Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

Russian Academy of Medical Sciences (RAMS) is one of the state academies of sciences of Russia. It is a scientific center coordinating basic and fundamental studies in the field of medicine (now RAMS institutes are the part of medical science department in the Russian Academy of Sciences).

"Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" is the multidisciplinary medical scientific journal. It is published in order to promote e achievements of clinical and basic medicine in the Russian Federation and abroad.

The editorial board of the journal “Annals of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences” selects for publication manuscripts, original studies, lectures, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, short messages on most significant achievements in basic and clinical medicine in wide range of specialties.

The main journal subject sections are:

• ANAESTHESIOLOGY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
• ANDROLOGY
• BIOCHEMISTRY
• CARDIOLOGY AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
• CELL TRANSPLANTOLOGY AND TISSUE ENGINEERING
• DERMATOLOGY and VENEROLOGY
• ENDOCRINOLOGY
• EPIDEMIOLOGY
• HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT
• HISTORY OF MEDICINE
• HYGIENE
• IMMUNOLOGY
• INFECTIOUS DISEASES
• INTERNAL DISEASES
• MICROBIOLOGY
• MOLECULAR MEDICINE AND GENETICS
• NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY
• OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY
• ONCOLOGY
• OPHTHALMOLOGY
• PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
• PEDIATRICS
• PHARMACOLOGY
• PHTHISIOLOGY
• PHYSIOLOGY
• PSYCHOLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY
• PULMONOLOGY
• RHEUMATOLOGY
• STATE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
• STOMATOLOGY
• SURGERY
• TRANSPLANTOLOGY
• TRAUMATOLOGY
• WORK-RELATED DISEASES
• ANNIVERSARIES, CONGRATULATIONS
• OBITUARIES
• PROCEEDINGS of the GENERAL MEETING of the DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL SCIENCES of RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

Sections

REVIEW

The journal publishes reviews of literature, including systematic reviews of clinical trials.

The main purpose of a review manuscript should be a discussion of actual data or presentation the original author's view on a problem. It shouldn't be a simple enumeration of previously published data. Thus, the discussion is a mandatory part of the review manuscript (it can be isolated in a separate section or place systematically throughout the text).

Authors should indicate all the sources of primary information in the manuscript (names of the full-text and references databases, keywords and other search settings).

The manuscript of literature review should be structured into sections and contain graphic materials.

ORIGINAL STUDIES

The journal accept manuscript containing results of international and local clinical and experimental studies, and meta-analyzes.

The journal is welcome for manuscripts with human subjects studies results, as well as results of experimental studies in vitro. Journal does not publish experimental and clinical studies of dietary supplements ("bioactive adds to food") and animal studies.

Editorial board will select for publication only manuscropts of clinical and experimental studies which were conducted in accordance with international biomedical ethics and deontology principles. Editorial board asks the authors to describe that presented study was conducted in accordance with international GCP standards: voluntary signing of an informed consent by all of participants; approval of the study protocol by the local ethics committee (the distinct name of ethics committee, the meeting date and protocol number should be indicate in a manuscript), etc.

The detailed study protocol should be presented in the manuscript. Authors should give so many details of a study protocol as need for it fully replaying. In the case of meta-analyze authors should describe in details the procedure of information search: names of databases, filters and keywords, as well as any additional search settings for primary sources collecting.

In compliance with the ethics policy editorial board asks authors to indicate the source of funding of their work (study preparation, writing and publishing the manuscript, etc.), and declare of apparent or potential conflicts of interests. Please note that the presence of obvious or potential conflict of interest (including the financial interest of the authors) or affiliation of any organization (public or private) with conduction of the research is not a reason for a manuscript rejection. Rather, it gives additional advantages of manuscript under evaluation by reviewers and will cause more interest and trust from readers.

SHORT MESSAGES

The journal accept articles on anniversaries, obituaries, short communications and discussions, annoncements and so on. 

Peer Review Process

A double-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences". This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.

1. Members of the editorial board and leading Russian and international experts in corresponding areas of life sciences, invited as independent readers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief or science editor choose readers for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 2-4 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
2. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
   - to accept the paper in its present state;
   - to invited the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;
   - that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;
   - to reject the manuscript outright.
3. If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 2 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
4. We politely request that the editor be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
5. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
6. The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
7. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
8. Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.
9. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 3 years.

Publication Frequency

6 items per year

Archiving

The journal uses the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve all the published articles. The PKP PN is a part of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) program offers decentralized and distributed preservation, seamless perpetual access, and preservation of the authentic original version of the content.

Also, the journal makes full-text archives on the Russian Science Electronic Library (http://elibrary.ru/) platform.

Author Self-Archiving

This journal permits and encourages authors to post items submitted to the journal on personal websites or institutional repositories both prior to and after the publication while providing bibliographic details that credit, if applicable, its publication in this journal.

Delayed Open Access

The contents of this journal will be available in an open access format 6 month(s) after an issue is published.

The journal is compliant with Green Open Access mode for articles distribution.

All the articles become Open Access in 6 months after publication.

You can find Open Access articles on the journal's WEB-site and on eLibrary.ru

To get access to new articles within the embargo period you should subscribe to the journal / directly buy an article or use eLibrary.ru service.

Issue Purchase

Readers without a subscription may still purchase individual issues. The following payment options and fees are available.

One issue: 25.00 (USD)

Article Purchase

Readers without a subscription may still purchase individual articles. The following payment options and fees are available.

One article: 5.00 (USD)

Indexation

Articles in "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" are indexed by several systems:

• Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
• Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
• Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory
• Scopus
• PubMed (MEDLINE)
• Cyberleninka
• EBSCO

Mass media registration certificate dated March, 27, 2020. Series ПИ № ФС77-78060 by Russian Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology, and Mass Media.

Publishing Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences"  are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org,  and requirements for peer-reviewed medical journals ((http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf), elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications) 

1. Introduction

1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences"

1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences"  is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences") must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’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.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

3.    Duties of Reviewers

3.1.Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2.Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" and excuse himself from the review process.

3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers  should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1.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.

3.6.2. 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.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1.Reporting standards

4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

4.2.Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

4.3.Originality and Plagiarism

4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

4.6.Authorship of the Paper

4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)

5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

5.2. The publisher should support "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.

The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/). 

 

Founders

• Russian academy of sciences
• Federal Research Institute for Healthcare System Organization and Informatics

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.

Plagiarism detection

"Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" use 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

Prior to acceptance and publication in "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in "Vestnik Rossiiskoi akademii medetsinskikh nauk" = "Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)