Ethical standards

The main objective of the Journal of Ural Medical Academic Science is the dissemination of knowledge and results obtained by global research communities. The Editorial Board adheres to a neutral position on all issues, published in the Journal. Any published information may serve as a basis for further discussions.

Publication in a peer-reviewed scientific magazine has several functions, one of which is to verify and ensure the reliability of the course, stages and accurate results of the study. The publishing process involves many steps, each of which plays an important role. Consequently, the Authors of the articles, the magazine Editor-in-Chief, the Reviewers and the Editorial Board are obliged to comply with ethical standards at all stages of publications, starting from submission of articles and ending with their publication in the Journal.

The Editorial Board seeks to comply with the norms of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process, carefully following the rules of such authoritative associations as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), which establish standards and provide guidelines for best practices in order to meet these requirements.

The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board adhere to the principles developed by the Council of Scientific Editors (CSE) “Statement of Editorial Policy”, which cover the duties and rights of the peer-reviewed journal editors.

Below is a brief overview of the requirements for editors, reviewers, and authors.

1. Ethical Requirements

Responsibilities of Editor-in-Chief

• To perform his/her duties in a balanced, objective and fair manner, and to eschew discrimination on grounds of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, the ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.

• To objectively assess all the submitted articles in terms of their scientific contribution and without taking into account any commercial considerations.

• To resolve all complaints and contradictions in accordance with the policies of the scientific community. The author must be given an opportunity to respond to any complaints and to justify the existing contradictions. All complaints must be investigated regardless of the publication date. All documents related to complaints must be retained.

Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

• To contribute to the decision-making process, and to assist in improving the quality of the published paper by reviewing the manuscript objectively, in a timely manner.

• To respect confidentiality of any information provided by the Editor or the Author during or after the peer-review process and not to keep a copy of the article after it is reviewed.

• To notify the Editor of articles published earlier in this or any other magazines, if any.

• To notify the Editor and, if necessary, to give the article to another reviewer, in the case of a potential conflict of interest (financial, organizational or any other relationships between the Reviewer and the Author).

• In their work the peer-reviewers are guided by the “Singapore Statement on Research Integrity” (2010).

Responsibilities of Authors

• To ensure the reliability, accuracy and completeness of the  information on the research work described in the article; to provide this information upon request at any time; and to give consent to publication of the obtained data with the purpose of their further use.

• Not to submit the same work concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. If the Author uses the information that was previously published, this fact should be made clear to readers and the Author should present clear and visible references to the previous publications. Authors should provide copies of the related publications or works.

• To follow applicable copyright laws and conventions. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.

• To provide a statement attesting to the originality of the study they have submitted for consideration, and to indicate the sources of the cited information. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced.

• To comply with all relevant legislation while conducting research work involving human subjects and animals (for example, the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki, Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, the European Convention for the protection of vertebrate animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes). The Author is obliged to obtain a formal consent to publication from the individual(s) who participated in the study, and to maintain strict confidentiality at all times. All authors should agree to be listed and should approve the submitted and accepted versions of the publication.

• To disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest (for example, competing interests that, in the Authors’ opinion, might bias or be seen to bias publication of their work).

• To promptly notify the Editor if a significant error in publication is identified. The authors should cooperate with the Editor to publish an erratum, addendum, corrigendum notice, where it is deemed necessary.

• To take full responsibility for possible plagiarism of text, graphics and other materials. Any violation of copyright will be reviewed according to the COPE algorithms.

All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. Authorship credit should be based on:

1.    Substantial contributions to conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data;

2.    Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and

3.    Final approval of the version to be published.

Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of a research group, alone, does not justify authorship.

The contributors who do not qualify for authorship or do not meet the criteria for the authorship should be listed  with their consent, in the Acknowledgment section. 

The order of authorship on the byline should be a joint decision of the co-authors.

2. Procedures for dealing with unethical behavior

Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the Editor-in-Сhief and the publisher  at all levels and at any stage of the peer-review process.

Whoever informs the Editor-in-Сhief of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

Investigation

An initial decision to start investigation should be taken by the Editor-in-Сhie , who may address to the publisher, if necessary.

Evidence should be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

Minor breaches

Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

Serious breaches

Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The Editor-in-Сhief together with the publisher or the scientific community should make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)

•      Informing the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
•      A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behavior.
•      Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.
•      Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.
•      A formal letter to the head of the author's or reviewer's department or funding agency.
•      Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author's or reviewer's department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
•      Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
•         Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organization or higher authority for further investigation and action.

3. Publication business model and revenue

The Editorial Board shall bear the offset expenses associated with publishing the magazine, including those of peer review management, journal production, online hosting and archiving.

The expenses will be compensated by charging a publication fee to the authors at the rate of 8,000 rubles per article (black / white illustrations). The authors will have to pay the additional cost of printing color illustrations (3,500 rubles per color page).

In the case of a negative review or rejection of the publication, the Author receives 70% of the amount paid for the pre-press preparation services.

The articles from Ural State Medical University (Ekaterinburg) as the main sponsor of the magazine, are published free of charge.

Peer reviewing is not paid.

4. Conflict of Interest Policy

A potential conflict of interest exists when any financial, personal or professional interests may potentially or actually compromise the reviewer’s or the editor’s professional judgment, which may substantially influence the editorial decision about publishing. 

The Journal presumes that by submitting a paper the Author assures that:

All funding sources are acknowledged in the submitted article;

There are no commercial, financial, personal, professional involvements that might lead to a conflict of interest related to the submitted article.

Otherwise, the author should make an explicit declaration of possible conflicting interests in a cover letter that accompanies the manuscript.

If there is a conflict of interests, authors may also suggest excluding any specific editors or reviewers from the peer review process.

Editors and reviewers are also required to declare any competing interests that may influence the judgment of the Editorial Board.

If there is a conflict of interest between the Editor or Reviewer and the Author of the article, the article should be transferred to another editor or reviewer, respectively.

All articles submitted for publication in the Journal should be given unbiased and objective assessment and should not be rejected when any conflicting interests are declared by any participant of the process, since the contributions are judged exclusively on their scientific merit.

5. Privacy Statement.

Information about the authors (surname, name, patronymic, affiliation, e-mail, contact number), which is provided by them for publication in the Journal, is becoming available for indefinite range of persons, for which the authors give their written permission by signing the corresponding Letter Of Agreement as a part of Author's Questionnaire, provided within the list of items to accompany the manuscript (questionnaire form is available on the site). The above mentioned data is published for the convenience of the authors with the aim of the full and correct account of publications and their citation by the corresponding bibliography companies and providing the possibility of contacting the authors and the scientific community.

Personal information provided by the authors in addition to the referred above, include additional e-mails and phone numbers. These will be used exclusively for contacting the authors in the process of preparing the publication and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.