Focus and Scope
The texts are under construction.
The journal rubrics are:
The texts are under construction.
The journal is published bimonthly.
The content of each issue of the journal goes to open access 12 months after publication (delayed open access).
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.
At initial submission, a manuscript is reviewed by editorial manager and the technical editor for the following:
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.
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:
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.
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.
Articles in the journal are indexed by Russian Science Citation Index (
Since 2016 the journal is included in the core collection of RSCI integrated with the Web of Science platform.
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.
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 (
Responsibility to readers
Responsibility to authors
Responsibility to the objects of research
Responsibility to organizations funding the research and publications
Responsibility to reviewers
Responsibility of reviewers
Reviewers are required to:
All reviewers are encouraged to check the full text of the COPE ethical review guidelines for reviewers.
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:
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 (
Randomized controlled trials:
Cohort studies and case-control studies:
Systematic reviews and meta-analyzes:
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 (
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 (
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.
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 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 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:
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.
The authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles.
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:
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.
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:
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.