Preview

User

Not a user? Register with this site Forgot your password?

Lechaschi Vrach

Advanced search

Editorial Policies

Aim and Scope

The aim of the journal is to aid in advancing research in medicine and to contribute to knowledge sharing among scientists and practitioners, as well as teachers and medical students.

Objectives of the journal:

  1. To provide the medical community with the state-of-the-art information about latest achievements and prospects of domestic and foreign medical science and healthcare.
  2. All-round development of preventive healthcare and promotion of the advances in medical sciences.
  3. Systematic publication of materials that contribute to improving healthcare professionals' awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and skills.
  4. Publication of materials that highlight and promote best practices for general practitioners, internists, and specialists of various medical disciplines.
  5. Wide coverage of international scientific contacts.

Target audience: practitioners of various specialties: therapists, pediatricians, endocrinologists, cardiologists, rheumatologists, neuropsychiatrists, pulmonologists, gastroenterologists, otorhinolaryngologists, dermatologists, infectious disease specialists, urologists and gynecologists, family doctors, emergency physicians. The journal is received monthly by heads of healthcare, chief physicians, deputy chief physicians for the medical part, heads of departments, rectors of universities, heads of departments and teachers of medical educational institutions.

Main topic: The journal has a practical orientation and publishes articles by leading experts, opinion leaders covering current problems of the clinic, diagnosis and treatment of a wide range of nosologies; optimal algorithms for diagnosis and therapy of internal diseases, relief of urgent conditions.

These issues are of particular interest and practical importance in the daily work of both therapists and practitioners – the target audience of the journal.

Geography of distribution:

  • Russia – 76.5%
  • Kazakhstan – 5.65%
  • Ukraine – 5.59%
  • Belarus – 5.16%
  • Uzbekistan – 1.02%
  • Kyrgyzstan – 0.8%
  • other countries – 5.28%

 

Section Policies

ALLERGOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
GASTROENTEROLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
DERMATOVENEROLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
GYNECOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
HEPATOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
NUTRITIOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
CARDIOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
RHEUMATOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
URONEPHROLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
ENDOCRINOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
CLINICAL TRIALS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
PEDIATRICS. NEONATOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
ALMA-MATER
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
PORTAL NEWS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
TOPICAL THEME. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
DISCUSSION CLUB
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
RHEUMATOLOGY. PAIN
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INFECTIONS. VACCINE PROPHYLAXIS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
BRONCHOPULMONOLOGY. OTOLARYNGOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
GASTROENTEROLOGY. HEPATOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
CARDIOLOGY. ANGIOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
THERAPY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
PSYCHONEUROLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
PEDIATRICS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
ON A NOTE!
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
TOPICAL THEME. GASTROENTEROLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
TOPICAL THEME. DERMATOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
GYNECOLOGY. ENDOCRINOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
NEUROLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
TOPICAL THEME. PAIN
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
TOPICAL THEME. OSTEOPOROSIS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INFECTIONS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
TOPICAL THEME. Dermatovenereology
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Publication Frequency

12 issues per year, 24 issues per 2 years

 

Open Access Policy

«Lechaschi Vrach» is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediately upon publication.

Publication in «Lechaschi Vrach» is free of charge for all the authors.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

For more information please read the BOAI statement.

 

Archiving

  • Russian State Library (RSL)
  • National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

 

Peer-Review

Peer review is the process of the independent assessment of the research paper by an expert in the relevant field who is not part of the Journal's editorial board. The editorial team of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal follows COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines in working with manuscripts, reviewers, and organizing the review process.

Type of Peer Review

All manuscripts submitted to the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal undergo mandatory double-blind (double- anonymized) peer review. This means that neither the author nor the reviewer knows each other's identity or affiliation, and all correspondence is conducted through the Journal's editor. Each manuscript is sent to at least two experts.

Review Timeline

The peer review process in the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal typically takes 4 to 8 weeks. This includes time for the initial assessment, selecting reviewers, preparing the review, allowing the author to revise the manuscript, conducting a re-review, and, if necessary, consulting additional experts.

Peer Review Process

  1. The Journal editor chooses reviewers and invites them to review the paper.
  2. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer review (the reviewer knows the author's identity, but the author does not know the reviewer's identity). Each manuscript is sent to at least two experts. In the event of conflicting reviewer reports, a third reviewer will be invited to resolve the dispute.
  3. Reviewers include both members of the Journal's editorial board and external reviewers holding a PhD (Candidate of Sciences) or doctoral degree whose expertise most closely matches the manuscript's topic. Reviewers are familiar with the Journal's publication standards and must have publications in the field of the reviewed manuscript within the last three years. The editor-in-chief, senior editor, and managing editor are responsible for choosing the reviewer. Reviewers from the same research institution as the authors are not involved in the review process.
  4. Reviewers are informed that the submitted manuscripts contain confidential information that may not be disclosed to third parties.
  5. Reviewers have the right to decline the role of reviewer if they have any interest that might interfere with an objective review and affect the perception and interpretation of the manuscript.
  6. If a revision is recommended, the Journal forwards the reviewer's comments to the author with a request to address the comments or provide a reasoned rebuttal (partial or full) to defend aspects of the work. The revised manuscript is then sent for a second round of peer review.
  7. The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal allows for up to three rounds of peer review. If, after the third round, the reviewer still has significant concerns, the can recommend that the author transfers their submission to another journal or resubmit after six months with the requested revisions. If the author decides not to revise the manuscript, they must inform the Editorial Board, and the manuscript will be withdrawn from consideration.
  8. If the authors decline to revise the manuscript, they must notify the Editorial Board in written or oral form. If the revised manuscript is not returned within two months after receiving the review, and no withdrawal notification is provided, the Journal will remove the manuscript from the register. The authors will receive a formal notification that the manuscript has been withdrawn from the register.
  9. If the author has a conflict of interest with a potential reviewer, they should inform the editor. In this case the manuscript will be assigned to another reviewer if necessary.
  10. If a conflict arises between the author and the reviewer during the review process, the editor has the right to appoint a new reviewer and may involve the editor-in-chief to resolve the dispute.
  11. The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal may publish articles by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, managing editor, and members of the editorial board, but such submissions must not involve any misuse of their position. Manuscripts submitted by Journal staff are subject to double-blind peer review by external reviewers. If a conflict of interest arises, only external experts are involved in the decision-making process. If there is a dispute regarding the editor-in-chief's manuscript, the final decision on its publication is made by the members of the editorial board.
  12. When publishing articles by members of the editorial board, the editor-in-chief, or their deputies, a note regarding their affiliation with the Journal will be included in the «Conflict of Interest» section.
  13. The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal does not exempt manuscripts from peer review, regardless of the authors' academic status.
  14. Copies of reviews are stored at the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal for at least five years.

Peer Review Procedure

  1. All manuscripts submitted to the Journal are registered and reviewed by the editor-in-chief or senior editor who decides whether the manuscript has to be forwarded to the members of the editorial board members for review.
  2. Members of the editorial board have the right to review the manuscript themselves or suggest external reviewers who are experts in the subject area of the manuscript under review.
  3. Once the candidacy of the reviewer is approved by the editor-in-chief, the managing editor, in agreement with the reviewer, sends the manuscript to the reviewer via email.
  4. The review is submitted to the editorial office either in a signed paper format or electronically from the reviewer's email address. The editorial board then evaluates the content of the review and makes one of the following decisions:
  • Accept for publication without corrections: The manuscript will be scheduled for one of the Journal's regular issues, and the author will be notified of the publication date.
  • Accept with minor revisions: The author is asked to make the necessary revisions within one week. Upon addressing the reviewer's suggestions or providing a justified refusal to make changes, the manuscript is accepted for publication.
  • Accept with major revisions and review: The author must substantially revise the manuscript within two weeks and then resubmit it for a second round of peer review. A final decision will be made within 30 days.
  • Reject: The author will receive a detailed rejection letter. Although rejection does not prevent the authors from submitting future manuscripts to the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal , if the rejection is due to serious misconduct by the author, the editor-in-chief may blacklist the author, preventing further submissions.
  1. Authors are required to review the feedback. The managing editor sends the review text, along with a cover letter and the manuscript with editorial comments, to the author(s) either by mail or electronically.
  2. If the authors disagrees with the reviewer's comments, they may submit a reasoned response to the Journal. The editor-in-chief or senior editor will decide whether further review is necessary.
  3. If the authors agree with the reviewer's comments, they may revise and resubmit the manuscript. In this case the manuscript is revised in another round of peer review.
  4. In cases of minor editorial corrections that do not require significant revisions, the manuscript may be accepted for publication with the author's consent.

Reviewers

External subject matter experts with relevant expertise and recent publications (within the last three years) in the field of the manuscript are invited to review submissions. If the subject matter is very narrow or the author declares a potential conflict of interest with external reviewers, members of the editorial board may also be asked to review the manuscript.

Reviewer Selection Criteria and Journal's Actions to Ensure High-Quality Expertise

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal regularly invites recognized experts in cardiology, endocrinology, pediatrics, psychiatry, neurology, allergology, immunology, gynaecology, dermatology, rheumatology, gastroenterology, urology, nephrology, otorhinolaryngology, pulmonology, and related fields to participate in the review process. Reviewers are recommended by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor, editorial board members, or authors themselves.

The managing editor monitors relevant publications in databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and RSCI, and sends invitations to potential reviewers to collaborate with the Journal.

Evaluation of the First Review by New Reviewers

The quality of the first review by new reviewers is assessed using the following criteria:

  1. Did the reviewer comment on the significance of the problem raised in the study?
  2. Did the reviewer address the originality of the manuscript?
  3. Did the reviewer identify the strengths and weaknesses of the research (study design, data collection, and analysis)?
  4. Did the reviewer provide useful comments on the language, structure, tables, and figures of the article?
  5. Were the reviewer's comments constructive?
  6. Did the reviewer support their arguments with examples from the manuscript?
  7. Did the reviewer address the author's interpretation of the results?
  8. Overall quality of the review.

Each criterion is scored from 1 to 5, where 1 is the minimum score and 5 is the maximum. If the review quality does not meet the editors' expectations, cooperation with the reviewer is discontinued. The editors of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal have the right to assess an unlimited number of reviews by all experts involved in the Journal's work.

Reviewer Engagement Mechanism

The editors of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal view peer review as one of the most crucial procedures for Journal operations and greatly value the expertise and time of reviewers. Reviewers are offered priority publication and translation of their accepted articles into English. The names and affiliations of reviewers are published on the Journal's website but without specifying which articles they reviewed.

Confidentiality

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal does not disclose personal data of reviewers or authors. All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. The editorial board expects reviewers not to share or discuss manuscripts without the editor's consent. Reviewers may involve third parties in the review process only with the editor's approval.

Reviewer Responsibility

By agreeing to review manuscripts for the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal, reviewers commit to adhering to the Journal's policies regarding manuscript evaluation, review preparation, and ethical standards. Reviewers should strive to ensure the publication of high-quality material, and therefore, they should only accept reviews for manuscripts in their area of expertise and when they have sufficient time for a thorough assessment.

Reviewers must inform the editor of any conflicts of interest (personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious). If there is any doubt, the situation should be discussed with the editor. Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript if:

  • They are a supervisor or subordinate of the author, or they share grants with the author.
  • They do not intend to write a review but only want to familiarize themselves with the article.
  • They are preparing their own manuscript on a similar topic.
  • They are reviewing a manuscript on a closely related topic.

Reviewers must inform the editor of their intent to review the manuscript and complete the review within the agreed timeframe. If the reviewer is unable to perform/complete the review, an alternative appropriate reviewer should be suggested. Reviewers should not use their position for personal gain or pressure authors to cite their own work. All materials received from the Journal are strictly confidential, and reviewers must not share them or involve others without the editor's approval.

Recommendations for Reviewers

To facilitate the review process, the editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal provides a quick-review form that highlights the questions essential for the editor to make a decision on the manuscript. The editorial board encourages reviewers to focus on the «Comments» section to help authors improve their current and future work.

Content and Structure of Reviews

  • The Journal followed NEIKON guidelines to create this section. The Journal has received permission to incorporate these recommendations into the review policy. Manuscripts should be evaluated based on the following 10 criteria:
  • Originality
  • Logical rigor
  • Statistical rigor
  • Clarity and conciseness of writing
  • Theoretical significance
  • Reliable results
  • Relevance to current research fields
  • Reproducibility of results
  • Coverage of the literature
  • Application of results

In addition to the quick-review form, the Journal recommends that reviewers adhere to the following structure in their reviews.

Comments for the Editor

Conflict of Interest

This section identifies any real or potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscript or its authors that may lead to biased conclusions.

Confidential Comments

This section is for comments not shared with the authors. It includes the reviewer's final decision on the manuscript, reviewer's assumptions, concerns about potential ethical violations, as well as recommendations and any accompanying remarks. For example, the reviewer may advise the editor to request additional information from the author. The anticipated decision usually includes a brief conclusion about the manuscript's fate, i.e., whether to accept or reject the manuscript (accept, accept with minor revisions, accept with major revisions, reject, or reject but invite resubmission).

Comments for Authors

Introduction

This section outlines the main findings and value of the article for readers.

Main Comments

This section addresses the relevance of the manuscript to the Journal's goals and objectives, the level of reliability, and ethical conduct.

Specific Comments

The reviewer evaluates the different sections of the manuscript (abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion) or specific pages, paragraphs, or lines.

Recommendations for the Author

The reviewer provides suggestions for improving the manuscript and possibly future research.

Final Comment

A brief summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript without additional recommendations.

Criteria for Manuscript Evaluation

Subject Relevance

Do not waste time reviewing an irrelevant manuscript, regardless of its quality. The first step is to determine whether the manuscript aligns with the Journal's subject matter and audience.

Justification

Does the study design, methods, structure, content, and depth of analysis meet the necessary requirements? Does the study comply with the principles of impartial scientific research? Are the results of the study reproducible? Was the study sample selected properly? Was it analysed in sufficient detail to generalize the results?

Novelty

Did the study contribute to existing body of knowledge in its respective field?

Ethics

Does the research meet originality requirements, and was it approved by an expert board (if applicable)? Is it unbiased regarding conflicts of interest? Regardless of the manuscript's significance, it cannot be accepted if it contains redundancy, plagiarism, or breaches ethical principles such as legality, benefit, and respect for people.

Manuscript Evaluation Elements

The editors of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal provide the following questions to help speed up the preparation of an expert opinion and to offer comprehensive information to both the editor and the author.

Title

Does the title accurately describe the contents the manuscript? Will the title capture the readers' attention?

Abstract

  • Does the abstract appropriately reflect the purpose and content of the manuscript (structured abstract, including objectives, methods, results, and significance)?
  • Are there any discrepancies between the abstract and the manuscript sections? Can the abstract be understood without reading the manuscript?

Introduction

  • Is the introduction concise? Is the goal of the study clearly defined? Does the author justify the study's relevance and significance based on a literature review? If so, does this part meet volume requirements? Does the author define terminology used in the manuscript? If the manuscript is submitted as an «Original Research», is there a clear hypothesis?

Literature Review

  • How comprehensive is the literature review?

Methods

  • Could another researcher replicate the results using the methods described, or are the methods unclear?
  • Do the authors justify the research methodology (e.g., visualization techniques, analytical tools, or statistical methods)?
  • If the authors propose a hypothesis, have they developed methods to test it?
  • How is the study design presented?
  • How do the data analyses contribute to achieving the study's objectives?

Results

  • Are the results explained clearly? Does the order of the results match the sequence of the Methods section? Are the results justified and expected, or unexpected? Are there any results that lack a corresponding description in the «Methods» section? How accurate is the presentation of the results?

Discussion

  • Is the discussion concise? If not, how can it be shortened?
  • If a hypothesis was stated, do the authors report whether it was confirmed or rejected? If it is not confirmed, do the authors explain whether the research question was answered? Are the authors' conclusions consistent with the study results? If unexpected results were obtained, do the authors properly analyse them? What potential contribution does the study make to the research field and global science?

Conclusions

  • Do the authors address the study's limitations? Are there additional limitations to point out? What is the authors' opinion on these limitations? What is the authors' perspective on future research directions?

References

  • Does the reference list comply with the Journal's format? Are there bibliographic errors? Are the references cited correctly in the text? Are there important works missing from the reference list? Are there too many references? Are the citations relevant?

Tables

  • If the article includes tables, do they appropriately describe the results? Should additional tables be included? Are the data presented in the tables processed appropriately, and do they facilitate or hinder the understanding of research data?

Figures

  • Do tables and figures appropriately address the goal (i.e., reflect data accurately)? Can the results be illustrated in another way? Do the figures and graphs clearly present the significant results? Should modifications be made to better visualize the results? Are figure and graph captions descriptive enough to be understood without having to refer to the main of the manuscript?

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

  • Is information on funding and conflicts of interest clearly disclosed?

The reviewer's decision regarding the article submitted to the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal should be based on a thorough analysis of all aspects of the manuscript, including its relevance to the field, scientific novelty, methodological accuracy, and adherence to ethical standards.

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal proposes to use the following justification for the final decision of the reviewer:

  • Accept the article for publication

The reviewer believes the article is ready for publication in its current form. It is well-founded, ethical, significant to the scientific community, and adds to existing research. The writing style is clear and concise.

  • Accept after minor revisions

There are non-critical comments that need to be addressed, such as unclear writing, poorly structured sections, citation errors, or duplicated information in tables, figures, and the text. After revision and re-evaluation, the article may be accepted for publication.

  • Accept after major revisions and re-review

The article has serious flaws affecting the validity of the results such as ethical issues, research design problems, insufficient method descriptions, poorly presented or misinterpreted results, incomplete discussion of research limitations, or conflicting (or refuted by the author's own statements) conclusions. After major revisions, the article undergoes another round of peer review and could either be accepted, rejected, or sent out for further expert evaluation. Additional data from the author might be required.

  • Reject

The work does not align with the Journal's aims, contains irremediable flaws, or presents significant ethical issues such as lack of consent where needed or methodological malpractices. In this case the author should not resubmit the paper unless specifically requested. Detailed comments must be provided to help the author improve the work.

  • Reject but invite resubmission

The topic or research question is interesting but the methods used are flawed or unreliable. This decision may also apply when substantial revisions are needed or the author fails to provide requested additional information. The authors are encouraged to redo the research considering recommendations and submit new results for review.

Editing of the Review

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal expects reviews to be written in a constructive tone and adhere to linguistic standards. Personal attacks, insulting remarks, or irrelevant criticism of any aspect of the research, language, or writing style are prohibited. Reviews should be helpful for both the editor and the author.

While the Journal strives to share reviews with authors in their original form, in some cases, editorial changes may be made to preserve clarity, especially when combining feedback from multiple reviewers or when confidential comments were included.

Appeals Process

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles.

  1. If the author disagrees with the editorial decision, the appeal must be made in writing. The authors they may submit an appeal letter to the Journal's editorial office, describing in detail why they disagree with the decision.
  2. The Journal's Conflict Resolution Committee will review the appeal.
  3. A change in the editorial decision may occur if:
  • The author provides additional results that were not considered during the initial review.
  • The author submits new material that was overlooked during the initial review.
  • The author discloses a conflict of interest that was not mentioned earlier.
  • The author raises concerns about potential bias in the review process.
  1. If sufficient grounds are found, the Conflict Resolution Committee will recommend either reconsidering or accepting the initial decision regarding the publication of the article.
  2. The Journal may involve an additional reviewer to make the final decision if necessary.
  3. The decision regarding acceptance or rejection of an article based on the results of review of the initial decision is made by the editorial board of the journal.
  4. The final editorial decision is binding and cannot be further appealed.

Plagiarism Policy

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal uses plagiarism detection software to ensure the originality of submitted manuscripts. If significant plagiarism is found, the editorial board acts in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

An acceptable level of references, including self-citations, cited in accordance with the Journal's guidelines with a reference to the original source should not exceed 30% of the total length of the manuscript. This requirement does not apply to review articles, which are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

If suspected plagiarism is confirmed, or techniques to disguise it are detected, the manuscript will not be considered further. Authors will be informed of the rejection due to suspected plagiarism.

Policy updated: 06.27.2024

 

Publishing Ethics

This section is based on guidelines from Elsevier and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Policy adopted by the Editor-in-Chief: 10.16.2023

Authorship

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal adheres to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) criteria for authorship:

  1. Substantial contribution to the conception and design of the study, data collection, or data analysis and interpretation, AND
  2. Preparation of the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, AND
  3. Final approval of the version to be published.
  4. Accountability for all aspects of the work and ensuring that any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are properly addressed.

Authors must not only take responsibility for their contributions but also be aware of the contributions of their co-authors. All individuals listed as authors must meet all four criteria, and anyone who meets these criteria must be identified as an author.

Individuals who do not meet all four criteria for authorship should be listed in the «Acknowledgements» section.

Contribution of Authors and Non-Authors

The «Acknowledgments» section may include individuals who contributed to the work but did not meet the criteria for authorship, such as those providing support, mentoring, data collection assistance, or research coordination.

Authors can use COPE's recommended resources for determining authorship:

Responsibility

The editorial team of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal is responsible for ensuring that the standards of authorship and contribution are adhered to. Authors must provide transparent and accurate information regarding the contributors to the manuscript.

If the manuscript is submitted by an editor-in-chief, deputy editor, or a member of the editorial board, the peer review will be conducted solely by external experts.

To correctly assess author contributions, authors can use the following resources:

Authorship Declaration

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal requires authors to submit a signed authorship declaration along with the manuscript, ensuring the following:

  • Each author listed meets the authorship criteria outlined in the Journal's ethics policy.
  • Individuals who contributed to the work but are not authors are listed in the «Acknowledgments» section.
  • The contribution of each author is described and will be published in the Journal.
  • Authors take responsibility for the accuracy of the information provided.

Upon submission of the manuscript, the editor verifies the authorship information and required documents. Manuscripts submitted without an authorship declaration or with missing signatures from all authors will not be considered for review.

Disputes

If an authorship dispute arises, work on the article is suspended regardless of what stage the process is at (review, editing, or preparation for publication). All co-authors are informed of the dispute via email.

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal has the right to set a deadline for authors to clarify the matter. If no clarification is provided by the deadline, the article is withdrawn with an accompanying explanation. If the article was published in Online First mode, a notice explaining the withdrawal is made publicly available.

If a dispute arises regarding a published article, the editor will issue a correction, refutation or retracts the article, indicating the reasons for the changes made to the published document.

If a co-author needs to be added or removed before or after publication, the editorial team follows COPE guidelines:

To prevent manipulation of authorship, the editorial team follows COPE's flowcharts and considers the following:

  • The study is funded by organizations whose authors are not included in the list. This requires closer scrutiny of each author's contribution, with clarifications requested if needed.
  • Authors are from different scientific fields, which could indicate «guest» or «gift» authorship».
  • Acknowledgments mention individuals without specifying their contribution.
  • Extremely long or short author lists that are uncharacteristic for the discipline or article type.
  • Incomplete descriptions of authors' contributions such as lack of information about who drafted the manuscript or processed the data.
  • Plagiarism detection tools detect borrowings from a dissertation whose author is not indicated in the author list.
  • Similar studies are published by other research groups.
  • The author list has suddenly changes during the publication process without prior discussion with the editorial board of the journal.
  • An author has numerous publications despite holding a position that does not typically imply such publication activity (e.g., department head or institute director).
  • The corresponding author is unable to respond to reviewer comments.

The editorial board expects organizations affiliated with authors to cooperate in investigating authorship disputes.

Complaints and Appeals

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal carefully considers complaints about the behavior of editors and reviewers. Such complaints may concern breaches of confidentiality, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or improper use of confidential information obtained during the review process. Authors may also disagree with decisions regarding the expression of doubts about certain articles or complain about violations of editorial processes.

Complaints can be submitted via email to editor@elpub.ru and will be addressed t in the general order within 7 days. The complainant will be informed of the decision as well as any measures taken, and the timeframe for their implementation.

The Journal follows COPE guidelines for handling:

Conflict of Interest

This section is based on WAME recommendations.

A conflict of interest is a situation in which a person or organization has competing or conflicting interests that could affect editorial decisions or the interpretation of research results. Conflicts of interest can be potential or actual, conscious or unconscious. Personal, political, financial, scientific, or religious factors can influence objectivity.

Conflicts of interest can occur in the following areas:

  • Financial: Arises when participants of the publication process receive or expect to receive monetary or other financial benefits (such as patents or shares), gifts, or services that may influence their work related to the article. Examples include research funding, consulting or public speaking fees, etc.
  • Personal Relationships: This conflict arises from relationships with family, friends, competitors, or former colleagues.
  • Political and Religious Beliefs: Commitment to a particular religion or political party may influence the review of an article that analyses these topics.
  • Institutional Affiliation: Arises when someone involved in the publication process is directly affiliated with an organization interested in the publication.

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal may ask the authors additional questions or request additional information if necessary.

Conflict of interest applies to authors, reviewers, and editors. The following policy is based on ICMJE guidelines.

Authors' Responsibilities for Disclosing Conflicts of Interest

When submitting a manuscript, authors must disclose all relationships and activities that could affect or be perceived to affect their work. The author must notify the editor about any real or potential conflicts by including this information in the relevant section of the article. If there are no competing interests to declare, the authors should provide a confirmation statement in their manuscript, e.g., «The authors declare no conflict of interest».

Reviewers' Responsibilities for Disclosing Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must inform editors of any conflicts of interest that could affect their assessment of a manuscript and must recuse themselves from the review process if there is potential for bias. Reviewers must not use information from the reviewed work for personal benefit until the work is published.

Editors' Responsibilities for Disclosing Conflicts of Interest

Editors who make final decisions on manuscripts must recuse themselves from editorial decisions in cases of conflict of interest or relationships that could create potential conflicts. Other members of the editorial board involved in decision-making must also inform editors of any relevant interests (as they may influence editorial decisions) and voluntarily step back from decisions when conflicts arise. Members of the editorial board must not use information obtained during manuscript revision for personal benefit. Editors must regularly publish disclosure statements about potential conflicts of interest related to their work or that of the Journal staff. Guest editors must follow the same procedures.

In articles by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor, or members of the editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal, a clear declaration of affiliation with the Journal must be made.

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is found in an unpublished article, the Journal will act in accordance with COPE guidelines.

If a conflict is discovered after publication, the Journal will act in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Ethical Supervision

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal aligns with COPE's view that publishing ethics extend beyond maintaining the integrity and reliability of published research to ensuring ethical behavior toward research subjects, including vulnerable populations, laboratory animals, human subjects (if relevant studies are conducted), confidential data, and business/marketing practices.

Informed Consent/Consent for Publication

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal requires informed consent/consent for publication for any research in which individuals or groups may be identified. This consent is also required if the study mentions deceased individuals. Consent must be obtained for the publication of clinical cases, photographs, X-rays, etc.

Authors must submit a statement to the editorial team confirming that informed consent has been obtained from the patient or their representative. The published article will include information on the consent obtained.

Information that must be included in informed consent:

  1. The patient's name and signature.
  2. If the patient is not the signer, the relationship of the signer (i.e., the proxy) to the patient must be stated.
  3. If one person is signing for a family or other group, that person should attest that all relevant members of the family or group have been informed.
  4. If proxy consent is obtained, the form should include a statement to indicate that the individual or group do not have legal, mental, or physical capacity to consent and the reason why. If such reasons exist, they must be specified (e.g., underage children, persons with cognitive or intellectual disabilities, or deceased persons).
  5. The person obtaining informed consent must be authorized to do so.
  6. The form should clearly indicate that even with the best efforts of research staff at confidentiality, the Journal cannot guarantee anonymity.
  7. The form should indicate that the patient may revoke consent at any time before publication, but once the information has been published, revocation of the consent is no longer possible.
  8. The form should make it clear what current and further uses might be made of the published manuscript, including as applicable publication in print or online.
  9. The form should indicate whether or not the patient or proxy has seen the final version of the manuscript to be published. If a final version has not been shown, it must be clear what the patient or proxy has seen and that he or she has agreed to publication without having seen the final version of the article.

Vulnerable Populations:

Vulnerable populations include (but are not limited to) those who are unable to protect their own interests: pregnant women, newborns, children, fetuses, prisoners, people with disabilities, people with intellectual impairments, economically disadvantaged individuals, critically ill hospitalized patients, etc.

Research involving vulnerable populations should only be planned if these groups will benefit from it.

One concern is that not all research participants, for objective reasons, may fully understand the terms and conditions of the study. If informed consent cannot be obtained from the direct participant, their legal representative must sign the consent form. Special care should be taken with research involving children.

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal supports COPE's statement on the publication of research involving vulnerable populations.

Authors must obtain informed consent for publication and report this to the Journal's editorial board.

Ethical Conduct of Research Involving Animals

When conducting experimental research on animals, authors must include information about compliance with institutional and national standards for the use of laboratory animals.

To provide more accurate and thorough information about animal research, the editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal recommends using the ARRIVE standards. Following these standards will improve the quality and reliability of published articles and allow other researchers to replicate the results.

Research Involving Humans

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal adheres to the principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles For Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and aims to ensure the ethical conduct and data collection of research involving humans. Before starting the research, the researcher should familiarize themselves with the informed consent provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki and conduct the study in strict accordance with the principles outlined below (sections 25-32 of the Declaration of Helsinki). When presenting results from experimental studies involving humans, authors must specify whether the procedures followed ethical standards set out in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the study was conducted without following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki, the authors must justify their approach and ensure that the ethics committee of the institution where the research was conducted approved the chosen methodology.

«25. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he or she freely agrees.

  1. In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of the right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as to the methods used to deliver the information.

After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.

All medical research subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.

  1. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study the physician must be particularly cautious if the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
  2. For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails only minimal risk and minimal burden.
  3. When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject’s dissent should be respected.
  4. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative.
  5. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient’s decision to withdraw from the study must never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
  6. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptional situations where consent would be impossible or impracticable to obtain for such research. In such situations the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee».

Animal Rights Policy

When conducting experimental research on animals, authors must indicate compliance with institutional and national standards for the use of laboratory animals and provide a reference to the document «CONSENSUS AUTHOR GUIDELINES FOR ANIMAL USE».

Handling Confidential Data

The right to privacy of individuals or organizations involved in research is paramount and must not be violated without their informed consent. Authors must take all necessary precautions to protect the information of research participants and, if necessary, take measures to minimize any potential physical and psychological harm to study participants.

Post-Publication Discussions and Amendments to Published Articles

In some cases, it may be necessary to amend an already published article. The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal supports the practice of making amendments to published materials. In this case, the Journal follows COPE guidelines.

All changes will be accompanied by a post-publication notice, which will always be linked to the original version of the article so that readers can access information about all required changes. The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal uses Expression of Concern, Correction, or Retraction of the article. The purpose of this practice is to ensure the integrity of scientific materials.

All corrections, expressions of concern, and notices of article retraction are publicly available.

What Should Authors Do if They Discover an Error in Their Article?

Authors may discover a technical or interpretive error in a published article. In such cases, authors should notify the editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal as soon as possible, especially if the errors may affect the interpretation of the results or raise doubts about the validity of the information. The corresponding author is responsible for reaching an agreement within the authors' group on further interaction with the editorial board.

If you believe that changes need to be made to your published article, please contact us via lvrach@osp.ru.

Procedure for Making Changes to an Article

Corrections

Corrections are made to an article if it is necessary to correct an error or add missing information, provided that these changes do not affect the integrity and scientific significance of the article. Examples of such corrections include changes to figure captions, adding information about research funding, or clarifying conflict of interest information. In such cases, a separate correction notice is published. The general process is as follows:

  • The correction is made to the original version of the article.
  • The Crossmark record is updated.
  • A description of the correction is added to the «Abstract» of the original article.
  • A correction notice containing information about the original version of the article, links to it, the names of the authors, and a description of the nature of the correction is published.

Notices of minor corrections such as spelling mistakes, typos, and other insignificant changes are not published separately. The website will indicate that corrections have been made to the article without further details.

Article Retraction

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal can retract an article in the following cases:

  • When there is clear evidence that the results are unreliable for various reasons, such as serious errors in calculations, fabricated data, or manipulated images.
  • When plagiarism is detected in the article.
  • When the results have already been published in other journals, and the author has not justified the need for repeated publication or has not informed the editor.
  • When the article contains materials and data for which permission for use has not been obtained.
  • When copyright is violated or other serious legal issues arise (e.g., confidentiality breach).
  • When research ethics are violated.
  • When the peer review process has been compromised.
  • When the author has not disclosed a conflict of interest that, in the editor's opinion, could have influenced the decision of the reviewer or editor to publish the article.
  • If the article has to be retracted, the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal acts according to the following steps:
  • Conduct an investigation to confirm that retraction is necessary.
  • Prepare a retraction notice: include the label «Retraction» in the title and the title of the article, describe the reason for retraction, indicate on whose initiative it is being conducted, and provide a link to the retracted article.
  • Publish the retraction notice.
  • Replace the original version of the retracted article, noting in the PDF file that the article has been retracted.
  • Report the retraction to the relevant databases.
  • Forward information about the retraction to the Retraction Database.

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal follows COPE guidelines when handling retracted articles.

Expression of Concern

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal issues an expression of concern in the following cases:

  • Serious concerns have been raised about a published article but investigation could not prove these concerns, or the investigation will not be conducted or cannot be completed for a long time. In such cases, it is necessary to inform readers about the situation as soon as possible.

Once the investigation is complete, the article may be amended or retracted.

Article Removal

Articles are removed from the Journal only in extreme cases where it is impossible to follow the protocol for corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern.

An article may be removed in the following cases:

  • If the distribution of the article poses a serious risk.
  • If the article contains content that violates the privacy rights of a research participant.
  • If the article violates rights.
  • If the article must be removed by court order.

In case of article removal, all materials are removed from the Journal's website, and requests are sent to databases to remove the full text and post a notice of article removal.

Updates and Post-Publication Discussions of Articles

Article Supplementation

Authors may need to supplement an article after its publication. In such cases, the editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal may publish an addition to the article. Article supplements are always reviewed by the Journal's editors and may be sent for peer review.

When a supplement is published, the file with the original version of the article is updated, and a notification of the supplement is also published in the current issue of the Journal, including information about the article, its authors, the nature of the changes, and a link to the article.

Commentary on a Published Article

Commentaries are short materials that may express opinions or observations about a published article. Comments are sent to the reviewers and authors of the article to allow them to prepare a response to the comment.

The authors' response is also sent to the reviewer. The author of the comment will have the opportunity to respond to the authors again, after which correspondence between the comment author and the article authors may continue privately.

The decision to publish comments is made by the editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal. Comments, responses, and replies are linked to the original version of the article to which they relate.

Responsibility of the Editorial Board, Editors, Publisher, and Founder

Editorial Board Formation Principles

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal is formed in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

Potential members of the editorial board can be recommended to the editor-in-chief by current members of the editorial board/council, reviewers, and authors.

Editors interested in joining the editorial board can submit an application to the editor-in-chief.

All potential board members must agree to the following conditions:

  • A member of the editorial board/council of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal cannot hold a similar position in more than one other journal.
  • A member of the editorial board/council cannot be involved in a special issue of another journal simultaneously.
  • A member of the editorial board/council cannot be an editor-in-chief of another journal.
  • A member of the editorial board/council cannot be an editor who is also responsible for making final decisions on the publication of manuscripts in another journal.
  • Potential members of the editorial board/council must disclose any potential or actual conflicts of interest, including involvement in publishing scientific journals and books, membership in the editorial boards/councils of other journals, as well as any conflicts of interest that may arise after their appointment in other journals or publications.

Duties of Editorial Board Members:

  • Publication of one article per year to support the Journal.
  • Review manuscripts in their field of expertise, if external reviewers are unavailable. Each member of the editorial board/council receives no more than 2 manuscripts per year for review. Review must be conducted in accordance with the approved Review Policy of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal.
  • Selection of reviewers for incoming manuscripts at the request of the responsible secretary, control over the review process of the manuscripts.
  • Making decisions on manuscript publication after all rounds of review. Decisions are passed to the editor-in-chief, who makes the final decision.
  • Inviting authors and reviewers to collaborate with the Journal.

A member of the editorial board/council may be dismissed from his/her position for the following reasons:

  • Violation of publication ethics, such as hiding conflicts of interest or misuse of status for personal gain.
  • Failing to fulfil responsibilities for a year without valid reason or agreement with the editor-in-chief.
  • Resigning at their own request.

Privileges of Editorial Board/Council Members:

  • Articles by members of the editorial board/council of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal are given priority.
  • One article per year is translated into English at the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal's expense.
  • Members of the editorial board/council of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal are exempt from editorial fees.
  • Members of the editorial board/council can participate in the events organized by the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal and the founding organization for free.
  • Members of the editorial board/council can act as guest editors for special issues of the the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal.
  • Information about members of the editorial board/council is featured on the Journal's website with the links to database profiles, affiliations, and other necessary data.

Potential candidates for editorial board/council membership are considered at regular editorial board/council meetings.

The final decision on their inclusion is made by the editor-in-chief.

Editor's Responsibilities

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal is personally and independently responsible for publication decisions. The final decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal must follow the Journal's policy when reviewing a manuscript and making decision on its publication.

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal can discuss manuscripts with other editors and reviewers if necessary, ensuring the discussions are justified and legitimate, and materials discussed are not used for personal gain.

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal must assess manuscripts impartially, regardless of the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, citizenship, or political views.

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal must maintain confidentiality and not disclose manuscript information to third parties without need, except to other editors, reviewers, the publisher, and the founder.

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal must report any conflicts, critical errors, or violations of publication ethics related to manuscripts under review by authors or reviewers to the editor-in-chief for necessary action, such as making changes, publishing refutations, retracting the article, expressing doubts.

The editor of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal should be involved in investigating ethical issues regarding submitted and published manuscripts and strive to resolve conflicts quickly. If necessary, they collaborate with the author's institution for deeper investigation.

Publisher's Responsibilities

The publisher of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal is responsible for adhering to modern recommendations and requirements to ensure the integrity of published scientific material.

The publisher of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal follows the Journal's policy on receiving compensation for the preparation and publication of manuscripts, as well as receiving profits from the printing of advertising and reprints. The publisher of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal does not allow potential profits from advertising and reprints to influence editorial decisions.

The publisher of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal does not interfere in the editorial process but may assist in investigating ethical violations if requested by editors and send official requests on its behalf to scientific and educational organizations, as well as other publishers.

The publisher of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal must implement industry standards in the work of the publishing house to enhance the Journal's ethical practices.

The publisher of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal must provide comprehensive legal support to the editorial board of the Journal if necessary.

Founder's Responsibilities

The founder of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal upholds editorial independence: the director and staff of the founding organization do not interfere in the editorial process.

The founder of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal may recommend potential editorial board/council members, reviewers, and authors, but the final decision rests with the editor-in-chief.

The founder of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal supports the need for geographic and gender diversity among editorial board members, reviewers, and authors.

The founder of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal does not prioritize financial or political gain over the Journal's quality. Editors of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal make publication decisions based on manuscript quality and relevance to the Journal's audience.

The founder of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal does not interfere in editorial processes but can assist in investigating ethical violations and send official requests to organizations or other publishers if needed.

 

Founder

  • Open Systems Publications

 

Author Fees

Publication in the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal is free of charge for all the authors.

The Journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The Journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

 

Conflict of Interest Policy

A conflict of interest is a situation in which a person or organization has competing or conflicting interests that could affect editorial decisions or the interpretation of research results. Conflicts of interest can be potential or actual, conscious or unconscious. Personal, political, financial, scientific, or religious factors can influence objectivity.

Author must notify the editor about any real or potential conflicts by including this information in the relevant section of the article. If there are no competing interests to declare, the authors should provide a confirmation statement in their manuscript, e.g., «The authors declare no conflict of interest».

Informed Consent Policy

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal adheres to the principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles For Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and strives to ensure that ethical standards and data collection practices are followed for research involving human subjects. Researchers must familiarize themselves with these principles before starting a study and conduct research in strict accordance with the principles outlined below (WMA Declaration of Helsinki, Clauses 25–32):

«25. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he or she freely agrees.

  1. In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of the right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as to the methods used to deliver the information.

After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.

All medical research subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.

  1. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study the physician must be particularly cautious if the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
  2. For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails only minimal risk and minimal burden.
  3. When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject’s dissent should be respected.
  4. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative.
  5. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient’s decision to withdraw from the study must never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
  6. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptional situations where consent would be impossible or impracticable to obtain for such research. In such situations the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee».

Informed Consent

 

Plagiarism detection

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal uses native Russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

 

Preprint and Postprint Policy

During the submission process, the author must ensure that the article has not been published or accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to an article published in the Lechaschi Vrach journal, the publisher asks to place a link (the full URL of the material) to the journal’s official website.

Articles previously posted by the authors on personal or public websites that are not related to other journals will be taken into consideration.

Preprint and Postprint Deposition Policy

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal allows authors to post the manuscript as a preprint before submission for review and to archive independently their articles in disciplinary and institutional repositories.

Preprints

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal encourages uploading preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as 'a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.'

A preprint publication shall not be considered duplicate publication nor shall it influence the editor's decision to publish it in the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal.

The author must notify the editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal about the posted preprint at submission of the manuscript for review, furnishing a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and the dissemination terms and conditions.

It is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published manuscript in the preprint record. The link must contain the DOI and the URL of the article published on the journal's website. The original preprint should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint should not be replaced with the text of the published article.

Do not delete the preprint text.

Manuscripts Accepted for Publication

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal allows manuscripts that have been reviewed and are accepted for publication to be archived independently.

 This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:

  • personal website or blog;
  • institutional repository;
  • disciplinary repository;
  • direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.

The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information about the planned publication.

Example: The ARTICLE TITLE has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in 2021 (3) of the Lechaschi Vrach Journal.

Final Versions of Manuscripts

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal allows manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and ready for publication (proofread and typeset) to be archived independently.

This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:

  • personal website or blog;
  • institutional repository;
  • disciplinary repository;
  • direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.

Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.

 

Revenue Sources

The journal is financed by its parent organization and publisher, Open Systems Publications. Additional funding comes from advertising materials and reprints.

 

Disclosure Policy and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished data from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the author's written consent.

Information or ideas obtained during the review process, which could provide a competitive advantage, must remain confidential and not be used for personal gain.

Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in case of conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or organizations associated with the work under review.

Data Sharing Policy

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal supports principles of appropriate data sharing. Authors are encouraged, but not required, to provide access to research data supporting their publications. Authors' willingness to share data does not influence the publication decision. Authors are recommended to facilitate data sharing via repositories.

Definition of Research Data

The «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal encourages sharing research data necessary to verify the findings presented in articles published in the Journal. Research data include information directly obtained by the authors (primary data) as well as data from other sources analysed during the study (secondary data).

Research data may include any factual materials recorded on any medium, whether digital or non-digital, used to obtain the study results, such as tabular data, code, images, audio and video files, documents, maps, processed and/or raw data.

Definition of Exceptions

The Journal's policy does not apply to research data not required to verify the results presented in published articles. Sharing qualitative and quantitative data that could identify research participants is not required and is subject to participant consent.

Sharing other sensitive information, such as data on the habitats of endangered species, is also not mandatory. Alternatives to public sharing of personal or sensitive data include:

  • Depositing research data in approved repositories with restricted access and publicly sharing metadata.
  • Anonymizing and de-identifying data prior to public sharing.
  • Sharing only metadata.
  • Indicating in the article how to access the data and providing access to other researchers upon request.

Supplementary Materials

The Journal does not encourage data sharing in the form of supplementary files.

Data Repositories

The preferred method of data sharing is through repositories. For assistance in choosing a repository for data placement, visit https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/.

Data Citation

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal encourages the citation of any publicly accessible research data in the reference list. Data citations should include a persistent identifier (e.g., DOI). References to data sets should include at least the minimum information recommended by DataCite (standard data citation set: author, year of publication, dataset name, publisher (repository), identifier; extended data citation dataset: author, year of publication, dataset name, version, publisher (repository), resource type, identifier) and comply with the Journal's style.

Data Use Licenses

The Journal supports the availability of research data under Creative Commons licenses (CC BY 4.0 or CC0). The journal does not require specific licenses for research data stored in third-party repositories. The publishers do not claim ownership of research data.

Author Support

For questions regarding compliance with this policy, please contact the editorial team via lvrach@osp.ru.

 

Human Rights Statement

When submitting the results of experimental studies involving humans, authors must indicate compliance with ethical standards outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the study was conducted without adhering to the Declaration's principles, authors must justify the chosen research approach and ensure it was approved by the ethics committee of the institution where the study was conducted.

For experimental studies involving animals, authors must indicate adherence to institutional and national standards for the use of laboratory animals (Consensus author guidelines for animal use).

 

Advertising Policy

Based on the Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals by WAME:

Many scientific journals receive income from advertising or reprints which often creates potential conflicts of interest. Editorial decisions should not be influenced by the cost of advertising or reprint orders. Editorial and advertising management functions must be separated. Advertisers and sponsors should not have control over editorial decisions, regardless of advertising agreements or other arrangements.

Reprints should be published in their original form as they appeared in the journal (including subsequent corrections) and should not contain additions or changes.

Content of special supplements (if any) should be governed solely by editorial decisions, and should not be influenced by sponsors or advertisers.

Limitations on the volume of advertising in the journal should be described and included in the Journal's policy. If articles in supplemental issues undergo a different peer-review process than the standard procedure, this must be indicated on the Journal's website.

Journals must have an official advertising policy, which should be accessible to all parties involved in the editorial-publishing process. In short, all advertisements must clearly identify the promoted product or service.

Commercial advertisements should not be placed next to any editorial article or an article discussing the advertised product, nor should they reference the issue of the journal in which they appear.

Advertising content should be distinct from editorial and other materials so that the difference between them is clear.

Advertisements should not be misleading or deceptive. Advertisements should not exaggerate the real characteristics of the advertised product. Advertisements should not contain offensive considerations of a religious, racial, or ethnic nature.

Advertised products should be targeted towards medical practice, medical education, or healthcare.

The Journal reserves the right to refuse any advertisement for any reason. Decisions about publishing advertisements should involve the editor and the editorial board.

 

Prevention of Ethical Violations

The editorial board, editorial team, and the editor-in-chief of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal adhere to the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international community, as reflected in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and take into account the experience of reputable international publishers. The editorial office reserves the right to reject an article for publication in the event of a violation of the editorial policy rules.

Principles of Professional Ethics in the Activities of the Editor and Publisher

  • The editor of a scientific journal is guided by the reliability of the presented data and the scientific significance of the work under consideration when deciding to publish.
  • The editor should evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status, or political preferences.
  • Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without the author's written consent. Information or ideas obtained during editing and associated with possible advantages must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
  • The editor should not allow the publication of information if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarism.
  • The editor, together with the publisher, should not leave unanswered claims concerning reviewed manuscripts or published materials, and should take all necessary measures to restore violated rights in the event of a conflict.

Ethical Principles in the Activities of Reviewers Conducting Scientific Peer Review of Research Materials

  • A manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document that cannot be shown to or discussed with third parties not authorized by the editorial office without the author's written consent.
  • The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the research results presented. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
  • Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.
  • A reviewer who believes they lack the necessary qualifications to evaluate a manuscript or cannot be objective due to a conflict of interest with the author or organization should notify the editor and request exclusion from the review process for that manuscript.

Principles to be Followed by Authors of Scientific Publications

Authors are aware that they are responsible for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research which implies adherence to the following principles:

  • Authors must present reliable results of research. Deliberately inaccurate or falsified statements are unacceptable.
  • Authors should ensure that the research results presented in the manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements should be properly cited, with the author and original source indicated. Plagiarism in any form, including uncredited quotations, paraphrasing, or claiming rights to someone else's research, is unacceptable.
  • The contribution of all individuals who influenced the course of the research should be acknowledged, and references to works that were significant to the research should be provided.
  • Authors should not submit a manuscript that has been sent to another journal and is under review, nor a previously published article.
  • All individuals who made a significant contribution to the research should be listed as co-authors. It is unacceptable to list individuals who did not participate in the research as co-authors.
  • Authors are obliged to promptly notify the Journal's editorial board if they discover errors or inaccuracies in their article during its review or after its publication.

Conflict of Interest

To avoid cases of unethical publication practices, conflicts of interest among all parties involved in the publication process must be avoided. A conflict of interest arises when the author, reviewer, or editorial board member has financial, academic, or personal relationships that could affect their actions.

To prevent conflicts of interest and in accordance with the accepted ethical standards of the journal, the editor, author, and reviewer have to:

Editor Responsibilities:

  • Assign the article to another editorial board member if the initially assigned reviewer has a conflict of interest with the author of the submitted article.
  • Request information from all parties involved in the publication process regarding the possibility of competing interests.
  • Make decisions about publishing information contained in the author's letter concerning conflicts of scientific and/or financial interests if it is not confidential and may influence the reader's or scientific community’s assessment of the published work.
  • Publish corrections if information about a conflict of interest is received after publication.

Author Responsibilities:

  • List known and potential sources of conflict of interest in the cover letter.
  • Indicate their place of work and the source of funding for the research.
  • If there is no conflict of interest, this should be stated in the cover letter.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

  • Notify the editor-in-chief of the presence of a conflict of interest (dual obligations, competing interests) and recuse themselves from reviewing the article.

Violations of Publication Ethics

In the event of a situation related to the violation of publication ethics in published or unpublished materials by the editor, author, or reviewer, the editorial board is obliged to demand clarification without involving individuals who may have a conflict of interest with one of the parties and consider the arguments of all interested parties, including the authors of the publication or copyright holders.

The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal reserves the right not to respond to allegations of plagiarism if the accuser provides false personal information or acts unethically. The editorial board of the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal is not obliged to discuss cases of alleged plagiarism with individuals who are not directly related to it.

Articles that violate the standards of scientific publication ethics may be retracted after publication.

The Journal's Editorial Policy Prohibits:

  1. Self-plagiarism. If elements of a scientific article were previously published, the author must reference the previously published work. Verbatim copying of one's own works and their paraphrasing is not allowed; they can only be used as a basis for new conclusions.
  2. Verbatim copying of more than 10 percent of another person's work without attributing authorship, citing the source, and using quotation marks.
  3. Improper paraphrasing of another person's work where more than one sentence is changed within a single paragraph or section of text, or sentences are rearranged without proper attribution. Significant improper paraphrasing (more than 10 percent of the original work) without citation is equivalent to verbatim copying.
  4. Use of components of another person's work without attribution such as a paragraph, figure, or table without citation or use of quotation marks.

 

CrossMark

CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref, which provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content. By applying the CrossMark logo, the «Lechaschi Vrach» Journal is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.



Girutskaya Elena Olgertovna
tel.: 89161790704
e-mail: Lvrach@osp.ru

Processing of personal data
supported by NEICON (Elpub lab)