Policies, Purpose and Objectives of the Journal

The purpose of the magazine:

The main goal of the journal “Volga Region Oncological Bulletin” is to cover current issues of experimental and clinical oncology: carcinogenesis, molecular biology, epidemiology, prevention, combined diagnostics, modern treatment of tumors (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, combined treatment), anesthesiology support, medical and social rehabilitation, palliative care and “quality of life” of cancer patients.

To attract promising young specialists to scientific work on projects in the field of oncology and surgery.

To create a communication platform to expand cooperation of oncological and surgical professional communities in the Volga region and Russia

Journal Objectives:

  • providing scientists with the opportunity to publish the results of their research;
  • achieving the international level of scientific publications;
  • Drawing attention to the most relevant promising and interesting areas of scientific research on the subjects of the journal;
  • attracting authoritative domestic and foreign authors who are specialists of the highest level to the Journal;
  • ensuring exchange of views between researchers of the Volga region and from different regions of Russia;
  • expanding the editorial board and reviewers with the involvement of famous Russian and foreign specialists;
  • providing full-text access to scientific articles, increasing the journal’s accessibility and openness in Russia and abroad;
  • inclusion in international databases;
  • increasing the impact factor of the Journal;
  • promotion of the Journal on the international and Russian market.

Free Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content based on the following principle: free open access to research results increases the global exchange of knowledge.


  • Russian State Library
  • National Electronic Information Consortium


General provisions

The Journal of the Volga Region Journal of Oncology strives to adhere to high standards of publication ethics based on the recommendations of international committees and associations: Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Council of Science Editors (CSE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), European Medical Writers Association (EMWA) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)

The following principles of ethical behavior are binding on all parties involved in the review and publication of a scientific article: the author(s), reviewers, editor-in-chief, editorial board, and publisher.

The manuscript will be withdrawn from publication if at any stage of the review, pre-publication or after publication of the article the editorial board or readers are found to have violated the requirements of publication ethics.


  1. Introduction

1.1 Publication of materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but it also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely, the Authors, the Editor of the Journal, the Members of the Editorial Board, the Reviewers, the Publisher and the Scientific Community for the journal “Volga Region Journal of Cancer Research”.

1.2 The Publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in this process, but is also responsible for compliance with all current recommendations in the published work.

1.3 The publisher is committed to the strictest oversight of scientific contributions. Our journal programs present an unbiased “report” of the development of scientific thought and research, so we are also aware of the responsibility to properly present these “reports”, especially in terms of the ethical aspects of publications outlined in this document.

  1. Duties of the Editors

2.1 Publication Decision

The Editor-in-Chief of the scientific journal “Volga Bulletin of Cancer” is personally and independently responsible for the decision to publish, often in collaboration with the relevant Scientific Society and members of the Editorial Board. The credibility of the work in question and its scientific relevance should always be the basis of the decision to publish. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of the Volga Bulletin of Oncology. being constrained by the current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality, and plagiarism.

The Editor may confer with other Editors and Reviewers (or officials of the Scientific Community) during the decision to publish.

2.2 Integrity.

The Editor should evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, background, citizenship, or political preferences of the Authors.

2.3 Confidentiality

The Editor and the Editorial Board of the Journal of the Volga Bulletin of Oncology are obliged not to disclose information about the accepted manuscript unnecessarily to all persons except the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific advisors and the Publisher.

2.4 Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

2.4.1 Unpublished data derived from manuscripts submitted for review may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained in the course of review and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

2.4.2 Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely, requesting a Co-Editor, Associate Editor, or collaborating with other members of the Editorial Board in reviewing the work instead of reviewing and deciding for themselves) if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, and other interactions and relationships with Authors, companies, and possibly other organizations related to the manuscript.

2.5 Oversight of Publications

An Editor who has provided convincing evidence that the assertions or conclusions presented in a publication are erroneous should notify the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Community) for the purpose of prompt notification of changes, withdrawal of the publication, expression of concern and other appropriate statements of the situation.

2.6 Research involvement and collaboration

The Editor, in conjunction with the Publisher (or the Scientific Community), shall respond appropriately to ethical complaints regarding manuscripts or published material reviewed. Such measures generally include interacting with the Authors of the manuscript and arguing the relevant complaint or claim, but may also involve interactions with relevant organizations and research centers.

  1. Duties of Reviewers

3.1 Influencing Editorial Board Decisions

Reviewing helps the Editor make decisions about publication and, through appropriate interaction with Authors, can also help the Author improve the quality of the work. Reviewing is a necessary link in formal scientific communications that is at the heart of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication are required to do the essential work of reviewing the manuscript.

3.2 Performance.

Any selected Reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to review a manuscript or who does not have sufficient time to do the work quickly must notify the Editor of the Volga Cancer Bulletin and request to be excluded from the review process of the manuscript in question.

3.3 Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. This work should not be opened and discussed with anyone not authorized by the Editor.

3.4 Requirements for the manuscript and objectivity

The Reviewer is obliged to give an objective evaluation. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and reasonably.

3.5 Recognition of primary sources

Reviewers should identify significant published works relevant to the topic and not included in the bibliography to the manuscript. Any statement (observation, conclusion, or argument) previously published should be properly bibliographically referenced in the manuscript. The Reviewer should also bring to the attention of the Editor any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work within the Reviewer’s scientific competence.

3.6 Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

3.6.1 Unpublished data derived from manuscripts submitted for review may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained in the course of reviewing and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

3.6.2 Reviewers should not participate in reviewing manuscripts if there is a conflict of interest due to competitive, joint and other interactions and relations with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations connected with the submitted work.

  1. Responsibilities of Authors

4.1 Requirements for manuscripts

4.1.1 Authors of the original research report must provide reliable results of the work done as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The data underlying the work must be presented without error. The work should contain sufficient detail and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. False or knowingly erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

4.1.2 Reviews and scientific articles should also be accurate and objective, the point of view of the Editorial Board should be clearly stated.

4.2 Data access and storage

Raw data relevant to a manuscript may be requested from Authors for review by the Editors. Authors should be willing to provide open access to this type of information (per the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) if feasible, and in any case be willing to retain this data for an adequate period of time after publication.

4.3 Originality and plagiarism

4.3.1 Authors must ensure that fully original work is presented and, where works or statements by other Authors are used, appropriate bibliographic references or excerpts must be provided.

4.3.2 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else’s work as their own, to copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else’s work (without attribution), to claiming their own rights to the results of someone else’s research. All forms of plagiarism are unethical and unacceptable.

4.4 Multiple, redundant and simultaneous publications

4.4.1 In general, an Author should not publish a manuscript that is substantially the same research in more than one journal as an original publication. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

4.4.2 In general, an Author should not submit a previously published article to another journal for consideration.

4.4.3 The publication of a certain type of article (e.g., clinical guidelines, translated articles) in more than one journal is in some cases ethical if certain conditions are met. Authors and Editors of the journals concerned must agree to a secondary publication presenting necessarily the same data and interpretations as in the primary published work.

The bibliography of the primary work must also be provided in the secondary publication. More information about the acceptable forms of secondary (repeated) publications can be found on the page www.icmje.org.

4.5 Recognition of primary sources

The contributions of others should always be acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the work presented. Data obtained privately, such as through conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the explicit written permission of the primary source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as manuscript evaluations or grants, should not be used without explicit written permission from the Authors of the work relating to confidential sources.

4.6 Authorship of Publications

4.6.1 Only persons who have made a significant contribution to the conception of the work, the design, execution, or interpretation of the submitted research may be authors of a publication. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as Contributors. In cases where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of the research project, they should be listed as significant contributors to the study.

4.6.2 The author must make sure that all participants who contributed significantly to the study are presented as Contributors and those who did not participate in the study are not listed as Contributors, that all Contributors saw and approved the final version of the work and agreed to submit it for publication.

4.7 Risks and Human and Animal Subjects

4.7.1 If the work involves the use of chemical products, procedures, or equipment in the operation of which any unusual risk is possible, the Author must clearly indicate this in the manuscript.

4.7.2 If the work involves animals or humans as research subjects, Authors should ensure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the research comply with the laws and regulations of the research organizations and are approved by the appropriate committees. The manuscript should clearly reflect that informed consent has been obtained from all human subjects. Care must always be taken to ensure that privacy rights are respected.

4.8 Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1 All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that may be perceived to have influenced the results or conclusions presented in the paper.

4.8.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consulting, equity ownership, honoraria, expert testimony, patent application or registration, grants, and other financial support. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.

4.9 Substantial Errors in Published Works

If the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in a publication, the Author should inform the Editor of the Volga Bulletin of Oncology and work with the Editor to withdraw the publication or correct the errors as soon as possible. If the Editor or the Publisher have received information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the Author is obliged to withdraw the work or correct errors as soon as possible.

  1. Publisher’s Responsibilities

5.1 The publisher should follow principles and procedures that promote ethical responsibilities of the Editors, Reviewers and Authors of The Volga Bulletin of Oncology in accordance with these requirements. The Publisher must be sure that potential profits from advertising or reprint production have not influenced the decisions of the Editors.

5.2 The Publisher should support the Editors of the journal “Volga Cancer Bulletin” in reviewing claims about the ethical aspects of the published materials and help interact with other journals and/or Publishers, if this contributes to the fulfillment of the duties of the Editors.

5.3 The Publisher should promote good research practices and implement industry standards to improve ethical guidelines, withdrawal procedures and error correction.

5.4 The Publisher shall provide appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice) where necessary.




Fee for publication

Publication in the journal is free of charge for authors. The editors do not charge authors for preparing, posting, and printing materials.

Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained in the course of reviewing and related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations related to the submitted work.

Borrowing and plagiarism

The Editorial Board of the journal “Volga Bulletin of Oncology” in reviewing the article may check the material using the Anti-Plagiarism system. In the case of multiple borrowings (more than 20%) the editorial board acts according to the COPE rules.

Preprint and Postprint Placement Policy

During the article submission process, the author needs to confirm that the article has not been published or accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to an article published in the journal “Volga Bulletin of Oncology”, the publisher asks to place a link (full URL of the material) to the official website of the journal.

Articles previously posted by authors on personal or public sites other than those of other publishers are accepted for consideration.



All scientific articles received in the editorial board of the “Volga Region Oncological Bulletin” undergo obligatory bilateral anonymous (“blind”) reviewing (reviewers do not know the authors and the authors of the manuscript do not know reviewers and receive a letter of comments signed by the chief editor (and/or his deputy) or the executive secretary).

Articles are reviewed by members of the editorial board as well as by invited reviewers – leading specialists in the relevant branch of medicine in Russia. The decision to choose one or another reviewer for the review of an article is made by the chief editor or deputy chief editors. The period of reviewing is 2 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended up to 4 weeks.

As a rule, two reviewers are assigned to each article for evaluation.

Each reviewer has the right to refuse the review if there is a clear conflict of interest affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. After reviewing the manuscript, the reviewer gives recommendations on the further fate of the article:

the article is recommended for publication in its present form;

the article is recommended for publication after correcting the deficiencies noted by the reviewer;

the article needs additional reviewing by another specialist;

the article cannot be published in the journal.

Each decision of the reviewer must be justified.

If the review contains recommendations to correct and improve the article, the editorial board sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them with arguments (partially or completely). Revision of the article should not take more than one or two months from the moment of sending the e-mail to the authors about the need to make changes. The corrected version of the article by the author is sent for reviewing again.

If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they should notify the editorial board in writing or verbally about their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the corrected version after 2 months from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the authors, the editorial office removes it from the account. In such situations, the authors are sent a corresponding notification about deregistration of the manuscript due to the expiration of the deadline for revision.

If the author and reviewers have unresolvable contradictions concerning the manuscript, the Editorial Board has the right to send the manuscript for additional reviewing. In conflicting situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at the meeting of the editorial board.

The decision to refuse to publish the manuscript is made at the meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board is not accepted for reconsideration. A message about the refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.

The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for the publication of the article. The final decision on the publication is made by the editorial board. In conflicting situations the decision is made by the chief editor.

After the editorial board makes a decision about the admission of the article for publication the editors inform the author about it and indicate the terms of publication.

The original reviews are stored in the editorial office for 3 years.



Publications in the journal “Povolzhsky Oncologichesky Vestnik” are included in the systems for calculating the citation indexes of authors and journals. “Citation index” is a numerical index that characterizes the significance of a given article and is calculated on the basis of subsequent publications referring to this work.

The journal is indexed in the systems:

Russian Science Citation Index – a bibliographic and abstract index implemented as a database that accumulates information about publications of Russian scientists in Russian and foreign scientific journals. The RSCI project has been developed since 2005 by the Scientific electronic library company (elibrary.ru). By 2012 more than 2400 domestic journals were placed on the elibrary platform.

Google Academy (Google Scholar) is a freely available search engine that indexes the full text of scientific publications of all formats and disciplines. The Google Academy Index includes most of the peer-reviewed online journals in Europe and America of the major scientific publishers.


The Ethics of Scientific Publications

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)