Данный информационный сайт предназначен исключительно для медицинских, фармацевтических и иных работников системы здравоохранения.
Вся информация сайта www.rmj.ru (далее — Информация) может быть доступна исключительно для специалистов системы здравоохранения. В связи с этим для доступа к такой Информации от Вас требуется подтверждение Вашего статуса и факта наличия у Вас профессионального медицинского образования, а также того, что Вы являетесь действующим медицинским, фармацевтическим работником или иным соответствующим профессионалом, обладающим соответствующими знаниями и навыками в области медицины, фармацевтики, диагностики и здравоохранения РФ. Информация, содержащаяся на настоящем сайте, предназначена исключительно для ознакомления, носит научно-информационный характер и не должна расцениваться в качестве Информации рекламного характера для широкого круга лиц.
Информация не должна быть использована для замены непосредственной консультации с врачом и для принятия решения о применении продукции самостоятельно.
На основании вышесказанного, пожалуйста, подтвердите, что Вы являетесь действующим медицинским или фармацевтическим работником, либо иным работником системы здравоохранения.
The editors of RMJ in their work are guided by the traditional ethical principles of scientific periodicals and the set of principles of the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications, developed and approved by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), requiring compliance with these rules from all participants in the publishing process.
1.1. Publication of materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Editors of the journal, Reviewers, Publisher and Scientific Society for the journal "BC"
1.2. The publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in this process, but is also responsible for following all up-to-date recommendations in the published work.
1.3. The publisher is committed to the strictest supervision of scientific materials. Our journal programs provide an impartial "report" of the development of scientific thought and research, so we are also aware of the responsibility for the proper presentation of these "reports", especially in terms of the ethical aspects of the publications outlined in this document.
2. Responsibilities of Editors
2.1. Publication decision
The editor of the scientific journal BC is personally and independently responsible for making the decision to publish, often in collaboration with the relevant Scientific Society. The credibility of the work in question and its scientific significance should always underlie the decision to publish. The editor may be guided by the policy of the Editorial Board of the RMJ magazine, being limited by current legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright, legality and plagiarism.
The Editor may confer with other Editors and Reviewers (or officers of the Scientific Society) during the decision to publish.
The editor must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the Authors.
The Editor and the Editorial Board of the journal "RMJ" are obliged not to disclose information about the accepted manuscript unnecessarily to all persons, with the exception of the Authors, Reviewers, potential Reviewers, other Scientific consultants and the Publisher.
2.4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
2.4.2 Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely, request a Co-Editor, Assistant Editor, or cooperate with other members of the Editorial Board in reviewing work instead of personally reviewing and making a decision) in case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with Authors, companies, and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.
2.5. Publication oversight
An editor who provides compelling evidence that a statement or conclusion presented in a publication is erroneous should notify the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) for prompt notification of changes, withdrawals, concerns, and other relevant statements.
2.6. Research engagement and collaboration
The Editor, in conjunction with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society), shall take appropriate action in the event of ethical claims regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the Authors of the manuscript and the argumentation of the corresponding complaint or requirement, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.
3. Responsibilities of Reviewers
3.1. Influence on the decisions of the Editorial Board
Peer review helps the Editor make the decision to publish and, through appropriate interaction with Authors, can also help the Author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communications, located at the very “heart” of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scholars who wish to contribute to a publication are required to do substantial peer review work.
Any selected Reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to complete the work quickly should notify the Editor of the BC Journal and ask to be excluded from the review process of the corresponding manuscript.
Any manuscript received for peer review must be treated as a confidential document. This work may not be opened or discussed with anyone not authorized to do so by the Editor.
3.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should clearly and reasonably express their opinion.
3.5. Recognition of primary sources
Reviewers should identify significant published work relevant to the topic and not included in the bibliography of the manuscript. For any statement (observation, conclusion or argument) published earlier, the manuscript must have a corresponding bibliographic reference. The Reviewer should also draw the attention of the Editor to the discovery of a significant similarity or coincidence between the manuscript in question and any other published work that is in the field of scientific competence of the Reviewer.
3.6. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
3.6.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
3.6.2 Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.
4. Responsibilities of Authors
4.1. Manuscript Requirements
4.1.1 The authors of the original article should provide credible results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the study. The data underlying the work must be accurately presented. The work must contain sufficient details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. False or knowingly erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
4.1.2 Reviews and scientific articles should also be accurate and objective, the point of view of the Editors should be clearly indicated.
4.2. Data access and storage
Raw data relevant to the manuscript may be requested from the Authors for review by the Editors. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to this kind of information (according to the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if feasible, and in any case be prepared to retain this data for an adequate period of time after publication.
4.3. Originality and plagiarism
4.3.1 Authors must ensure that the work presented is wholly original and, in the case of using works or statements by other Authors, must provide appropriate bibliographic references or excerpts.
4.3.2 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as the author's, to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming one's own rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and is unacceptable.
4.4. Plurality, redundancy and simultaneity of publications
4.4.1 An author should not publish a manuscript mostly devoted to the same research in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
4.4.2 The author should not submit a previously published article for consideration to another journal.
4.4.3 Publishing a certain type of article (eg clinical practice guidelines, translated articles) in more than one journal is ethical in some cases, subject to certain conditions. Authors and Editors of interested journals must agree to a secondary publication presenting necessarily the same data and interpretations as in the primary published work.
A bibliography of the primary work should also be included in the second publication. More information on acceptable forms of secondary (repeated) publications can be found on the page www.icmje.org
4.5. Recognition of primary sources
The contribution of others must always be acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the performance of the submitted work. Data obtained privately, for example, in the course of a conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as evaluation of manuscripts or awards of grants, should not be used without the express written permission of the Authors of the work related to confidential sources.
4.6. Publication authorship
4.6.1 The authors of the publication can only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the concept of the work, the development, execution or interpretation of the presented research. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as Contributors. Where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of the research project, they should be listed as having made significant contributions to the research.
4.6.2 The author must make sure that all participants who have made a significant contribution to the study are presented as Co-Authors and not listed as Co-Authors those who did not participate in the study, that all Co-Authors saw and approved the final version of the work and agreed with its submission for publication.
4.7. Risks, as well as people and animals that are the objects of research & nbsp;
4.7.1 If the work involves the use of chemicals, procedures, or equipment that may involve any unusual risk, the Author must clearly indicate this in the manuscript.
4.7.2 If the work involves the participation of animals or people as objects of research, the Authors must make sure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the study comply with the laws and regulations of research organizations, and are approved by the relevant committees. The manuscript should clearly state that informed consent has been obtained from all subjects of research. Privacy rights must always be respected.
4.8. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1 All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that may be perceived as affecting the results or conclusions presented in the work.
4.8.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consulting, stock ownership, royalties, expert opinions, patent applications or patent registrations, grants, and other financial support. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.
4.9. Significant errors in published works
If the Author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author must inform the Editor of the journal "RMJ" about this and interact with the Editor in order to withdraw the publication or correct errors as soon as possible. If the Editor or the Publisher receives information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the Author is obliged to withdraw the work or correct the errors as soon as possible.
5. Responsibilities of the Publisher
5.1. The Publisher shall follow policies and procedures that promote ethical responsibilities for Editors,
Reviewers and Authors of the journal "RMJ" in accordance with these requirements. The Publisher must be sure that the potential profit from advertising or reprint production does not influence the Editors' decisions.
5.2. The publishing house should support the editors of the journal "RMJ" in considering claims to the ethical aspects of the published materials and help interact with other journals and / or publishing houses, if this contributes to the performance of duties by the editors.
5.3. The publisher should promote good research practice and implement industry standards to improve ethical guidelines, withdrawal procedures, and error correction.
5.4. The publisher must provide appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice) if necessary.
Данный информационный сайт предназначен исключительно для медицинских, фармацевтических и иных работников системы здравоохранения.