Policies

Focus and Scope

The texts are under construction.

Section Policies

• Reviews
• Original articles
• Brief reports
• Cardiovascular surgery in federal districts
• Lectures
• Methods
• Scientific reports
• History of surgery

The journal rubrics are:

The texts are under construction.

Publication Frequency

The journal is published bimonthly.

Archiving

• Russian State Library (Moscow)
• Scientific Electronic Library

Open access

The content of each issue of the journal goes to open access 12 months after publication (delayed open access).

Peer-Review

The order of peer-review

The scientific articles submitted to the editorial office undergo primary examination, and then are sent for peer-review.   Up ↑

The editors and the members of the editorial board are not denied to be published in the journal, but in this case they do not interfere the review process.

The journal uses a single-blind peer-review system: the authors do not know the reviewers.

Primary examination

At initial submission, a manuscript is reviewed by editorial manager and the technical editor for the following:

• Compliance with journal's profile;
• Availability of the accompanying documents and authors' signatures;
• Design and structure of the article;
• Availability of the information on research funding, conflict of interests, acknowledgments , contribution of the authors;
• Compliance with EQUATOR Network reporting principles;
• Compliance with ethical standards;
• Uniqueness of the article (check for plagiarism).

At the stage of primary examination, the article may be returned to the authors for the revision. The papers qualified for the further review are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief to determine the scientific value of the manuscript and to appoint the reviewers.

Peer-reviewing

The reviewing of the articles is carried out by the editorial board of the journal, as well as by the external reviewers, leading specialists in this area. The reviewers have to be practicing and publishing in the scientific areas corresponding to the subject of the article during the last 3 years. The ethical aspects of peer-review are set out in the section Responsibility of reviewers.

The reviewers adhere to the following criteria:

• correspondence of the article content to the code of the declared specialty;
• the relevance of the topic;
• the originality, the novelty of the data;
• the completeness and correct presentation of the problem in the literature review;
• clear presentation of the goals and objectives of the work, their conformity to the presented factual material;
• completeness of the description of material and methods;
• the adequacy of research methods choice;
• the adequacy of statistical analysis;
• the compliance of results with the research objectives;
• the availability of the evaluation of the received data;
• the validity of the conclusions;
• the scientific significance of the results;
• the practical significance of the results;
• the visual presentation of the material (tables, pictures);
• the availability of comparison of own data with literature data;
• the availability of necessary references to all relevant publications;
• the quality of the abstract and keywords;
• the compliance of the manuscript with ethical standards;
• data accuracy reflected in the conclusions;
• for case studies: the completeness of the clinical case, instrumental and laboratory methods, the correctness of the analysis.

A questionnaire for reviewer was developed in order to obtain the most complete and objective review of the manuscript. The questionnaire contains the list of issues to be assessed by the reviewer. Based on the above assessment, the reviewer comes to one of the four decisions below: a) the manuscript is acceptable for publication in its current form; b) the manuscript is recommended for the publication, taking into account the correction after the reviewing process; c) the manuscript is recommended for the additional review to another specialist; d) the manuscript is unacceptable for publication.

The mean review period is 2 weeks. This date is controlled by the editorial board. The review deadline may be extended at the request of the reviewer.

The copies of the reviews or a motivated refusal must be sent to the authors. The editorial is responsible to send the copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon the admission.

It is important to note that a positive review does not guarantee acceptance of the manuscript. The final decision on the publication is made by the editorial board. In case of conflict situations, the decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

Original reviews are stored in the editorial office for 5 years.

Correcting the manuscript

The editors carry on correspondence with the author indicated in the cover letter as сorresponding author. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the editorial team sends a comment to the contact author. The authors must respond to all reviewer and editor comments.

The manuscript finalizing process should not take more than 2 months from the moment of sending a message to the authors. The refined article is sent again for the review.

If the author and the reviewer have unresolved contradictions regarding the article, the editorial board has the right to send the article to another reviewer. In conflict situations, the article may be submitted to one of the members of the editorial board. The final decision in such cases is made by the Editor-in-Chief.   Up ↑

Refusal to correct the manuscript

In case of refusal to correct the article, the authors must notify the editorial office in writing or verbally. If the authors do not return the revised version after 2 months from the date of sending the review, the manuscript is removed from the registration, even if there is no feedback from the authors.

Rejection of publication

The decision to refuse the publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board in accordance with the reviewer's recommendations. An article not recommended for the publication is not reviewed repeatedly.

Appeal

If the authors do not agree with the editorial decision, they can write to the editorial office within 30 days from the date the article was rejected.

The appeal should include all the editors' and reviewers' comments that the authors disagree with. The editorial board may change the initial decision if the injustice of the comments is proved by the authors and the authors will provide additional information confirming their point of view. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

Indexation

Articles in the journal are indexed by Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI) a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by Scientific Electronic Library foundation (eLibrary.ru).

Since 2016 the journal is included in the core collection of RSCI integrated with the Web of Science platform.

Author fees

Publication in the journal is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any arcticle processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any article submission charges.

The editors do not pay the authors and do not provide authors' copies.

Publishing Ethics

• Conflicts of Interest Disclosure
• Funding
• Appeal
• Article Retraction
• Borrowing and Plagiarism
• Preprint and Postprint Policy

The editorial board of the journal srtives to provide the highest quality of published scientific materials, reviws and educational works. We are following and journal best prectices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medikal Journal Editors(ICMJE), and Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers(ASEP).

Editorial responsibility

Responsibility to readers

• The editorial guarantees the readers that the information published in the journal is reliable and unbiased.
• The editorial office provides the readers with the information about the authors and the institutions in which the study was conducted (affiliations).
• The editorial board makes objective decisions, regardless of commercial considerations, and ensures effective independent review process.
• The editorial informs the readers on the participation of commercial organizations and their role in research conducting or publications preparing process, as well as on any other conflict of interest - that may affect the results of the research.
• The editorial board reviews complaints about the materials published in the journal, received from the readers, and informs the readers about the measures taken. If necessary, the editorial publishes clarifications and apologies to the readers.
• The editorial board protects the authenticity of the published materials by making changes and refutations (retractions), when necessary.

Responsibility to authors

• The editorial board is entitled to accept articles for the publication or reject them, basing on the reviewer's conclusion on the relevance, originality, reliability of the materials and their relevance to the journal's thematics and the principles of editorial ethics.
• Peer-reviewing process is conducted according to the adopted procedure.
• The members of the editorial board must not be interested in accepting or rejecting the article; in case a member of the editorial board abuse his position, he is suspended from it, and the author gets apologies in writing form.
• The editorial staff informs the authors of all the requirements, as well as notifies them about the reasons for rejecting the articles and provides recommendations for the revision. In the end of each issue, and also on the journals's website, the information for authors is provided.
• The editorial office grants authors an opportunity to appeal regarding the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.
• The editorial ensures the copyrights when considering an application for publication.
• The editorial can retract an article already published in case of disclosure of facts that were not known during the review process.

Responsibility to the objects of research

• The editors adhere the principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki, approved by the World Medical Association (WMA) in 1964 and revised at the 64th Congress of the WMA General Assembly in 2013.
• The editorial office checks the ethical committee conclusion for conducting the published study.

Responsibility to organizations funding the research and publications

• The editorial undertakes to publish information on commercial organizations that supported the research or publication.

Responsibility to reviewers

• The editorial office provides reviewers with guidelines and a list of questions for the reviewing process.   Up ↑
• The editorial ensures objectivity of the reviewers, promptly identifying violations and eliminating them.
• The editorial board documents the decision on the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript, based on the conclusion of the reviewer.
• The editorial does not accept an open review system, and ensures the fully anonymity of reviewers.

Responsibility of reviewers

Reviewers are required to:

• agree to review only those manuscripts for which they have sufficient knowledge and which can be reviewed in a timely manner;
• provide the journal with accurate information about their personal and professional knowledge and experience;
• respect the confidentiality of the review and not disclose any details of the manuscript or reviews during or after the peer-review to anyone other than those authorized for it;
• do not use the information obtained during the review for own benefit or benefit of third persons or organizations;
• declare all possible conflicts of interest and seek advice in the editorial if they are not sure whether the current situation is a conflict of interest or not;
• do not allow the review to be affected by the origin of the manuscript, nationality, religious affiliation, political or other views of the authors, and commercial considerations;
• maintain objectivity of the review, refraining from hostile statements, as well as from slanderous or humiliating comments;
• realize that attempts to impersonate another person during reviewing are a serious violation of proper behavior.

All reviewers are encouraged to check the full text of the COPE ethical review guidelines for reviewers.

Authors' responsibility

By submitting an application for the publication of the manuscript, the authors confirm that the publication was prepared in accordance with the requirements published on the journal's website and at the end of each issue of the paper version.

Authors should understand that the article may be rejected if the following is not met:

• The published study should be conducted in accordance with ethical and legal norms;
• The results of the research should be stated in clearly and honestly manner, without falsification and data juggling;
• Researchers should endeavor to describe the methodology of the research clearly and unambiguously so that their results can be confirmed by others;
• Authors should strictly ensure the originality of the material in the proposed research that is not plagiarized and has not been published before;
• Authorship should accurately reflect the contribution of each individual to the research;
• The authors are obliged to provide information on commercial organizations that supported the research or publication, and on any other conflicts of interest, that may have an impact on the content of the manuscript;
• Researchers must comply with the requirements for the design of a scientific article, and also provide all necessary (metadata for submitting an article to databases) see Guide for Authors

EQUATOR Network Recommendations

In describing the results of studies (randomized and observational, reviews and meta-analyzes, clinical observations), authors should be guided by the recommendations of the International Initiative Group for Enhancing of Quality and Transparency of Medical Research (EQUATOR Network).

Randomized controlled trials: CONSORT recommendations.

Cohort studies and case-control studies: STROBE.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyzes: PRISMA principles.

Clinical observations: CARE recommendations, checklist and chart.

Following the principles of EQUATOR Network will help to perform the study structurally, fully describe the process of the study and avoid unconfirmed results.

The recommendations of the research group EQUATOR Network are recognized by all conscientious medical Russian and foreign journals.

Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

The journal follows the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). When submitting the manuscript, information of potential conflicts of interest for each author should be provided.

Public confidence in the process of reviewing and authenticity of published articles partially depends on clear conflict of interest disclosure. We do not seek to eradicate competing interests: they are inevitable. The presence of a conflict of interest is not an ethical violation. The reader must independently evaluate the results presented in the article. If the hidden competing financial or personal interests are identified after publication, the editorial office acts in accordance with the recommendations of the International Ethics of Scientific Publications Committee (COPE).

What is a conflict of interest?

Conflict of interest arises when the author, reviewer or editor has financial or personal relations that impede impartial perception, review, and decision to publish research results (ambiguous obligations, competing interests or beliefs). Conflicts of interest arise in relations with the organization or another person.   Up ↑

Financial and personal interests

Financial relations (hiring, providing consulting services, owning shares, paying fees, paying expert opinions, patent application or patent registration, grants and other financing) is the most common cause of conflict of interest, which may undermine the credibility of the journal, authors and science as such. However, the conflict of interests can be caused by other reasons - personal relationships and beliefs (political, religious, ideological), scientific rivalry and intellectual predilections, financial and non-financial relations with organizations and funding bodies.

Who and how declares the presence or absence of a conflict of interest?

All participants in the review and publication process (authors, editors, reviewers) should report on the relationship that may contribute to the conflict of interest.

Authors

When submitting an article, authors are responsible for disclosing all financial or personal relationships that can influence their research. All authors are required to report potential conflicts of interest which may be perceived as influencing the results or conclusions presented in the work. If there is no conflict of interest, the author should indicate: Materials without information on the conflict of interest will not be directed to peer-review.

TO BE NOTICED! The author's disclosure of an obvious or potential conflict of interest (including the financial interest), as well as funding for scientific research and/or writing an article by an organization, is not an excuse for refusing publication, but gives the authors additional advantages in the review process and reflects the responsible approach of the authors to the research and publication of the results.

Editors

Editors shuuld no consider manuscripts in case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and othr interactions and relationships with authors, as well as potential conflicts of interest related to the obligations of the journal staff.

Reviewers

Reviewers should not review manuscripts in case of conflict of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with authors, companies or other organizations. Unpublished data obtained from the manuscripts can not be used in personal research without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas received during the review and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

If there is a suspicion of a conflict of interest, the editorial board is guided by the COPE algorithms:

• What to do if a reviewer suspects undisclosed conflict of interest (Col) in a submitted manuscript
• What to do if a reader suspects undisclosed conflict of interest (CoI) in a published article

Funding

When submitting an article all sources of funding must be disclosed. The authors describe the impact of sponsorship (if any) on the design of the study, the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, writing and publishing article. If the study was supported by a grant, specify the number. If the study did not have financial support, please report it: The study had no sponsorship.

Appeal

The authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles.

Appeal mechanism

1. In case of the author's disagreement with the editorial decision, the author shall contact the editorial office of the journal in writing specifying the reasons for the appeal.
2. The Commission for the Resolution of Conflicts of the journal shall consider the author's appeal.
3. A change in the editorial decision regarding the article is possible in the following cases:
   • the author provided additional actual results that were not taken into account in the initial review of the article;
   • the author provided additional material, which was not taken into account in the initial review of the article;
   • the author provided information on a conflict of interest that was not provided during the initial review of the article;
   • the author is concerned about biased review.
4. If there is sufficient information, the Conflicts Resolution Commission of the journal shall submit to the editorial board a proposal to amend or retain the primary decision regarding the publication of the article.
5. If necessary, the editorial board may invite an additional reviewer to make a final decision.
6. The decision of the editorial board following the results of the revision of the initial decision is final and no further appeal is possible.

Article Retraction

The retraction (recall, withdrawal) of an already published article is an extreme measure and is applied in case of the disclosure of facts that were not known in the course of the review. The editorial board is considering retraction if:

• There is clear evidence of inaccuracy of published information, either as a result of conscious actions (for example, falsification of data), or because of bona fide errors (for example, errors in calculations or experiments);
• The findings were previously published in another publication, but there are no proper references, permissions and justifications for the need for a re-publication (i.e., cases of duplicative publication);
• The article is plagiarized;
• The article describes unethical research.

The main purpose of the exemption is to correct the published information and ensure its integrity, and not to punish the authors who committed the violations.

Retraction mechanism

1. Authors, readers, reviewers, editors and publishers may initiate the retraction of the article by written request to the editorial office of the journal in which the article was published.   Up ↑
2. The Conflicts Resolution Commission of the journal shall consider the appeal.
3. A decision is made by the Conflicts Resolution Commission of the journal in the presence of sufficient facts in favor of the retraction.
4. The Conflicts Resolution Commission notifies the initiator of the retraction of the article on the results of consideration of the appeal in writing.
5. If the Commission decides to retract an article, the journal publishes information that the article has been retracted, indicating the metadata of the article.
6. If the articles are indexed by any databases, a letter is sent to these databases indicating that the article was retracted with an indication of the reasons.

Borrowing and Plagiarism

Authors should make sure that the data presented in the article are original; all the studies of other authors cited in the work are accompanied by references to primary sources and are included in the list of references.

TO BE NOTICED! Fragments of borrowed text without specifying the source are unacceptable.

There are different forms of plagiarism from representing someone else's work as an author's work to copying or paraphrasing essential fragments of other's works (without attribution) and claiming their own rights to the results of other people's research. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable.

The editorial office checks manuscripts for uniqueness with the Antiplagiat service www.antiplagiat.ru/. In case of detection of multiple borrowings, the editors act in accordance with the COPE algorithms:

• Suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript
• Suspected plagiarism in a published manuscript

Preprint and Postprint Policy

In the submitting process, the author must confirm that the article was not published or was not accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to the article published in the journal, the publisher asks to place a link (the full URL of the material) on the official website of the journal.

Articles posted earlier by authors on personal or public websites that are not related to other publishers are allowed for consideration.