• tel: +380-50-988-989-4

  • Statistics

    Downloadings - 11879

    Publication ethics and malpractice statement

    The publication of an article in the journal «Actual problems of transport medicine» is an essential building block in the development of scientific system of knowledge. The publication is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. The published works are created by the authors using only the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.
    The editorial board of the journal «Actual problems of transport medicine» takes its ethical and other responsibilities extremely seriously over all stages of publishing.
    We are committed to ensuring taking objective editorial decisions, we also ensure that advertising or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the editor and the editorial board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

    Standards of research writing
    Authors should present an accurate presentation of the research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the article. The publication should contain sufficient detail and references to permit other researchers to replicate the work.
    Fraudulent data or publishing of knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
    Reviews and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective; and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.

    Data access and retention
    Authors may be asked to provide the raw (original) data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

    Originality and plagiarism
    The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or wording of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. 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 behavior and is unacceptable.

    Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
    An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or one publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. An author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors must agree to the secondary publication of previously published materials, if a new work contains another interpretation of the original data. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

    Acknowledgement of sources
    Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in carrying out the research or the interpretation of the results of the corresponding work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, also must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

    Authorship of the paper
    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. All those who have made a significant contribution in separate aspects of the published work should be mentioned in it (without the status of co-authors). The author, who is responsible for the communication with the editorial board, should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper, and also that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

    Hazards and human or animal subjects
    If the work involves hazardous chemicals, procedures or equipment, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant existing laws. Describing experiments with humans the author should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for such experimentation. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

    Conflicts of interest
    All authors should disclose in their manuscripts 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. 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 stage possible.

    Fundamental errors in published works
    When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns 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 or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

    Publication decisions
    The editor of the journal «Actual problems of transport medicine» is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Matching of the work in question scientific criteria, the quality of the article and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor must be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and comply with the constraints of existing laws regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor takes into account opinions of other members of editorial board and reviewers in making the decision about the publication.

    The editorial board evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors.

    The editor and any editorial staff 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.

    Disclosure and conflicts of interest
    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. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask 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. Editors should require all contributors to disclose possible competing interests and to make corrections in the article if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

    Consideration of claims
    The editorial board should take reasonably responsive measures if ethical complaints have been presented concerning a manuscript or published paper. Such measures generally include communicating with the author of the manuscript concerning eliminating the claims made, but may also include communication with the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other necessary information. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

    Contribution to editorial decisions
    Peer review assists the editor in making publishing 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. The editorial board of the journal «Actual problems of transport medicine» shares the view that every true scholar has an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing scientific works.

    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.

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

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

    Acknowledgement of sources
    The task of reviewers is to identify previously published works that has not been cited by the authors and have essential relation to the essence of the reviewed article. 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 editorial board’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and the elements of any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.

    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. 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.

    The editorial board of the journal