- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexing
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Publication fee
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism Policy
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Correction and retraction policy
- » Advertising policy
- » Data Sharing Policy
- » CrossMark
Aim and Scope
The journal aims to achieve the following tasks:
1. Generalization of scientific and practical achievements in the field of surgery, oncology, urology, gynecology, and traumatology: The journal intends to disseminate information about the latest developments and advancements in the field of surgery and related specialities.
2. Improving the scientific and practical qualifications of doctors in these specialities: The journal aims to provide doctors with access to the latest research and practical knowledge, thereby enhancing their professional skills and knowledge.
3. Publication of modern achievements in the field of surgery: The journal publishes original articles, basic research results, reviews, analyses of clinical cases, and results of Russian and international clinical studies related to surgery and related specialities.
4. Inviting researchers and doctors from related specialities to publish: The journal invites researchers and doctors working in the field of surgery, oncology, urology, gynecology, traumatology, as well as doctors of other specialities to publish their work in the journal.
5. Publishing the results and resolutions of all-Russian congresses and conferences dedicated to surgery, oncology, urology, gynecology, and traumatology: The journal's chronicle section publishes the results and resolutions of major conferences and congresses in the field of surgery and related specialities, keeping the readers up-to-date with the latest events in the field.
Section Policies
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
4 issues per year
Open Access Policy
All articles published in the journal are open access and are freely available for anyone to read. The open access policy contributes to the global exchange of knowledge.
Articles are published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright
Authors retain intellectual property rights without any restrictions. When republishing materials, the author is obliged to provide a reference to the materials previously published in the "Surgical Practice (Russia)".
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
The journal conducts a double-blind peer review of submitted manuscripts, meaning that the reviewers do not know the author’s identity, and the author does not receive information about the reviewers.
Manuscripts are reviewed by both members of the editorial board and external reviewers. Reviewers are leading experts in their respective fields, drawn from Russia and other countries. Each manuscript is reviewed by two experts, ensuring a comprehensive and objective assessment.
In the event of significant discrepancies between the initial reviews, a third expert is engaged to provide a definitive evaluation. The selection of reviewers is guided by their academic credentials and the absence of any professional conflicts of interest with the author.
When submitting an article for review, the author may indicate persons with whom there is or may be a conflict of interest caused by competition or cooperation. The editors will take this information into account.
In their work, reviewers are guided by the principles formulated by the Committee on Publication Ethics. Based on these principles the Editorial Ethics was developed.
Reviewers are informed that manuscripts sent to them for review are the property of the authors and contain confidential, non-public information. Reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and are not allowed to make copies of the article.
Peer review is a confidential process, with the author being provided with the text of the review. Confidentiality is maintained at all times, except in cases of plagiarism or falsification, where a breach of confidentiality may be necessary to ensure the integrity of the review process.
Review deadlines are set by the editor-in-chief, who strives to minimize the time between the submission of a manuscript and a decision on it. Maximum reviewing period is 2 months.
The review covers the following aspects:
- correspondence of the title to the content of the article;
- assessment of the manuscript's relevance to the field of study,
- evaluation of the adequacy of the methodology used in the study,
- the depth of analysis of the issues and the quality of the obtained results,
- evaluation of the form and presentation of the manuscript
- consideration of the appropriateness of publishing the article,
- comprehensive description of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript.
In addition to providing comments for the author, reviewers have the following five options to express their opinion on the article:
- to accept the article;
- to accept after minor corrections;
- to accept after major corrections;
- to resubmit for another review after major corrections;
- to reject the article.
In case the reviewer recommends making changes to the article, his/her recommendations are sent to the author with a suggestion for revision. It is the author’s right to defend his/her position before the editorial board and the reviewers.
In some cases, the editorial board may choose to enlist the assistance of additional reviewers to re-evaluate an article.
If the article is accepted, the secretary notifies the author and informs him/her about the planned time of publication.
A positive review is a necessary but not sufficient condition for publication. The editor-in-chief makes the final decision.
Upon receipt of a negative review, the author will be notified of the decision and sent a detailed explanation for the rejection by email. If the Editorial Board decides to accept the article for publication, the author will be promptly informed about it, and a copy of the decision, along with the review, will be sent to him/her electronically. All original reviews will be kept on file by the Editorial Board for a period of five years.
It is mandatory for the Editorial Board to provide the reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon request. However, the Editorial Board does not guarantee publication of the manuscript and reserves the right to reject any article that does not meet the journal's standards for quality and relevance.
Articles such as interviews and reports from round tables, conferences, and other similar events are not subject to compulsory review. Additionally, information, advertising messages, and announcements are also exempt from mandatory review. However, the editorial board reserves the right to review and edit these types of submissions to ensure that they meet the journal's standards for accuracy, relevance, and appropriateness.
Indexing
CrossRef, Russian Index for Science Citation (RISC), Google Scholar, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, WorldCat, Cyberleninka, Dimensions, ResearchBib, Lens, Research4Life, JournalTOCs
Publishing Ethics
The editorial policy of the journal "Surgical Practice (Russia)" is based on the provisions of authoritative international associations, such as the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), as well as on the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, the Declaration of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers (ASEP) "Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications", as well as the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers that set standards of ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the publication (authors, journal editors, reviewers, publishers, and scientific society).
- Introduction
1.1. Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal serves a multitude of purposes beyond simple communication. It is an essential building block in the construction of a coherent and reputable network of knowledge. Therefore, it is crucial to establish and maintain ethical standards for all parties involved in the publishing process, including the author, journal editor, peer reviewer, publisher, and society for society-owned or sponsored journals like the "Surgical Practice (Russia)". Such standards ensure the integrity and quality of the published work and promote trust in the scholarly community.
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.
- Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication decision
The publication decision for the journal "Surgical Practice (Russia)" rests solely with the Editor, who is responsible for determining which articles are suitable for publication based on their validity and relevance to the field of research. The Editor may work in collaboration with relevant societies or consult with other editors and reviewers to make the final decision. However, the ultimate responsibility for the publication decision lies with the Editor, who must ensure that the work is validated and of significant importance to the readers and researchers.
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 editorial staff of "Surgical Practice (Russia)" 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 related to the papers.
2.5. Vigilance over published record
If an editor is presented with compelling evidence that the content or findings of a published paper are flawed, they should collaborate with the publisher (and/or society) to expedite the publication of an appropriate response, such as a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other relevant statement. This is necessary to ensure the accuracy and credibility of scientific literature, and to prevent further dissemination of erroneous or misleading information. It is the responsibility of the editor and publisher to uphold ethical standards in scholarly publishing and to maintain the integrity of the journal's content.
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 to the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
- 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 the "Surgical Practice (Russia)" and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3. Confidentiality
All manuscripts submitted for review must be treated as confidential documents and handled accordingly. They should not be disclosed or discussed with anyone other than those authorized by the editor. The confidentiality of the manuscript must be upheld to maintain the integrity of the review process and to protect the authors' intellectual property rights.
3.4. Standard and objectivity
Reviews must be conducted with objectivity and impartiality. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate and should be avoided. Referees should present their opinions in a clear and concise manner, supported by evidence and reasoning. They should evaluate the manuscript based on its scientific merits and not on any personal biases or preferences. It is important for reviewers to provide constructive feedback that can help the author improve the manuscript, rather than making subjective judgments or disparaging remarks.
3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
It is the reviewer's responsibility to identify published works relevant to the topic and not included in the references of the manuscript. Additionally, reviewers should bring to the editor's attention any significant similarities or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published paper that they are aware of. This is essential to ensure that credit is given to previous work and that the scientific literature accurately reflects the state of knowledge in the field. Reviewers should provide accurate and complete references for all cited works, and avoid making unsubstantiated claims or speculations.
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 must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may affect their ability to provide an objective and impartial review of the manuscript. If a reviewer has any competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript, they should decline the invitation to review or declare the conflict of interest to the editor. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists, as it may compromise the integrity and impartiality of the review process.
- Duties of Authors
4.1. Reporting standards
4.1.1. The authors of the original study are responsible for presenting accurate and reliable results of their work, accompanied by an impartial discussion of the study's significance. The data supporting the study should be presented clearly and comprehensively. The underlying data should be accurately represented in the paper, and any relevant details and references should be provided to enable others to replicate the work. Any fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Authors must take responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of their work, and ensure that the manuscript presents an honest and transparent account of the research
4.1.2. Reviews and professional publication articles should also adhere to high standards of accuracy and objectivity. Editorial works that express an opinion should be clearly identified as such, and should not be presented as objective or scientific analysis. It is important that authors, editors, and reviewers maintain a clear distinction between facts and opinions, and avoid presenting personal biases as objective truth.
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 is a serious ethical violation in academic publishing that can take various forms. These include presenting another person's work or ideas as one's own, copying large portions of a paper without proper citation, and claiming research results obtained by others without giving them proper credit. Such practices undermine the principles of academic integrity and compromise the reliability and validity of scientific knowledge. Therefore, any form of plagiarism is considered unethical publishing behaviour and is not tolerated in any reputable scholarly journal.
4.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. Multiple or redundant publications, as well as concurrent submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal, are considered unethical publishing practices and are not acceptable. Authors should not submit manuscripts that report essentially the same research to more than one primary journal. This includes submitting manuscripts that have been published elsewhere in any language or format, or that are being considered for publication in other journals.
4.4.2. The general ethical standard is that an author should not submit a paper that has already been published for consideration in another journal. This practice would constitute a breach of publishing norms and could result in copyright infringement.
4.4.3. Publication of some types 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 acknowledgement 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 in 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. Authors are expected to disclose any financial or other potential conflicts of interest that could affect the results or interpretation of their manuscript. Additionally, any sources of financial support for the project should be fully disclosed in the manuscript.
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 the "Surgical Practice (Russia)" and cooperate with the Publisher 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.
- Duties of the Publisher
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of the "Surgical Practice (Russia)" 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 has a responsibility to provide support to the editors of the "Surgical Practice (Russia)" journal in reviewing and addressing any complaints related to ethical issues. Additionally, the publisher should facilitate communication with other journals and publishers, if necessary, to assist the editors in their handling of such complaints.
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.
Founder
The Journal is funded by the founder.
ENDOUROLOGY CENTRE “ENDOCENTRE” NON-PROFIT PARTNERSHIP
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University
Publication fee
Publication in the journal is free.
There is no fee for the preparation of materials for publication.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
All individuals involved in the peer-review and publication process must disclose any potential conflicts of interest. This includes financial relationships such as employment, consulting, shareholding, patents, or payment for peer review. Additionally, personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual convictions should be considered and disclosed.
- Authors
All authors are required to disclose all financial and personal relationships that have influenced or may have influenced their work. This information should be provided in the Author Agreement and in the submitted manuscript, including:
- A clear statement on whether or not the authors have a conflict of interest.
- Details on sources of funding and including sponsors and an explanation of their role in developing the research design; collecting, analysing, and interpreting the data; drafting the manuscript; deciding on the submission of the manuscript for publication; or a statement that the source of financial support was not so involved on any of the stages mentioned above.
- Reviewers
Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts where there is a conflict of interest due to competitive, collaborative, and other interactions and relationships with any of the authors, companies, or other organisations associated with the submitted work.
- Editors and journal staff
Editors and the journal staff should recuse themselves from editorial decisions in a conflict of interest related to the articles under review.
Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review may not be used for personal research without the written consent of the author.
Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Plagiarism Policy
The editorial board of the "Surgical Practice (Russia)" journal implements the principle of zero tolerance for plagiarism. All submitted articles are checked for plagiarism. If multiple borrowings are found, the editorial board acts in accordance with the rules of the COPE Publication Ethics Committee.
Preprint and postprint Policy
When submitting a manuscript, the author should confirm that the manuscript has not been published or has not been accepted for publication in another journal. When referring to an article published in the Surgical practice, the URL of the material posted on the official website of the journal should be given.
Articles previously posted by authors on personal or public websites that are not affiliated to other publishers are eligible for consideration.
Correction and retraction policy
Making changes to an article that has been accepted for publication and has undergone all stages of peer review and prepress preparation falls into one of the following categories:
- Addendum
- Publisher's correction (typo/erratum)
- Author's correction (corrigendum).
In situations related to the withdrawal of articles, the editorial board and the publisher of the "Surgical Practice (Russia)" are guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE Retraction Guidelines) and AIRP Council of Ethics (Rule of Retraction of an article from publication).
5.2 An article can be retracted for the following reasons:
- publication of the same manuscript in several journals;
- plagiarism;
- errors in the manuscript or falsification of the data that cast doubt on its scientific value.
An article may be retracted following an official request of the authors with a reasoned explanation of the decision or on the initiative of the editorial board or the publisher based on their expertise. In the latter case, an official letter explaining the reasons for retracting the article is sent to the author (or to the lead author in the team of authors).
After the retraction, the article remains on the website of the journal as part of the issue and retains the DOI, but is marked as ‘retracted’. The same notice is made in the table of contents of the issue. The PDF version of the article is replaced by an identical version with a watermark indicating on each page that the article has been retracted.
The editorial board publishes a statement of retraction indicating the reasons and the date of retraction on the official website of the journal. The editorial board sends the notification of the retraction to the Scientific Electronic Library (elibrary.ru) and other bibliographic databases in which the journal is enlisted. Notification will be sent to the AIRP Scientific Publications Ethics Council for its inclusion in the Unified Database of retracted articles.
Advertising policy
The advertising policy of "Surgical Practice (Russia)" outlined in this section adheres to the guidelines provided by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
Advertisers and sponsors do not exert control over the editorial decisions, irrespective of the terms stipulated in advertising or other agreements. The journal retains the right to reject any advertisement for any reason. The decision to publish an advertisement requires the involvement of the editorial team and consultation with the editor-in-chief and deputy editor-in-chief of the journal. The content of scheduled issues and special supplementary editions is solely at the discretion of the editor and remains unaffected by sponsors or advertisers.
Advertised products should be relevant to medical practice, medical education, or medical care. All advertisements must clearly identify the advertiser and the product or service being promoted. Drug advertisements are required to include the full name of each active ingredient.
Promotional content must be clearly distinguished from editorials and articles to ensure a noticeable difference between them. Commercial advertisements should not be placed adjacent to any editorial or article discussing the advertised product, nor should they reference the specific issue of the journal in which they appear.
Advertisements within the journal must not deceive or mislead, and they should not contain offensive language related to race, religion, or any other sensitive nature.
Data Sharing Policy
"Surgical Practice (Russia)" encourages authors to share the data supporting the results presented in the manuscript by archiving it in an appropriate public repository or making it available from the corresponding author upon request.
Authors prepare a data availability statement to be published in their article and should include a reference to the raw data provided in the reference list.
Below are standard templates for the "Data Availability Statement":
- "The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in [repository name] at [URL], reference number [reference number]."
- "The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request."
You can refer to the repository indexing services re3data.org и FAIRsharing.org or your university may provide a repository for its affiliated researchers.
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 "Surgical Practice (Russia)" 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.
