diseases and Management adheres to double-blind peer review policy for submitted manuscripts. In double-blind peer review system, the identity of both the author and reviewer is kept hidden. This process creates review process that is not influenced by standing within the research community, peer pressure or other factors that may make the review less objective.
In order to expedite the review process; authors should send submissions as two documents: 1) title page and 2) the manuscript. The title page will contain the details of the corresponding authors and co-authors.
Peertechz's publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. We strictly adhere to the ethical guidelines for non-discriminatory publication and expect the same from the authors, editors and reviewers. We have summarized the expected ethical duties under following aspects:
Unbiased Publication decisions: The editors of the Journal will be responsible for evaluating the quality of the articles submitted for the publication for the journal. Peertechz has a strict non-discrimination policy. Acceptance or rejection for publication is independent of race, gender, religious belief, country or origin and citizenship.
Abiding to the law: The editors must be well-versed in the policies of the journal's editorial board and the changes incorporated therein according to the prevailing legal requirements regarding copyright issues, plagiarism and defamation and must abide by those policies and requirements.
Maintaining Privacy: The editors are expected not to disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author(s), reviewers and other members of the editorial board. All correspondence should be through the editorial board.
Providing constructive feedback: The editors are expected to provide constructive feedback to the authors in order to enhance the quality of their article and its value to the field.
Assisting editors in Peer Review Process: Reviewers are expected to promptly assist the editors in the peer review process. Reviews should communicate any deficiencies, methodological, ethical or other concerns and where possible, provide guidance to the authors for improving the quality of the manuscripts.
Managing time and workload: The reviewers should ensure they complete the review process within stipulated time so that accepted manuscripts are processed and reach the publication stage on fast track basis.
Maintaining privacy: The reviewers' should maintain the privacy of the manuscripts during and after the review process and should discuss about the manuscripts only with the authorized editor(s).
Identifying and evaluating resources: The reviewers' are expected to identify and evaluate the resources cited by the authors. They should report to the authorized editors any identified plagiarism or any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published or unpublished paper(s).
Providing constructive and unbiased feedback: The reviewers are expected to ensure that while providing feedbacks to the authors, the language used is appropriate and should not include any personal criticism or objectionable content.
Honest and original research: The authors are solely responsible for their work. We expect that our authors submit accurate, original and objective research. The manuscripts should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Retaining data: The authors are expected to preserve the raw data and any other valuable information related to the research. The editorial board may ask to review the raw data in relation to the manuscript under publication consideration.
Avoiding parallel publication: The authors are advised not to submit manuscripts related to the same research more than once. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal or publication will be considered unethical and unacceptable.
Proper citation: The authors are expected to cite properly the publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Reporting errors: The authors are expected to notify the editors or publisher any inaccuracy or error in the submitted manuscript immediately. It is the responsibility of the authors to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher about the errors and cooperate with the editors to withdraw or correct the submitted manuscript.