Русская версия

The goal of “RMJ” is participation in postgraduate education of physicians by familiarizing them with modern research, practical and educational activities in the field of medicine. The main audience of the journal are general practitioners, narrowly focused specialists, clinical residents and graduate students.

The journal is distributed by free subscription targeted at health-care facilities, as well as at medical exhibitions, conferences and workshops.

The journal’s main features include articles on etiology and pathogenesis of diseases, epidemiology, clinical features, the latest methods of diagnosis, treatment and prevention.

The journal presents the main directions of modern medicine, such as cardiology, neurology, obstetrics and gynecology, pediatrics, pulmonology, otolaryngology, gastroenterology, endocrinology, urology, dermatology, rheumatology, surgery and ophthalmology.

The journal’s thematic issues are edited by leading experts in the given field of medicine.

Rules for peer review

All scientific manuscripts submitted for publication are subject to peer review.

The reviewers are established scholars whose authority is recognized in the field related to the content of the article.. The reviewer cannot be the author or co-author of the manuscript under review, or the scientific adviser (consultant) of degree candidates, or the author(s) colleagues working in the same division.

Reviews are discussed by the editorial board and serve as the basis for the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. A review is signed by a specialist, who provides the surname, name and patronymic, date, the scientific degree, academic rank, position occupied by the reviewer, and the full address. The article sent to the editor could be accompanied by a letter from the sending organization, signed by its head.

Reviews of the received materials are stored for 3 (three) years. Manuscripts violating “Manuscript Submission and Publication Rules ” and not containing the corresponding author’s contact information will not be considered for publication.

All reviewing is confidential. It is conducted by the double-blind method, which means that neither the author, nor the reviewer knows each other’s names. The breach of confidentiality is possible only if there is a reviewer’s statement of consent about reporting his name to the author. Reviewers cannot to make copies of manuscripts and save them into their personal computers, as well as to give a part of the manuscript for review to another person without the permission of the editors. Reviewers cannot take advantage of the knowledge of the content of the work prior to its publication.

A review provides an objective assessment of a scientific article and contains a comprehensive analysis of its research and methodological strengths and weaknesses. The review shall be made in a free form, with obligatory coverage of the following provisions:

— Relevance (a brief explanation of the conditions that caused the need for formulating and solving the problem

— Scientific novelty of the research ( a brief description of the new scientific results obtained by the author);

— The importance of the task and its practical significance (specific results obtained by the author (s) and how they can be applied and implemented in practice);

— The adequacy and timeliness of research methods and statistical processing of materials;

— Sufficiency of the material in the study;

— The correctness and consistency of the discussion of the results;

— Correspondence of the conclusions to the goals and objectives of the study;

— The quality of the literature survey(correspondence of the submitted bibliography to the modern level of the problem development);

— The quality of the article formatting as a whole: the style, terminology, wording.

The final part of the review provides valid conclusions about the manuscript as a whole and a clear recommendation about the advisability of publication or the need for its revision. In case of a negative evaluation of the manuscript as a whole (a recommended rejection), the reviewer must justify his conclusions. In case of non-compliance of the manuscript to one or more publication criteria the reviewer recommends to revise the article makes recommendations for improving the manuscript (with an indication of inaccuracies and mistakes made by the author).

The editorial board informs the author about the result of the review (in an electronic form). At the request of the author and the reviewer the review can be carried out in person. The revised article is again sent for review to the same or a different reviewer (at the discretion Editions). If the author disagrees with the reviewers comments, , he may apply for re-reviewing or withdraw the article.

In the event of a negative review the article is transferred to another reviewer who is not informed about the results of the previous review. In case of a negative result of the second review the copies of the negative reviews are sent to the author(s). The final decision on whether the article should be published after the review is made by the Editorial Board.

Reviews are submitted to the relevant authorities upon request. The editorial board does not keep the manuscript that are not accepted for publication. Manuscripts accepted for publication will not be returned.

Publishing Ethics

Compliance requirements of publication ethics in the preparation and publication of the journal “RMJ” apply to all members of the publishing process, i.e., authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher of the journal. The editorial board monitors compliance with the ethics requirements based on the manuals prepared by international specialized organizations, associations and publishers, as well as the Association of Science Editors and Publishers.

Responsibility of the editors of the journal “RMJ”

1. The editors are personally and independently responsible for the content of the materials published and recognize that responsibility. The reliability of the work in question and its scientific significance should always be the basis in the decision to publish.

2. The editors make fair and objective decisions, regardless of any commercial considerations and provide a fair and efficient process for the independent review.
3. The editors evaluate manuscripts’ intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, origin, nationality, and/or the political preferences of the authors.
4. The editors do not work with articles for which they have a conflict of interest.

5. The editors resolve conflict situations arising during the editorial process, as well as use all available means to resolve these situations.

6. The editors of the journal publish information concerning corrections, rebuttals, and review articles in case the need arises.

7. The editors of the journal do not publish the final version of the article without the consent of the authors.

The responsibility of the reviewers

1. The reviewer evaluates his or her own availability before the examination of the manuscript and accepts materials for review only if the reviewer is able to allow for sufficient time as to ensure the quality his or her work.
2. The reviewer notifies the editorial staff of any conflict of interest (if one exists) before the start of the review of the article.
3. The reviewer does not send information about the article and or any of the data contained within the article to any third party.
4. The reviewer does not use the information obtained from the article for any personal and or commercial purposes.
5. The reviewer does not make conclusions about the quality of the article on the basis of subjective data, e.g. the personal relationship to the author, gender, age, religion, etc.
6. The reviewer uses only proper and appropriate language and explanations in respect to the articles, avoiding any personal remarks.

The responsibility of the authors of material for the journal “RMJ”

1. The author submits materials for review, which have not been previously published. If the article is based on previously published material which are not academic articles or based on materials presented on the Internet, the author should notify the editorial staff of the journal.
2. The author does not submit the same article to different journals for review.
3. All co-authors consent to the submission of their articles to the journal.
4. The author informs the editorial staff of a potential conflict of interest.
5. The author takes the necessary steps to ensure the correctness of citations in the submitted article.
6. The list of authors included only individuals who have made significant contributions to the research.
7. The author correctly cites his or her previous work as to avoid self-plagerism in the manuscript and the artificial increase of volume of publications (salami-slicing).
8. The author, who is acting as the contact with journal, informs all other co-authors of all changes and suggestions from the editorial staff, and does not make decisions regarding the article alone without the written consent of all co-authors.
9. The author properly corresponds with the reviewer through contact with the editor and responds to comments and observations if they arise.
10. If necessary, the authors either adjust the data presented in the article, or refute them.

The responsibility of the publisher

1. The publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in the process, but is also responsible for complying with all current
guidelines and standards for publishing scientific work.
2. The publisher does not affect the editorial policy of the journal.
3. The publisher provides legal support to the journal if necessary.
4. The publisher provides for the timely release of futures issues of the journal.
5. The publisher publishes changes, explanations, and recalls articles that have been identified to contain scientific misconduct and or critical errors.

Policy of disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished data from manuscripts submitted for consideration can not be used for personal research without the expressed written consent of the author.

Information or ideas obtained through peer review and related actives, which potentially can be beneficial to any party other than the author, must be kept confidential and not be used for personal gain.

Reviewers should not participate in the examination of manuscripts in the event of a conflict of interest that is a result of any competitive, cooperative, and or other interactions and relationships with any of the authors, companies, and or other organizations involved in the creation or presentation of the works.

Author fees

Publication in “RMJ” 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.

Derivation and Plagiarism

During the consideration of an article, the editorial staff of the journal Science Editor and Publisher may conduct a verification of the submitted materials with the help the Anti-plagiarism system. In the case of the discovery of multiple incidents of content matching, the editorial staff acts in accordance with the rules of COPE.