- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder and publisher
- » Author fees
- » Regulation on Conflict of Interest
- » Borrowings and plagiarism
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » CrossMark
- » Advertising policy
- » Principles on informed consent
- » Human Rights Policy
- » Subscription
- » Article retraction policy
Aim and Scope
The goal of the Journal Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) is to participate in the continuing education of physicians by providing scientific and practical information to familiarise a wide audience of medical professions with practical and theoretical developments in medicine. Each issue focuses on one or more medical specialisms, as well as covering a major All-Russian congress or scientific and practical conference. Thematic issues of the journal include Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Gastroenterology, Dermatology, Cardiology, Neurology, Paediatrics, Oncology, Otorhinolaryngology, Pulmonology, Rheumatology and Endocrinology. The journal publishes original articles devoted to practical and theoretical questions applying to medical specialisms, clinical / experimental research and fundamental scientific works, reviews, lectures, descriptions of clinical cases, as well as supporting materials on all topical problems of medicine.
The Journal is aimed at all medical practitioners, including general practitioners and specialists.
The Journal publishes articles from all specialised medical institutions of the Russian Federation and neighbouring countries, as well as materials prepared by Western partners. The journal welcomes contributions from Russian specialists, as well as those based in the near (CIS) and far abroad, including Europe, Asia, Africa, America and Australia.
The Editorial Board accepts articles in English and Russian. Articles submitted to the Editorial Office in English are translated into Russian. All articles accepted for publication by the Journal are printed in the Russian language, while the original (English) versions of the articles are published on the Journal's website. Russian-language articles selected by the Editorial Board as being of particular significance are also translated into English and published on the Journal's website.
Section Policies
Open Submissions
Peer ReviewedPublication Frequency
23 issues per year
List of thematic issues of the journal
№1 | Pediatrics | 31.03.2025 |
№2 | Dermatology / Cosmetology | 31.03.2025 |
№3 | Neurology / Rheumatology | 31.03.2025 |
№4 | Obstetrics and Gynecology | 30.04.2025 |
№5 | Polyclinic | 30.04.2025 |
№6 | Endocrinology / Cardiology | 30.04.2025 |
№7 | Otorhinolaryngology | 30.04.2025 |
№8 | Gastroenterology | 31.05.2025 |
№9 | Pulmonology | 31.05.2025 |
№10 | Oncology / Oncohematology Issue chief editor Aydar A. Ishmukhametov | 31.07.2025 |
№11 | Pediatrics | 31.07.2025 |
№12 | Neurology / Rheumatology | 31.07.2025 |
№13 | Polyclinic | 31.08.2025 |
№14 | Dermatology / Cosmetology | 30.09.2025 |
№15 | Gastroenterology | 30.09.2025 |
№16 | Cardiology / Endocrinology | 31.10.2025 |
№17 | Obstetrics and Gynecology | 31.10.2025 |
№18 | Otorhinolaryngology | 31.10.2025 |
№19 | Pediatrics | 30.11.2025 |
№20 | Pulmonology | 30.11.2025 |
№21 | Oncology / Oncohematology Issue chief editor Aydar A. Ishmukhametov | 30.11.2025 |
№22 | Neurology / Rheumatology | 30.11.2025 |
№23 | Polyclinic | 30.12.2025 |
Open Access Policy
Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
1. General provisions
1.1 All manuscripts submitted to the Journal are sent for single blind review (the Reviewer knows the names of the Authors of the manuscript, but the Authors of the manuscript do not know the names of the Reviewers).
1.2 Reviews are carried out by members of the Editorial Board, as well as external Reviewers having a Candidate or Doctor of Sciences degree and specialist knowledge of current work in the relevant scientific field covered by the article. All Reviewers are familiar with the requirements of the Editorial Board concerning the published materials and have had works published during the last 3 years on a topic related to that presented in the article under review. The selection of reviewers for the expert evaluation of articles is carried out by the Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor and the Editor responsible for the particular issue. The review period is generally from 2 to 4 weeks; however, at the request of the Reviewer, this period can be extended.
1.3 Specialists working in the same research institution where the research work was carried out are not involved in the process of reviewing corresponding articles.
1.4 Reviewers are informed that the manuscripts sent to them contain confidential information that may not be disclosed to third parties.
1.5 In case of an obvious conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials, a Reviewer has the right to decline the review request.
1.6 If the review contains recommendations for correction and /or modification of the article, the Editorial Board of the Journal sends the text of the review to the Author with a proposal to take these recommendations into account in the preparation of a new version of the article or to (partially or fully) refute them. Finalisation of the article should be carried out no more than 2 months following the date of sending an electronic message to the Author about the need to make changes. Following improvements carried out by the Author, the article is then sent for additional review.
1.7 If the Author declines to finalise the materials, he or she must notify the Editorial Board in written or oral form of the refusal to publish the article. If the Author does not return the finalised version after 2 months from the date of the review being sent, even in the absence of confirmation of refusal to finalise the article, the Editorial Office will remove it from the register. In such cases, the Author is notified that the manuscript has been withdrawn from the register in connection with the expiration of the period of time allotted for revision.
2. Review procedure
2.1 All articles received by the Editorial Board are registered and reviewed by the Managing Editor or Editor-in-Chief, who then sends the manuscript to the members of the Editorial Board.
2.2 Members of the Editorial Board have the right to review the manuscript themselves, or to propose sending the article to an external Reviewer (or Reviewers), i.e. a specialist on the subject of the article under review.
2.3 Following approval by the Editor-in-Chief of the Reviewer's candidacy, the Executive Secretary sends the text of the article to the Reviewer by e-mail.
2.4 The text of the review is submitted to the Editorial Board in paper form with personal signature or electronically from the Reviewer's email address. The content of the review is considered by the Editorial Board, which takes one of the following decisions:
- to accept the article for publication without corrections;
- to send the article for additional review;
- to return the article to the Author for correction of the Reviewer's remarks;
- to reject the article.
2.5 The responsible secretary of the Editorial Office sends the text of the review along with a cover letter and the text of the article requiring improvement to the Corresponding Author in printed form or by e-mail. All contributing Authors must familiarise themselves with the content of reviews.
2.6 In case of disagreement with the remarks of the Reviewer, the Author may send a reasoned response to the journal. The decision concerning any further review of the article will be made by the Managing Editor or Editor-in-Chief.
2.7 If the Author agrees with the Reviewer's comments, he or she has the right to amend the article and submit it again. In this case, the review procedure is repeated.
2.8 In case of minor comments requiring only editorial changes, a decision to accept the article for publication may be taken with the consent of the Author(s).
Policy updated: 06/18/2020
Indexation
Articles in Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) are indexed by several systems:
Russian Scientific Citation Index , Google Scholar, Dimensions, SOCIONET, DOAJ, Scopus.
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available a, and requirements for peer-reviewed medical journals, elaborated by the Elsevier Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), Guidelines for what a Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement should adhere to (PEMS)
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: Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet)
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.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) 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 Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) 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 Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) 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 Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) 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 Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) 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 "Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) 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 Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) 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 of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/).
Founder and publisher
- REMEDIUM GROUP Ltd.
Author fees
Publication in Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Arcticle processing charges.
This journal provides authors with an option to publish their scientific papers free of charge. The editorial staff does not charge the authors for preparation, placement and printing of materials. In certain circumstances if a fast-track publication of research studies, including those conducted as part of the grants, in the closest thematic issue is required, an article can be accepted on a fee-paying basis (APC), but ONLY after getting positive peer reviews and approval of the editorial board and editor-in-chief. The cost of fast-trek publication is 55,000 rubles.
Regulation on Conflict of Interest
The author is obliged to notify the editor of a real or potential conflict of interest (conflict of interest is the condition under which the conflicting or competing interests that may affect the editorial decision arise) by including information about the conflict of interest in the relevant section of the article.
Reviewers do not participate in the review of manuscripts in case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint and other interactions and relations with any of the authors, companies or other organizations related to the presented work.
If there is no conflict of interest, the author should also report it. Example wording: "The author states that there is no conflict of interest".
Borrowings and plagiarism
The Editorial Board of the journal "Medical Council" during the consideration of the article makes the verification of the material using the system of Antiplagiarism. In case of multiple borrowings, the editorial board acts in accordance with COPE rules.
Permissible volume of borrowings (including self-quotations), drawn up in accordance with the established rules (with reference to the original source) - no more than 30% of the total volume of the article. The requirement does not apply to reviews. Such materials are considered by the editorial board on an individual basis.
In case of acknowledgement of suspicions on plagiarism or detection of the techniques, allowing to hide its presence, articles are not accepted for the further consideration. The authors are sent a refusal of consideration due to suspicion of plagiarism.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in journal Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet), 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 journal Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet)we suggest that the link to the DOI.
CrossMark
CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content. By applying the CrossMark logo, journal “Meditsinskiy Sovet” is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.
Clicking the CrossMark logo on a document will tell you its current status and may also give you additional publication-record information about the document.
Advertising policy
Text prepared on the basis of:
Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals WAME and Federal Law "On Advertising" of 13.03.2006 № 38-FL.
Journal "Medical Council" is a mass media registered by the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media (certificate of registration SI № SIF777-30814 of December 26, 2007).
The journal specializes in publishing articles and materials of scientific and practical significance for doctors of various specializations, heads of medical institutions, employees of medical universities and students.
The target audience of the journal is medical and pharmaceutical workers, therefore the materials of advertising character, published in the journal "Medical Council", are focused on medical/pharmaceutical practice, specialized medical/pharmaceutical education.
For the purpose of financing the publication activities in the Journal, advertising materials shall be published on a paid basis, as well as reprints of articles published in the Journal in accordance with the rules set forth in this Advertising Policy shall be made.
Basic principles of advertising policy:
- The publication of advertising materials in the Journal shall be subject to the requirements of this Policy.
- Decisions of the Joutnal's editors regarding promotional materials do not depend on the cost of placement of the relevant material or the cost of reprinting.
- The functions of the editor and the advertising manager of the Journal shall be divided.
- Advertisers and sponsors do not influence the editor's decisions, regardless of the terms of the advertising materials or other agreements.
- Reprints of articles are published in accordance with the principle "as is", i.e. as originally published in the Journal. No additions or changes to the text of the articles may be made during the publication of the reprint.
- Publication of additional issues is carried out only by the decision of the editor in accordance with the principles of editorial policy and the objectives of the Journal. Advertisers and sponsors do not influence the content of the respective additional issue.
- All advertising materials shall comply with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation and the Federal Law "On Advertising" dated 13.03.2006 № 38-FL.
- The total volume of advertising materials placed in the Journal may not exceed 40% of the total volume of the Journal. The total volume of advertising materials published in the respective issue of the Journal shall be calculated by the advertising manager.
- Advertising materials are not supported or approved by the editorial office or editorial board of the advertised product, company or service.
- The magazine has the right to refuse to post any advertising material for any reason.
- The decision to publish advertising materials is made with the participation of the editorial office or editorial board of the journal.
- The publication of advertising materials within any article is not allowed.
- Advertising content placed in the Journal should be visually different from editorial and other materials so that the difference between them was obvious.
- The advertisers are fully responsible for all the information contained in the advertising materials published in the Journal and its reliability.
General requirements for advertising materials published in the journal "Medical Council":
- All advertising materials must clearly identify the advertiser and the advertised product, work, service.
- Advertising in the Journal must be fair and accurate. Unfair and unreliable advertising is not allowed, as provided by paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 5 of the Federal Law "On Advertising" dated 13.03.2006 № 38-FL.
- Advertising should not:
- Encourage the commission of unlawful acts;
- Form a negative attitude towards people who do not use advertised goods or to condemn such people.
- In advertising it is not allowed to:
- Use foreign words and expressions that may distort the meaning of the information;
- Indicate that the advertised object is approved by the public authorities or local governments or their officials;
- Indicate that the advertised product is produced using human embryo tissues;
- Use swear words, obscene and offensive images, comparisons and expressions, including those concerning sex, race, nationality, profession, social category, age, language of a person and citizen, official state symbols (flags, coats of arms, anthems), religious symbols, cultural heritage sites (historical and cultural monuments) of the people of the Russian Federation and other countries, as well as cultural heritage sites included in the World Heritage List.
5. Advertisements that do not contain part of the material information about the advertised product, the terms of its purchase or use are not allowed, provided that they distort the meaning of the information and mislead the advertisement consumer.
6. The placement of the text of the advertisement must be accompanied by the mark "advertisement" or the mark "as advertising".
Requirements for advertising materials placed in the "Medical Council" Journal, related to the peculiarities of the advertised object:
- The full name of each active ingredient is indicated in the drug advertisement.
- Advertising of medicines, medical services and medical devices should not:
- Refer to minors;
- Create an idea of the advantages of the advertised object by referring to the fact of the studies required for state registration of the advertised object;
- Contain statements or assumptions about the presence of certain diseases or health disorders in the consumers of the advertisement;
- To promote a healthy person's perception of the need to use the advertised object (with the exception of medicines used for disease prevention);
- Create the impression that there is no need to see a physician;
- Guarantee the positive effect of the advertised object, its safety, effectiveness and absence of side effects;
- Present the advertised subject as a dietary supplement and food additive or other non-medical product;
- Contain statements that the safety and/or effectiveness of the advertised object is guaranteed by its natural origin.
- Message in advertising about properties and characteristics, including methods of use and application, of drugs and medical devices is allowed only within the indications contained in the established instructions for the use and application of such advertising objects.
- Advertising of dietary supplements and food additives should not:
- Create the impression that they are medicines and/or have therapeutic properties;
- To refer to specific cases of curing people, improvements in their condition as a result of the use of such supplements;
- Express gratitude to individuals for the use of such supplements;
- Encourage the refusal of healthy eating;
- Create an impression of the benefits of such supplements by referring to the fact of research mandatory for state registration of such supplements, as well as using the results of other studies in the form of an explicit recommendation for the use of such supplements.
- Advertising of dietary supplements in each case must be accompanied by a warning that the advertised object is not a medicinal product. The warning must include at least ten percent of the advertising space.
- Advertising of baby food products should not represent them as full substitutes for women's milk and should not contain a statement about the advantages of artificial feeding of children. Advertising of products intended for use as substitutes for women's milk and products included in the child's diet during his or her first year of life should include information on age restrictions for the use of such products and a warning of the need for expert advice.
Principles on informed consent
The journal Medical Council (Meditsinskiy sovet) relies on the principles of the World Medical Association's (WMA) policy statement - the Declaration of Helsinki - a statement of Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects) and endeavours to ensure compliance with ethical and data collection standards for research involving human subjects. Before beginning research, the researchers should familiarise themselves with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration on informed consent and carry out the research in strict accordance with those principles as set forth below (Articles 25-32 of the Helsinki Declaration are given):
25. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although, it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he/she freely agrees.
26 In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of his right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw his consent to participate at any time without reprisal.
Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as the methods used to deliver the information.
After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject's freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, verbal consent must be formally documented and witnessed.
All medical subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.
27. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study, the physician must be particularly cautious when the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations, the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
28. For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from his legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails minimal risk and burden.
When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject's dissent should be respected.
30. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative.
31. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient's decision to withdraw from the study should never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
32. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptions where consent would be impossible or impractical to obtain for such research. In such situations, the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee.
Human Rights Policy
When presenting the results of experimental research involving human subjects, the authors should indicate whether the procedures performed adhered to the ethical standards prescribed in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the study was conducted without adherence to the principles of the Declaration, the authors should justify the chosen approach to the study and guarantee that the ethics committee of the organisation in which the study was conducted approved the chosen approach.
Subscription
The electronic version of the journal is publicly available under a license
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Subscriptions to the journal may be ordered by foreign citizens by contacting the journal editorial office (subscription department) or using the services of alternative subscription agencies.
Article retraction policy
Retraction (withdrawal) of an article from publication is a mechanism for correcting published information and notifying readers that the publication contains serious drawbacks or erroneous data that cannot be trusted. The reason for withdrawal of an article may be a duplicate publication, plagiarism, serious errors in research and other violations.
In accordance with the rules of the Ethics Council of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP), the grounds for retracting the article are:
- Finding incorrect borrowings (plagiarism) in publications;
- Duplication of the article in several editions;обнаружение в работе фальсификаций или фабрикаций (например, подтасовки экспериментальных данных);
- Detection of serious errors in work (e.g. misinterpretation of results), which calls into question its scientific value;
- Incorrect composition of authors (includes people who do not meet the criteria of authorship);
- Conflicts of interest (and other breaches of publication ethics) are concealed;
- The article was not reviewed.
The main purpose of the retraction is to correct the published information and ensure its integrity, not to punish the authors who have committed violations.
Withdrawal of the article is carried out on the official request of the editorial board of the journal or the author. During the retraction the article remains in the journal, but in the information about the article, in the file, in the databases it is indicated that the article is withdrawn.
The order of retracting articles
1. If the author/authors' team finds it necessary to withdraw an article, they apply to the editorial office, explaining the reason for their decision. If the editorial board does not respond to such a request, the author/authors' team should contact the Scientific Publications Ethics Council. If the editorial board responds to the authors and agrees to the retraction, it will then retract the text itself.
2. If the Editorial Board decides to withdraw the text on the basis of its expertise or the information received, the Editor-in-Chief will inform the authors/authors' team of the decision. The author (lead author in case of collective authorship) will be acquainted with the wording justifying the retraction of the article.
3. if the author/authors' team ignores the request of the editorial office, the editor-in-chief or editor-in-chief requests the assistance of the ASEP Scientific Publications Ethics Council.
4. Having made a decision to withdraw the article, the editorial board indicates the reason for the retraction (in case of plagiarism - with an indication of the sources of borrowing), as well as the date of retraction. The article and the description of the article remain on the journal's website as part of the corresponding issue of the journal, but the electronic version of the text is marked with an inscription RETRACTED and the date of retraction, the same note is put in the index of the issue.
5. The ASEP Scientific Publications Ethics Council, the scientific information databases (NEB, CyberLeninka), as well as all network libraries and databases where the journal is indexed, are provided with the protocol indicating the date of the meeting of the Editorial Board, the composition of the members of the meeting, the results of the examination, a reasoned decision and the completed form:
1. Name of the author and title of the article.
2. Name of the publication from which the text is withdrawn.
3. The initiator of the article withdrawal.
4. The basis for withdrawal of the article and the date of the decision.
5. Link to the page on the website of the publication, where the information about the retraction is given.
6. Output data of the article and DOI (if any).
7. Topics (social sciences; agriculture, etc.).
8. Date of policy update.
