Ethical principles

1.1. Duties of the editor

1.1.1. The editor must act objectively and fairly in the performance of his or her duties, evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnicity or geographical origin of the authors.

1.1.2. The editor must ensure that published materials comply with international standards of scientific and publication ethics.

1.1.3. The editor is obliged to ensure the high quality of published materials and their substantive integrity, as well as to publish corrections, clarifications, and apologies when necessary.

1.1.4. The editor is obliged to guarantee that all submitted articles will be objectively assessed in terms of their scientific significance without any commercial influence.

1.1.5. If there is a conflict of interests between the editor and the author of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational, or other relationships between the editor and the author), the editor is obliged to transfer the article to another editor.

1.1.6. The editor is obliged to keep the names and details of the reviewers confidential and not to disclose the names and details of the authors of the articles to the reviewers.

1.1.7. The editor is responsible for disclosing any information about the received manuscript to third parties who don’t belong to the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, and publishers.

1.1.8. The editor must warrant that all complaints and contradictions are considered in accordance with the policy of scientific society. The author must be given an opportunity to respond to any complaints and substantiate any contradictions. All complaints must be considered regardless of when the publication was approved. All documentation somehow related to the complaints must be retained.

1.1.9. The editor has the right to reject a manuscript at the stage preceding the peer review if there is a compelling reason for this: the topic of the article does not correspond to the topic of the journal; the article is of obviously low scientific quality; the article has been previously published in another publication; the submitted materials reveal a fundamental contradiction with the ethical principles adhered to by the journal, etc. For more details, see the Rules for authors.

1.2. Responsibilities of a Reviewer

The purpose of the peer review process is to assist the editors in making editorial decisions and to assist the author in improving the submitted manuscript. In this connection, a reviewer should:

act objectively and in a timely manner;
inform the editors if a reviewer decides, that he / she does not feel qualified to review an article or does not have enough time to complete the review promptly, and request to be excluded from reviewing the relevant article;
evaluate the article critically but constructively;
avoid derogatory comments and personal criticism of the authors;
prepare detailed, reasoned comments about the research and the article that can assist the authors in improving the work;
identify and indicate in the review instances where relevant published work has not been cited in the text of the article or is not listed in the reference list; identify and indicate in the review whether all statements, conclusions, and ideas borrowed from other publications are provided with references;
notify the editorial board if the reviewed article has a significant overlap or similarity with any other published material known to the reviewer;
warn the editorial board if there is an obvious or potential conflict of interest that could affect the perception and interpretation of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational or other relationships between the reviewer and the author). See also the section on disclosing conflicts of interest in ICMJE Recommendations.

In their work, the reviewer is guided by the Singapore Statement of Research Integrity.

A list of reviewer responsibilities can be found in WAME materials (here and here), and the role and responsibilities of the reviewer can also be found in CSE Recommendations. Ethical principles for reviewers are presented by COPE.

See also Peer review.

1.3. Author’s Responsibilities

1.3.1. The author guarantees the authenticity of the material presented in the article and its compliance with the requirements of the current legislation of the Russian Federation and is solely responsible for the content of the article. All claims, lawsuits, and other demands of third parties, as well as claims/orders of government agencies related to the content of the article, are settled by the author independently and at his own expense.

1.3.2. The author confirms that the article does not violate copyright and other rights, including intellectual property rights and personal non-property rights, as well as the current legislation of the Russian Federation. The author takes full responsibility for possible plagiarism of text, illustrations, etc. Any violation of copyright will be considered by the editors in accordance with the COPE algorithm.

1.3.3. The author must have accurate, reliable, objective and complete information on the research described in the article, including the original (raw) research data. This information can be sent at the request of the editors, including for provision to reviewers. The author’s consent to publish the data for the purpose of their further use is required. Submission of false data or knowingly erroneous statements in a manuscript will be regarded as a gross violation of publication ethics, and such a manuscript will be rejected by the editors for publication.

1.3.4. The author guarantees that the article, in whole or in part, has not been previously published, and is not currently under consideration or in the process of publication in another publication. If the article has previously been submitted for consideration to other publications but has not been accepted for publication, this must be indicated in the cover letter, otherwise the editors may misinterpret the results of checking the text for unauthorized borrowing and reject the article. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at a time is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable. The editors will reject from publication any manuscripts that are under consideration or have previously been published in other publications.

1.3.5. The author must confirm that his or her article is original. In the event that information that has been previously published is used in the article, the author must indicate the source and author of the cited information. In addition, the author is obliged to provide the editor with a copy of the cited article.

1.3.6. The author is responsible for compliance with national and local laws and biomedical ethical standards when performing research involving humans and animals (e.g., World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki; National Institutes of Health (NIH) Policy on Animal Research; European Union Directive on Animal Research).

The manuscript should reflect all risks (obvious and potential) to which the research subjects (humans or animals) were exposed: exposure to chemicals (including drugs), procedures or equipment, and other situations that could harm the health or pose a danger to the life of the research subjects.

If the experimental study involved living humans or animals, the author should reflect in the manuscript that all stages of the study were carried out in accordance with the law and regulatory documents. The author should also provide information that the study protocol was reviewed by an ethics committee with the obligatory indication of the name of the committee (or the organization under which the committee was created), the date and number of the minutes of the meeting at which the study was approved. The editors have the right to request certified copies of the relevant protocols from the author.

The manuscript must clearly reflect that voluntary written informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from all human subjects.

The author must obtain permission to publish from the person(s) who participated in the study. The author is solely responsible for ensuring that the manuscript does not in any way reveal the identity of the study participants (or clinical case description). The author should ensure that the data presented in the manuscript cannot be used to identify the study subjects.

1.3.7. The author should disclose (declare in the appropriate section of the manuscript) actual and potential conflicts of interests (e.g., competing interests that the author believes may directly or indirectly influence the results, conclusions presented in the work, or their interpretation, or the publication process).

Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed:

receipt of financial support for any stage of the research or writing of the article (including grants and other financial support);
any connection (contract work, consulting, stock ownership, honoraria, provision of expert opinions) with organizations that have a direct interest in the subject of the study or review;
a patent application or registration of a patent for the results of the study (copyright, etc.).

1.3.8. Throughout the publication process, the author is obliged to cooperate with the editors and the publisher, supplementing, shortening and correcting the article, if necessary.

1.3.9. Basing on the results of the review, the article may be sent to the author for revision. The author should take an active part in the review process, promptly answering questions and, if necessary, making corrections to the manuscript in accordance with the requirements of the reviewer.