Онкология Ethics of journal publications
eng
ONCOLOGY BULLETIN OF THE VOLGA REGION

Scientific-practical Journal for general practitioners and researchers

Search

Ethics of journal publications

The Editorial Board of the Journal “Oncology Bulletin of the Volga Region” observes the principles of publication ethics approved by the global community and reflected, in particular, in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); also, we take into account the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishers.

To avoid malpractices in publications (plagiarism, giving unreliable data, etc.), to ensure the high quality of scientific publications and recognition of the obtained scientific results by the public, each Editorial Board member, author, reviewer, publisher, as well as organizations participating in the publishing process, must observe the ethical standards, norms and rules, and take all reasonable measures to prevent their violation. Observance of the ethical rules of scientific publication by all participants of the process will ensure the authors’ intellectual property rights, enhance publication quality, and exclude the possibility of illegitimate use of the authors’ materials.

1. Principles of professional ethics of a publisher

In their professional activity, a publisher is responsible for publication of the authors’ works, which implies the obligation to observe the following basic principles and procedures:

1.1. To promote the observance of the ethical rules by the editorial board, editorial committee, reviewers and authors in compliance with these requirements.

1.2. To render assistance to the journal editorial board is considering the claims against ethical aspects of the published materials and in interaction with other journals and/or publishers, if it promotes fulfilling the editors’ responsibilities.

1.3. To provide confidentiality of the information obtained from the authors, and any other information, till its publication.

1.4. To realize that the journal’s activity is not a commercial project, and is nit aimed at profit making.

1.5. To be always ready to publish corrections, explanations, refutations and apologies, when it is necessary.

1.6. To provide the opportunity for the journal’s editorial board to exclude publications containing plagiarism and unreliable data.

1.7. The publisher (director) has the right to reject the manuscript or demand its correction, if it is formatted with violations of the Rules adopted in the Journal and agreed upon by the Publisher.

1.8. The article accepted for publication is allocated for open access; the copyright is retained by the authors.

1.9. To publish the information about financial support of the research, if the author gives such information.

1.10. When detecting conceptual, grammar, stylistic or other mistakes, the editorial board is obliged to take all measures for correcting them.

1.11. To reconcile the editorial corrections with the author.

1.12. Not to delay the issuing of the journal.

 

2. Ethical principles to be observed by the author of a scientific publication

The authors (a collective of authors) submitting materials for publication in the scientific Journal “Oncology Bulletin of the Volga Region” realize that they are primarily responsible for the novelty and reliability of the scientific research results, which implies the obligation to observe the following principles:

2.1. The authors must provide reliable results of the carried out research. The knowingly erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.

2.2. The authors must guarantee that the research results, described in the submitted manuscript, are completely original. The borrowed extracts or statements must be formatted with obligatory indication of the author and source. Excessive borrowings, as well as plagiarism in any form, including unformatted citations, rephrasing or appropriation of rights for other people’s results, are unethical and unacceptable. Any borrowings without citation will be regarded as plagiarism.

2.3. The authors must present only true facts and data in the manuscript; present sufficient information for other researchers to check and repeat the experiments; not use information obtained privately, without open written consent; not allow data fabrication and falsification.

2.4. The authors must not allow double publications (the author states in the cover letter that the work is published for the first time). If certain elements of the manuscript were published before, the author must refer to the earlier work and state the differences between the new and the earlier work.

2.5. The authors must not submit the manuscript which was submitted to another journal and is under review there, as well as the article already published in another journal.

2.6. The authors must acknowledge the contribution of all persons who influenced the course of research; in particular, the article must contain references to all works which mattered when doing the research.

2.7. The authors must observe ethical norms when criticizing or making remarks about the third parties’ research.

2.8. The authors must include all persons making significant contribution to the research. The person who did not participate in the research must not be indicated as coauthors.

2.9. The authors must respectfully treat the work f the editorial board and reviewers, and correct all specified drawbacks or explain them argumentatively.

2.10. The authors must submit and format the manuscript in compliance with the rules adopted in the journal.

2.11. The authors must immediately inform the editorial board of the journal about all detected essential errors or mistakes during its reviewing or after publication;

 2.12. The authors must present the proofs of the correctness of the original article to the editorial board or the publisher, or correct the essential errors, if these became known to the editorial board or the publisher through the third parties.

 

3. Ethical principles in the work of a reviewer

A reviewer performs scientific expertise of the author’s materials; therefore, their actions must be unbiased, which is provided by observing the following principles:

3.1. The manuscript under review must be regarded as a confidential document, which cannot be transferred for viewing or discussing to the third parties not authorized by the editorial board.

3.2. The reviewers must realize that the submitted manuscripts are an intellectual property of the authors and belong to the confidential information. Violation of the confidentiality is only possible in case the reviewer declares that the materials presented in the article are unreliable or falsified;

3.3. The reviewer must draw the attention of the editor-in-chief (and/or their deputy) to an essential or partial similarity of the reviewed manuscript with another work, as well as to the absence of references to provisions, conclusions or arguments previously published in the works of the same author or other authors.

3.4. The reviewer must point at the relevant published works, which are not cited (in the article).

3.5. The reviewer must give an objective and well-reasoned estimation of the presented research results, as well as substantiated recommendations. The personal critique of the author is unacceptable.

3.6. The reviewer’s must comments and recommendations must be objective and matter-of-fact, aimed at enhancing the scientific level of the manuscript.

3.7. The reviewer must make decisions basing on particular facts, and give proofs of their decisions.

3.8. The reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the manuscripts for their own purposes.

3.9. The reviewers are not allowed to use in their own interests the knowledge of the article content before its publication.

3.10. The reviewer, who, in their opinion, does not possess sufficient qualification for reviewing the manuscript, or cannot be objective, as in case of conflict of interest with the author or the organization, must inform the editor about it, requesting to exclude them from reviewing this manuscript;

3.11. The article reviews are confidential. The reviewer’s name is known to the executive editor and the editor-in-chief (and/or their deputy) of the journal. This information is not disclosed.

 

4. Principles of professional ethics in the work of the editor-in-chief

In their work, the editor-in-chief is responsible for publication of the authors’ works, which implies the obligation to observe the following basic principles:

4.1. When making a decision on publication, the editor-in-chief of a scientific journal is guided by the reliability of the submitted data and the scientific significance of the work under review.

4.2. The editor-in-chief must estimate the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences.

4.3. The unpublished data contained in the submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal purposes or transferred to the third parties without the written consent of the author. The information or ideas obtained during editing and related to the possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used to acquire personal advantages.

4.4. The editor-in-chief must allow the publication of information if there is sufficient evidence of it being plagiarism.

4.5. In their work, the editor-in-chief is obliged:

– to constantly improve the journal;

– to follow the principle of the freedom of opinion;

– to strive for satisfying the needs of the journal readers and authors;

– to exclude the influence of business or political interests on decision-making about publication of the materials;

– to make decisions about publishing the materials according to the following basic criteria: compliance of the manuscript with the journal theme; topicality, novelty and scientific significance of the work submitted; clarity of  exposition; reliability of the results and completeness of conclusions. The quality and topicality of research underlie the decision on its publication;

– to take all reasonable measures to provide the high quality of the published materials and protect confidentiality of the personal information;

– to take into account the reviewers’ recommendations when making the final decision about publishing the article. The responsibility for the decision about publishing lies fully on the journals’ editorial board;

– to substantiate the decision about publishing or rejecting the article;

– to provide the opportunity for the author of the reviewed material to substantiate their research position;

– in case of changing the composition of the editorial board, not to cancel the previous board’s decision about publishing the material.

4.6. The editor-in-chief and the publisher must not leave unanswered the claims related to the reviewed manuscripts or published materials, and in case of conflict they must take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights.

 

5. Conflict of interest

To avoid the cases of publication ethics violation, it is necessary to exclude the conflict of interest of all parties in the process of a manuscript publication. The conflict of interest appears if the author, reviewer or editorial board member has financial, scientific or personal relations which may influence their actions. Such relations are called dual liabilities, competing interests or competing loyalties.

To prevent the conflict of interest and in compliance with the adopted ethical norms of the journal, each of the parties is obliged as follows.

The editor is obliged:

– to transfer the manuscript for review to another editorial board member, if the initially appointed reviewer has conflict of interest with the author of the submitted manuscript;

– to request information from all participants of the publication process about the possibility of competing interests;

– to make a decision about publishing the information stated in the author’s letter, related to the conflict of scientific and/or financial interest, if this information is confidential and may influence the estimation of the published work by the readers or the scientific community;

– to ensure the publishing of correction, provided the information about the conflict of interest was obtained after publication of the article.

The author is obliged:

– to state the place of their work and the source of financing the research.

The reviewer is obliged:

– to inform the editor-in-chief about the conflict of interest (dual liabilities, competing interests) and refuse from the manuscript expertise.

 

Violations

In case of a situation related to violation of the publication ethics on the part of the editor, author, or reviewer, mandatory investigation is required. This is true for both published and unpublished materials. The editorial board is obliged to demand explanations, without attracting persons who may have a conflict of interest with one of the parties.

Provided the material containing significant inaccuracies was published, it must be immediately corrected in the form available for the readers and indexing systems.

 

This section is prepared using the materials of a publisher of scientific and medical literature Elsevier, and the materials of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).





Наши партнеры



Copyright © 2014 | Все права защищены
RAFANDOS.COM | SUPPORT