Saratov JOURNAL of Medical and Scientific Research

For Authors

Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research publishes peer-reviewed articles on all aspects of clinical medicine and public health, including original clinical studies, experimental investigations with clear clinical relevance, state-of-the-art papers, and viewpoints. In general, case reports will not be considered for publication.

Please read and follow these instructions carefully; doing so will ensure that the publication of your manuscript is as rapid and efficient as possible. The Publisher reserves the right to return manuscripts that are not prepared in accordance with these instructions.

All manuscripts should be submitted online at Submission Service.

The manuscripts are considered for review only under the conditions that they are not under consideration elsewhere and that the data presented have not appeared on the internet or have not been previously published (including symposia, proceedings, transactions, books, articles published by invitation, and preliminary publications of any kind except abstracts not exceeding 400 words). On acceptance, written transfer of copyright, signed by all authors, will be required.

Communication should contain the full postal address and e-mail address of the sender, and a clear indication as to whether the correspondence is to be considered for publication. Acknowledgement of receipt will be sent by e-mail.

All authors of submitted manuscripts must sign a copy (e-copy or scanned copy) of following docs:

  1. ICMJE Uniform Disclosure Form for Potential Conflicts of Interest,
  2. Covering letter: Please submitt with the manuscript the filled covering letter. In case of previous submission of manuscripts for consideration to other journals, submission of manuscripts together with referee’s reports is mandatory and will facilitate the consideration. Please suggest up to 3 potential reviewers for your manuscript; first name, last name, institution and email address are required for each suggestion.

 

Preparation of the Manuscript

General: Papers must be written in English or Russian.

All text, references, figure legends, and tables should be in one electronic document. You must upload your figures separately.

Full papers of an experimental or observational nature must be divided into sections headed Introduction, Methods (including ethical and statistical information), Results, Discussion, Conclusion and Conflict of interest, although reviews may require a different format.

Legends for all figures should be included in the file with the text and should not appear on the figures. For Original Articles, there is normally a limit of 5 figures and tables (total) per manuscript.

Except for units of measurement, abbreviations are strongly discouraged. Except for units of measurement, the first time an abbreviation appears, it should be preceded by the words for which it stands.

Drug Names. Generic names should be used. When proprietary brands are used in research, include the brand name and the name of the manufacturer in parentheses after the first mention of the generic name in the Methods section.

Title Page

The title page should include:
- The name(s), degrees, position(s) of the author(s),
- A concise and informative title,
- The affiliation(s) and address(es) of the author(s)
- The e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers of the corresponding author.

Abstract
Provide an abstract of not more than 1500 symbols. It should consist of four paragraphs, labeled Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusions. They should briefly describe, respectively, the problem being addressed in the study, how the study was performed, the salient results, and what the authors conclude from the results.

Keywords
Please provide 4 to 6 keywords which can be used for indexing purposes. 

Statistical Methods
The basis for these guidelines is described in Bailar JC III, Mosteller F. Guidelines for statistical reporting in articles for medical journals: amplifications and explanations. Ann Intern Med 1988;108:266-73.

  • Exact methods should be used as extensively as possible in the analysis of categorical data. For analysis of measurements, nonparametric methods should be used to compare groups when the distribution of the dependent variable is not normal.
  • Results should be presented with only as much precision as is of scientific value. For example, measures of association, such as odds ratios, should ordinarily be reported to two significant digits.
  • Measures of uncertainty, such as confidence intervals, should be used consistently, including in figures that present aggregated results.
  • Except when one-sided tests are required by study design, such as in noninferiority trials, all reported P values should be two-sided. In general, P values larger than 0.01 should be reported to two decimal places, those between 0.01 and 0.001 to three decimal places; P values smaller than 0.001 should be reported as P<0.001. Notable exceptions to this policy include P values arising in the application of stopping rules to the analysis of clinical trials and genetic-screening studies.
  • In manuscripts that report on randomized clinical trials, authors may provide a flow diagram in CONSORT format and all of the information required by the CONSORT checklist. When restrictions on length prevent the inclusion of some of this information in the manuscript, it may be provided in a separate document submitted with the manuscript.

 

Figure

Figures should be supplied in an electronic format at a suitable size for printing with the following resolutions: 600 dots per inch (dpi) for line drawings and combinations; 300 dpi for greyscale and colour. Acceptable formats for pictures, photos, and figures are PDF, DOC, PPT, JPG, GIF, TIF.

If photographs of patients are used, either they should not be identifiable or the photographs should be accompanied by written permission to use them.

 

References
References must be double-spaced and numbered consecutively as they are cited. References first cited in a table or figure legend should be numbered so that they will be in sequence with references cited in the text at the point where the table or figure is first mentioned. List all authors when there are four or fewer; when there are five or more, list the first three, followed by “et al.” The following are sample references:

1. Takag A, Watanabe S, Igarashi M, et al.The effect of Helicobacter pylori on cell proliferation and apoptosis in gastric epithelial cell lines. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2000; 14(1): 188–192.

2. Chapter in book: Provide inclusive page numbers, authors, chapter titles, book title, editor, publisher and year. Example: Meidell RS, Gerard RD, Sambrook JF. Molecular biology of thrombolytic agents. In: Roberts R, editor. Molecular Basis of Cardiology. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1993: 295–324.

3. Book (personal author or authors): Provide a specific (not inclusive) page number. Example: Cohn PF. Silent Myocardial Ischemia and Infarction. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 1993:33.

4. U.S. positions on selected issues at the third negotiating session of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Washington, D.C.: Committee on Government Reform, 2002. (Accessed March 4, 2002, at http://www.house.gov/reform/min/inves_tobacco/index_accord.htm.)

Numbered references to personal communications, unpublished data, or manuscripts either “in preparation” or “submitted for publication” are unacceptable. If essential, such material can be incorporated at the appropriate place in the text.

Use Index Medicus (National Library of Medicine) abbreviations for journal titles.

Do not cite personal communications, manuscripts in preparation or other unpublished data in the references; these may be cited in the text in parentheses. If letters to the editor are cited, identify them with the word "letter" in parentheses. Do not cite abstracts that are older than two years. Identify abstracts by the abbreviation "abstr" in parentheses.

 

Authorship Criteria and Contributions and Authorship Form

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. One or more authors should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. Authorship credit should be based only on (1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; and (2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and (3) final approval of the version to be published.  

The authors also must certify that the manuscript represents valid work and that neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under their authorship has been published or is being considered for publication elsewhere. Authors of manuscripts reporting original data or systematic reviews must provide an access to data statement from at least one named author, often the corresponding author If requested, authors should be prepared to provide the data and must cooperate fully in obtaining and providing the data on which the manuscript is based for examination by the editors or their assignees.

 

Role of the Corresponding Author 

The corresponding author (or coauthor designee) will serve on behalf of all coauthors as the primary correspondent with the editorial office during the submission and review process. If the manuscript is accepted, the corresponding author will review an edited typescript and proof, make decisions regarding release of information in the manuscript to the news media, federal agencies, or both, and will be identified as the corresponding author in the published article. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript is complete. “Acknowledgment” is the general term for the list of contributions, disclosures, credits, and other information included at the end of the text of a manuscript but before the references. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the conflict of interest disclosures reported in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript are accurate, up-to-date, and consistent with the information provided for each author. The corresponding author must sign the Authorship Form confirming that all persons who have contributed substantially are identified as authors and that written permission from each author has been obtained.

 

Conflicts of Interest

All authors must make a formal statement indicating any potential conflict of interest that might constitute an embarrassment to any of the authors if it were not to be declared and were to emerge after publication. Such conflicts might include, but are not limited to, shareholding in or receipt of a grant or consultancy fee from a company whose product features in the submitted manuscript or which manufactures a competing product.

Authors must state all possible conflicts of interest in the manuscript, including financial, consultant, institutional and other relationships that might lead to bias or a conflict of interest. If there is no conflict of interest, this should also be explicitly stated as none declared. All sources of funding should be acknowledged in the manuscript. All relevant conflicts of interest and sources of funding should be included on the title page of the manuscript with the heading “Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding:”.

For example: "Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding: A has received honoraria from Company Z. B is currently receiving a grant (#12345) from Organization Y, and is on the speaker’s bureau for Organization X – the CME organizers for Company A. For the remaining authors none were declared."

 

Proofs

All manuscripts will undergo some editorial modification, so it is important to check proofs carefully. PDF page proofs will be sent via e-mail to the corresponding author for checking. To avoid delays in publication, proofs should be checked and returned within 48 hours. Corrections should be returned by annotated PDF, e-mail or fax. Extensive changes to the text may be charged to the author.

 

Post-production corrections

Corrections are made if the publication record is seriously affected by the academic accuracy of published information. Where these amendments concern peer-reviewed material, the correction will be published as a formal notice (erratum) in a subsequent issue.

Authors' corrections to Supplementary Data are made only in exceptional circumstances (for example major errors that compromise the conclusion of the study). Because the Supplementary Data is part of the original paper and hence the published record, the information cannot be updated if new data have become available or interpretations have changed.

 

Permissions 

No part of materials published in "Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research" may be reproduced without written permission of the publisher.

 

Relationship with Industry Policy

The Editors require authors to disclose any relationship with industry and financial associations that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article in both the cover letter and on the title page. All sources of funding for the work should be acknowledged in a footnote on the title page, as should all institutional affiliations of the authors (including corporate appointments). Other kinds of associations, such as consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interests or patent-licensing arrangements, should be disclosed to the Editors in the cover letter at the time of submission. If no relationship with industry exists, please state this in the cover letter and on the title page. Relationship with industry guidelines apply to authors of all the following: Original Research Papers, State-of-the-Art Papers, Expedited Reviews, Editorials and Viewpoints, Editorial Comments, and Letters to the Editor.

 

Publication Ethics

Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. We abides by Code of Conduct and aims to adhere to Best Practice Guidelines proposed by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.

In particular, 

Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.

Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. 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 and excuse himself from the review process. 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

Plagiarism is when an author attempts to pass off someone else's work as his or her own. Duplicate publication, sometimes called self-plagiarism, occurs when an author reuses substantial parts of his or her own published work without providing the appropriate references. This can range from getting an identical paper published in multiple journals, to 'salami-slicing', where authors add small amounts of new data to a previous paper.

Plagiarism can be said to have clearly occurred when large chunks of text have been cut-and-pasted. Such manuscripts would not be considered for publication in Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research. But minor plagiarism without dishonest intent is relatively frequent, for example, when an author reuses parts of an introduction from an earlier paper. The Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research editors judge any case of which they become aware (either by their own knowledge of and reading about the literature, or when alerted by referees) on its own merits. Editors verify the originality of submitted manuscripts.

If a case of plagiarism comes to light after a paper is published in Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research, the journal will conduct a preliminary investigation. If plagiarism is found, the journal will contact the author's institute and funding agencies. A determination of misconduct will lead Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research to run a statement, bidirectionally linked online to and from the original paper, to note the plagiarism and to provide a reference to the plagiarised material. Depending on the extent of the plagiarism, the paper may also be formally retracted.

 

Duplicate Submission

Manuscripts that are found to have been published elsewhere, or to be under review elsewhere, will incur duplicate submission/publication sanctions. If authors have used their own previously published work, or work that is currently under review, as the basis for a submitted manuscript, they are required to cite the previous work and indicate how their submitted manuscript offers novel contributions beyond those of the previous work.

 

Citation Manipulation

Submitted manuscripts that are found to include citations whose primary purpose is to increase the number of citations to a given author’s work, or to articles published in a particular journal, will incur citation manipulation sanctions.

 

Data Fabrication and Falsification

Submitted manuscripts that are found to have either fabricated or falsified experimental results, including the manipulation of images, will incur data fabrication and falsification sanctions.

 

Improper Author Contribution or Attribution

All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims. It is important to list everyone who made a significant scientific contribution, including students and laboratory technicians.

 

Redundant Publications

Redundant publications involve the inappropriate division of study outcomes into several articles.

 

Sanctions

In the event that there are documented violations of any of the above mentioned policies in any journal, regardless of whether or not the violations occurred in Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research, the following sanctions will be applied:

  • Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript.
  • Immediate rejection of every other manuscript submitted to Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research by any of the authors of the infringing manuscript.
  • Prohibition against all of the authors for any new submissions to Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research, either individually or in combination with other authors of the infringing manuscript, as well as in combination with any other authors. This prohibition will be imposed for a minimum of 36 months.
  • Prohibition against all of the authors from serving on the Editorial Board of Saratov Journal of Medical Scientific Research.

In cases where the violations of the above policies are found to be particularly egregious, the publisher reserves the right to impose additional sanctions beyond those described above.

 

Peer Review Process

Beeing of utter importance for filtering high quality research and for maintaining journal focus, peer review is sistematically used for all papers sent to our journal. All papers submitted to the journal are subjected to blind, unbiased, independent critical evaluation.

The review process is as follows:

First an editor checks the article for its suitability to be published in the journal, according to its scope.

Next the editor assigns the article to two independent reviewers, selected based on their field of expertise to match the content of the article, to critically appraise the paper. The reviewers are selected form our database of reviewers. The article is sent to them and they are asked to perform the review. If they consider they don't have enough expertise on the article content, or if they decline the review, another reviewer is asked to help with the review.

Subsequently the reviewers assess the article, writes their comments to the author and to the editor and give their reccomendation:

At the end of the round of reviewing, the editor makes the decision: accept submission, revisions are required, resubmit for review, or decline submission. The decision will be sent to the author along with the comments from the reviewers and the editor.

The editorial process will continue with other rounds of reviewing (in case revisions are requred) till the final decision is made (to accept the article or to decline it).

In the interests of transparency, authors are informed that on average a round of reviewing takes about four weeks (The typical period of time allowed for reviewers is two weeks).

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Offprints

Corresponding authors may purchase offprints by mail. On-line version of all articles is free.

 

Publication Charges

Publishing of papers in English is free of charge.