The editorial board of the scientific journal “Povolzhsky Oncologichesky Vestnik” adheres to the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international community and reflected, in particular, in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as considers the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishing houses.
In order to avoid unfair practices in publication activities (plagiarism, presentation of false information, etc.), to ensure the high quality of scientific publications, the public recognition of the scientific results obtained by the author, each member of the editorial board, author, reviewer, publisher, and institutions involved in the publishing process must comply with ethical standards, norms and rules and take all reasonable measures to prevent their violation. Compliance with the rules of ethics of scientific publications by all participants in this process contributes to ensuring the rights of authors to intellectual property, improving the quality of the publication and eliminating the possibility of misuse of copyrighted materials for the benefit of individuals.
1. Principles of Professional Ethics in the Publisher’s Activity
In his activities, the publisher is responsible for the disclosure of copyrighted works, which entails the need to follow the following fundamental principles and procedures:
1.1 Promote the ethical duties of the editorial board, editorial board, reviewers and authors in accordance with these requirements.
1.2 Support the journal’s editorial board in addressing ethical concerns about published material and help collaborate with other journals and/or publishers if this facilitates the fulfillment of the editors’ responsibilities.
1.3 Ensure the confidentiality of the publication and any information received from authors until it is published.
1.4 Understand that the activities of the journal is not a commercial project and has no profit motive.
1.5 To be always ready to publish corrections, clarifications, denials and apologies when necessary.
1.6 Provide the possibility of excluding publications containing plagiarism and unreliable data to the editorial board.
1.7 Publisher (director), has the right to reject a manuscript or require the author to revise it, if it is designed with violations of the Rules adopted in this journal and agreed with the Publisher.
1.8 The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain; the copyright is retained by the authors.
1.9 To place information about the financial support of the research, if the author provides such information to the article.
1.10. If content, grammar, stylistic and other errors are detected, the editorial board undertakes to take all measures to eliminate them.
1.11. Coordinate with the author, introduced in the article editorial proofreading.
1.12. Do not delay the issue of the magazine.
2. Ethical principles that should guide the author of a scientific publication
The authors (or group of authors) when submitting materials to the scientific journal “Volga Bulletin of Oncology” are aware that they are initially responsible for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which implies compliance with the following principles:
2.1 The authors of the article must provide reliable results of the conducted research. Knowingly erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.
2.2 Authors must guarantee that research results presented in the submitted manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be presented with obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing as well as plagiarism in any form, including unformatted quotations, paraphrasing or appropriation of rights to the results of others’ research, is unethical and unacceptable. Borrowing without citation will be considered plagiarism by the editorial board.
2.3 Authors should cite only authentic facts and information in the manuscript; cite enough information to verify and repeat experiments by other researchers; do not use information obtained privately without open written permission; avoid fabrication and falsification of data.
2.4 Do not allow duplication of publications (in the cover letter the author should indicate that the work is published for the first time). If some elements of the manuscript have been previously published, the author must refer to the earlier work and indicate the differences of the new work from the previous one.
2.5 Authors should not submit to the journal a manuscript that has been sent to another journal and is under consideration, or an article already published in another journal.
2.6 It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons who in one way or another influenced the course of the research, in particular, the article should provide references to the works that were important in the conduct of the study.
2.7 Authors must comply with ethical standards when criticizing or commenting on the research of third parties.
2.8 All persons who have made a significant contribution to the study should be listed as co-authors of the article. Among the co-authors it is unacceptable to indicate persons who did not participate in the study.
2.9 Authors must respect the work of the editorial board and reviewers and eliminate the indicated shortcomings or reasonably explain them.
2.10. Authors must submit and format the manuscript according to the rules accepted in the journal.
2.11. If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its review or after its publication, he should immediately notify the editorial board;
2.12. Authors should provide the editorial board or the publisher with evidence of the correctness of the original article or correct significant errors if the editorial board or the publisher becomes aware of them from third parties.
3. Ethical principles in the reviewer’s activity
A reviewer carries out scientific expertise of author’s materials, as a result of which his/her actions must be unbiased, consisting in the implementation of the following principles:
3.1 A manuscript received for reviewing must be treated as a confidential document, which must not be shared for review or discussion with third parties who are not authorized to do so by the editorial board.
3.2 Reviewers must know that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and belong to the non-public information. Breach of confidentiality is possible only in case of a reviewer’s statement about inaccuracy or falsification of materials stated in the article;
3.3 The reviewer should draw the attention of the chief editor (and/or his/her deputy) to the substantial or partial similarity of the assessed manuscript with any other work as well as to the facts of absence of references to the provisions, conclusions or arguments previously published in other works of this or other authors.
3.4 The reviewer should note the relevant published works that are not cited (in the article).
3.5 The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the research results presented and clearly substantiated recommendations. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
3.6 Comments and wishes of the reviewer must be objective and principled, aimed at increasing the scientific level of the manuscript.
3.7 A reviewer must make decisions based on specific facts and provide evidence for his decision.
3.8 Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of manuscripts for their own needs.
3.9 Reviewers are not allowed to use for their own benefit the knowledge about the content of the work before its publication.
3.10. A reviewer who, in his/her opinion, is not qualified enough to evaluate a manuscript or who cannot be objective, for example, in case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, should inform the editor about this with a request to exclude him/her from the review process of this manuscript;
3.11. The review of the article is confidential. The name of the Reviewer is known to the Executive Secretary and the Editor-in-Chief of the journal (and/or his/her deputy). This information is not disclosed.
4. Principles of professional ethics in the activity of the editor-in-chief
In his activity the chief editor is responsible for the publication of the author’s works, which imposes the need to follow the following fundamental principles:
4.1 When deciding on the publication the chief editor of a scientific journal is guided by the reliability of the data presentation and the scientific significance of the work in question.
4.2 The Editor-in-Chief must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of the authors.
4.3 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used for personal purposes or passed on to third parties without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained in the course of editing and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
4.4 Editor-in-Chief should not allow information to be published if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is plagiarized.
4.5 The editor-in-chief in his activity undertakes:
– constantly improve the Journal;
– follow the principle of freedom of opinion;
– strive to meet the needs of readers and authors of the Journal;
– exclude the influence of business or political interests on the decision to publish materials;
– make a decision on the publication of materials, guided by the following main criteria: correspondence of the manuscript to the magazine’s topics; relevance, novelty and scientific significance of the submitted article; clarity of presentation; reliability of the results and completeness of the conclusions. The quality of the research and its relevance are the basis for the decision on publication;
– to take all reasonable measures to ensure the high quality of published materials and to protect the confidentiality of personal information;
– take into account the recommendations of the reviewers in making the final decision on the publication of the article. The responsibility for the decision to publish lies entirely with the editorial board of the journal;
– justify its decision in case of acceptance or rejection of the article;
– give the author of the reviewed material an opportunity to justify his/her research position;
– when changing the composition of the editorial board do not override the decisions of the previous board on the publication of the material.
4.6 The editor-in-chief together with the publisher should not leave unanswered the claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials, as well as take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights when a conflict situation is revealed.
5. Conflict of interest
In order to avoid cases of violation of publication ethics, conflicts of interest of all parties involved in the process of publishing a manuscript should be avoided. A conflict of interest occurs when an author, reviewer or member of the editorial board has a financial, scientific or personal relationship, which may influence their actions. Such relationships are called dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties.
In order to prevent conflicts of interest and in accordance with the accepted ethical standards of the journal, each party has the following responsibilities.
The editor has the responsibility to:
– Refer the manuscript to another member of the editorial board for review if the originally appointed reviewer has a conflict of interest with the author of the submitted manuscript;
– solicit information from all participants in the process of publishing a manuscript regarding the possibility of competing interests;
– make a decision on publication of information indicated in the author’s letter concerning a conflict of scientific and/or financial interests, if it is not confidential and may affect the evaluation of the published work by the reader or the scientific community;
– ensure publication of corrections if the information about the conflict of interest has been received after the article has been published.
The author must:
– Identify the location of his or her work and the source of funding for the research.
The reviewer is obliged to:
– notify the Editor-in-Chief if there is a conflict of interest (dual commitments, competing interests) and refuse to review the manuscript.
When a situation arises involving a violation of publication ethics by an editor, author, or reviewer, a mandatory investigation is required. This applies to both published and unpublished material. The editorial board is obliged to demand an explanation, without involving persons who may have a conflict of interest with one of the parties.
If material containing significant inaccuracies is published, it should be promptly corrected in a form accessible to readers and indexing systems.
This section is based on materials from Elsevier, the publisher of scientific and medical literature, as well as materials from the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)