Ethics of scientific publications
The editorial board of the scientific journal “Stomatologist” follows the international ethical rules of scientific publications, based on monitoring the process of publishing publications, as well as minimizing the risks of unfair practices associated with the publication of works.
In its activities, the editorial staff of the journal “Stomatologist” is guided by the recommendations of the Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications (Committee on Publication Ethics https://publicationethics.org/), and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE http://www.icmje.org/), applies the experience of reputable international journals and publishing houses. 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 publication in the eyes of the world scientific community and eliminating the possibility of unauthorized use of copyrighted materials in the interests of individuals. This Regulation is consistent with the policy of the journal and is one of the main components of reviewing and publishing the journal
1. Ethical principles in the activities of the authors
The authors are personally responsible for the provided text of the manuscript, which implies the following principles:
1.1. Provide reliable results of research done. Obviously false or false statements are equated with unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
1.2. Give the editor access to the source data, if necessary, keep the source materials for a reasonable period of time elapsed after their publication.
1.3. To ensure that the results of the study, presented in the manuscript, constitute an independent and original work. In the case of using fragments of other people’s works and / or borrowing the statements of other authors, write out the relevant bibliographic references in the article with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Articles that are compilations from materials published before by other authors, without their own author’s understanding, are not accepted for publication by the editors of the journal.
1.4. To bear the initial responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research.
1.5. Indicate in the article of all persons who have contributed to the development of the research topic.
1.6. Submit to the journal the original manuscript, which was not sent to another journal and is not currently under consideration, as well as an article not previously published in another journal. If the elements of the manuscript were previously published in another article, the authors are obliged to refer to the earlier work and indicate what is the significant difference between the new work and the previous one. Verbatim copying of one’s own works and their paraphrasing are unacceptable, they can only be used as a basis for new conclusions.
1.7. Ensure the correct composition of the list of collaborators. The co-authors of the article should include all persons who have made a significant intellectual contribution to its concept, structure, as well as to the conduct or interpretation of the results of the presented work. Other people who participated in some aspects of the work should be thanked. The author must also ensure that all co-authors are familiar with the final version of the article, approved it and agree with its submission for publication. All authors referred to in the article should be held publicly responsible for the content of the article. If the article is a multidisciplinary work, co-authors may be responsible for their personal contribution, leaving collective responsibility for the overall result. Among the co-authors, the indication of persons who did not participate in the study is unacceptable.
1.8. In case of detection of significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, immediately notify the editors of this journal and take a joint decision on admitting the error and / or correcting it as soon as possible.
1.9. Indicate in your manuscripts all sources of funding for the work, declare possible conflicts of interest that may affect the results of the study, their interpretation, as well as the opinions of reviewers.
2. Ethical principles in the work of the reviewer
The reviewer carries out scientific examination of copyright materials, his actions should be unbiased, consisting in compliance with the following principles:
2.1. The expert assessment should help the author to improve the quality of the text of the article, and the editor-in-chief should decide on the publication.
2.2. A reviewer who is aware of the insufficient level of his qualifications to review the materials of a particular study, or who have doubts about meeting the deadlines for reviewing, should notify the editors in advance.
2.3. The reviewer can not be the author or co-author of the work under review, as well as scientific supervisors of candidates for a scientific degree and / or employees of the department in which the author works.
2.4. Any manuscript received from the editorial board for review is a confidential document. It cannot be discussed with other persons, with the exception of persons indicated by the editor-in-chief.
2.5. The reviewer must be objective, express his opinion clearly and convincingly. Personal comments to the author are not allowed.
2.6. The reviewer undertakes to comply with the terms of confidentiality, under which it is not allowed to transfer labor for familiarization and discussion with persons who do not possess such powers.
2.7. Unpublished data articles are not allowed to be used for personal use by the reviewer without the written consent of the author.
2.8. When a similarity of research is found with already existing similar works, the reviewer should immediately inform the editorial board about this
2.9. The reviewer should not accept manuscripts for consideration if there is a conflict of interest caused by competition, cooperation, or other relationships with any authors or organizations associated with the article.
3. Ethical principles in the activities of the editorial board
The editors are responsible for posting in the journal copyright works, and therefore strictly adheres to the following principles:
3.1. When deciding on a publication, the chief editor of a scientific journal is guided by the accuracy of the data presented and the scientific significance of the work in question.
3.2. The editor-in-chief should not have a conflict of interest in relation to articles that he rejects or accepts.
3.3. The chief editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles sent to the journal will be accepted for publication, and which are rejected. However, he is guided by the journal’s policy and complies with legal restrictions, avoiding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor-in-chief of the journal may, when making a decision, consult with members of the editorial board and reviewers.
3.4. The editor-in-chief evaluates the manuscript solely on the basis of its scientific content – regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, citizenship, origin, social status, or political views of the authors of the manuscript.
3.5. The editor-in-chief, editorial staff, editorial and publishing group, and members of the editorial board of the journal should not disclose any information on the article presented in the journal to anyone except the author (s), appointed and potential reviewers, other editorial staff and, if necessary, the publisher.
3.6. Unpublished articles should not be used for personal use by the editor-in-chief, editorial staff, editorial staff or members of the editorial board without the written consent of the author and should not be passed on to third parties (without the written consent of the author).
3.7. The chief editor should not allow information to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarized.
3.8. The article, if accepted for publication, is placed in the public domain; copyright reserved by the authors.
3.9. The editor-in-chief, together with the publisher, should not leave unanswered claims regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials. In identifying a conflict situation, they should take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights, and when errors are detected, they should promote the publication of corrections or refutations.
3.10. The chief editor, the editorial staff, the editorial and publishing group of the journal ensure the confidentiality of names and other information relating to reviewers. If necessary, when deciding whether to bring in a new reviewer, the latter can be informed about the names of previous reviewers.
4. Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the publisher
In its activities, the publisher is responsible for the publication of the author’s works, which entails the need to follow the following fundamental principles and procedures:
4.1. To promote the performance of ethical duties by the editors, the editorial and publishing group, the editorial board, reviewers and authors in accordance with these requirements.
4.2. To support the editors of the journal in reviewing claims to the ethical aspects of published materials and to help interact with other journals and / or publishers, if this contributes to the duties of editors.
4.3. Ensure the confidentiality of any information received from the authors of publications prior to its publication.
4.4. To realize that the activity of the journal is not a commercial project and does not carry the purpose of making a profit.
4.5. To be always ready to publish corrections, explanations, refutations and apologies, when necessary.
4.6. Provide the editors of the journal the opportunity to exclude publications containing plagiarism and inaccurate data.