Aim and Scope

Goal. To create an effective professionally oriented information resource for integrating the knowledge and experience of scientists and medical practitioners in the field of medicine. To make the expert opinion of specialists in demand when making decisions in medicine and the healthcare system. To increase the medical, social and economic efficiency of the functioning of the healthcare system, as well as the quality of medical and preventive care to the population using publications by specialists on optimal organizational and methodological forms and new medical technologies.

Tasks:

1. To publish original, significant, well-founded and peer-reviewed review, clinical, experimental and laboratory scientific papers on a wide range of biomedical problems.

2. To provide doctors, researchers, and healthcare organizers with information in the field of fundamental and practical medicine for continuing postgraduate education. 

3. To broaden the horizons of doctors in the field of disciplines beyond the narrow specialization. 

4. When forming an editorial portfolio, priority should be given to publications that meet the most important trends in the development of medicine and healthcare – the increasing importance of personnel, technologization, primary medical care, preventive medicine, and ethical articles on the humane foundations of the medical profession.

5. To predict the most important trends in the development of medicine and healthcare.

6. To inform readers about non-clinical aspects of medicine, including coverage of philosophical, ethical, sociological, and economic issues. 

7. To promote the institute of independent peer review as the most important tool for assessing the quality of scientific research. 

8. To maintain high ethical standards of medical journalism. Confidentiality of reviewing. Ensuring transparency of publication policy and requirements for manuscripts.

9. Achieving compliance with international requirements and ensuring the international visibility of the journal “Medical Journal” by attracting foreign authors to publications and increasing the share of joint publications

Section Policies

ОБЗОРЫ И ЛЕКЦИИ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

ЮБИЛЕИ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

ОРИГИНАЛЬНЫЕ НАУЧНЫЕ ПУБЛИКАЦИИ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

В ПОМОЩЬ ПРАКТИКУЮЩЕМУ ВРАЧУ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

ИСТОРИЧЕСКИЙ РАКУРС

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

СЛУЧАЙ ИЗ ПРАКТИКИ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Летопись БГМУ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Клинический случай

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

CHRONICLE OF BSMU

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

ЛЕКЦИИ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF'S PAGE

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

EDITORIAL

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

REVIEWS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

Four times a year

Delayed Open Access

The contents of this journal will be available in an open access format 6 month(s) after an issue is published.

Archiving

• Russian State Library (RSL)
• National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

Peer-Review

All scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial board of the Medical Journal are subject to mandatory anonymous peer review. The primary examination is carried out by the editor for compliance with the basic requirements for publications accepted in the journal within a period of no more than 3 days.

Manuscripts that are not designed according to the "Rules for Authors" are not considered. The "rules" are set out in the journal and its electronic version. The material of the manuscript is checked using the "Anti-plagiarism" system.

Manuscripts are not allowed to be published:

• the subject of which does not correspond to the scientific field of the journal; 

• if they are not properly designed;

• if the present plagiarism – copying research data from another author without proper citation. External review. 

Scientific review involves Doctor of Sciences, sometimes Candidates of Sciences, recognized experts in the relevant field who have published on the subject of the reviewed manuscript over the past three years. The decision on the choice of a reviewer is made by the editor-in-chief. The review period is not more than 1 month (it can be extended at the request of the reviewer).

The manuscript is sent to 1-2 reviewers and undergoes an independent one-sided blind review (the reviewer is unknown to the author). The review is conducted confidentially. Violation of this rule is possible in case of unreliability or falsification of scientific data. The interaction of authors and reviewers is carried out through the editorial office. After receiving the manuscript, the reviewer is obliged to inform the editorial board about the absence of a conflict of interest. After studying and evaluating the manuscript, the reviewer sends the conclusion to the editor. Based on the expert's recommendations, the editor decides on the future fate of the manuscript: 

• accept the manuscript for printing; 

• if revision is necessary, to send the text of the review to the author with a suggestion to take into account the comments when preparing a new version of the manuscript or to refute them in a reasoned manner;

• to send it to another reviewer;

• to refuse to publish the manuscript;

If there are unsolvable contradictions between the author and the reviewer, and if there is a need for additional opinion from another specialist, the author's request to replace the reviewer or doubts about the quality of the review, the manuscript is sent to another reviewer. If it is necessary to finalize the manuscript, it is assumed that the author will take into account the recommendations or try to refute them in a reasoned manner. The revision of the manuscript by the author should not take more than 1 month from the moment of sending him an e-mail about the need for changes. If the author does not return the revised version of the manuscript after 3 months from the date of sending the review without a valid reason, the editorial board removes it from the register. The revised manuscript is re-sent to the reviewer for review. If the author does not agree with the reviewer's comments, he may apply for a second review with the involvement of another expert or withdraw the article. 

The presence of a positive review is not a reason for the publication of the article, the final decision is made by the editorial board.  The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendation of the reviewers and is not allowed for reconsideration. In conflict situations, the final decision is made by the editor-in-chief. A notice of refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.

Publishing Ethics

General provisions

The editorial staff and editorial board in their work are guided by the legal requirements of the legislation of the Republic of Belarus regarding copyright, plagiarism and ethical principles supported by the community of leading publishers of scientific periodicals, are responsible for the publication of copyrighted works, and also follow the recommendations of the International Committee on Publication Ethics (SOPE).

Ethical principles on which the activities of the editor-in-chief and the editorial board are based 

The most common ethical problems faced by the editor-in-chief of the journal and the editorial board are: 

• plagiarism and submission of an article to several publications simultaneously; 

• the problem of authorship; 

• conflict of interests between the author and the reviewer.

The editor-in-chief and the editorial board are responsible for publishing the author's manuscripts, which implies that their activities comply with the following principles:

• when making a decision on publication, they are guided by the reliability of the data presentation and the scientific significance of the work in question;

• they should evaluate the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of race, gender, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status of the authors; 

• unpublished data presented in the manuscript should not be used for personal purposes or shared with third parties without the written consent of the author; 

• information or ideas obtained during editing related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain; 

• information is not allowed to be published if there is reason to believe that it is plagiarism;

• together with the publisher, they are obliged not to leave unanswered claims regarding the reviewed manuscripts or published materials and, if conflict situations are identified, take the necessary measures to restore violated rights.

Conflict of interest

A conflict of interest arises when reviewing an article in cases where its author, reviewer, or editor have their own interests that may influence their judgments. The most important source of conflict of interest is financial relationships with manufacturers of medicines and medical equipment. There may be other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic rivalry, etc.

• When submitting an article to the journal, the authors should indicate in their cover letter the existing financial relationships that could lead to a conflict of interest in relation to the work in question. The source of research funding must be indicated. 

• Editors should avoid making decisions in cases where the work in question is a source of conflict of interest for them. 

• The existence of authors, reviewers and editors' own interests is not an obstacle to the publication of scientific work, however, all parties involved in the process of reviewing and publishing articles should disclose the existence of conflicting interests.

Ethical principles in the reviewer's activity

Reviewers carrying out scientific examination of copyrighted materials should be guided by the following principles: 

• The manuscript received for review is considered as a confidential document that cannot be passed on for review to third parties who do not have the appropriate editorial authority; 

• the reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the research results;

• unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used for personal purposes; 

• a reviewer who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript or is unable to be objective should inform the editor about this, with a request to exclude him from the review process of this manuscript.

Reviewers should:

• conduct the review objectively;

• avoid personal criticism of the author, express their views clearly with arguments and references, and declare conflicts of interest as necessary;

• refuse to review manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest as a result of competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with the authors, company, or institution; 

• respect the confidentiality of materials submitted for review, should not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use information about them in their work. If the reviewer wishes to send a review request to a colleague, the editor's permission must be obtained.

Ethical principles in the author's work

The author (or the team of authors) is aware of the responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which implies compliance with the following principles:

• to provide reliable research results, knowingly erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable; 

• to ensure that the research results presented in the manuscript are original; 

• borrowed fragments or statements in the text of the manuscript should be accompanied by an indication of their author and original source.;

• It is necessary to recognize the contribution of all persons who influenced the course of the research. In particular, the manuscript should contain references to works that were important during the research; 

• it is unacceptable to submit articles submitted to another journal and accepted for review or published in other publications; 

• all persons who have made a significant contribution to the research (development of a design concept or research format, collection and processing of material, statistical processing of material, analysis, interpretation of the data obtained), writing and editing of the article should be indicated as co-authors. You cannot specify people who did not participate in the study.;

• All authors are responsible for the development, writing and editing of the manuscript, for reviewing the article before submitting it to the editorial board and during editorial and publishing preparation. If the authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its review or after publication, it is necessary to notify the editorial board of the journal as soon as possible.; 

• All co-authors should be familiar with the final version of the text, approve its version before printing the original layout and give permission for printing.; 

• If it turns out that the article contains false information and errors, the article was written using plagiarism/fraud, all co-authors share responsibility.

Anti-plagiarism Policy 

In order to ensure the high quality of published materials and copyright compliance, articles submitted to the editorial office are checked for plagiarism (the presence of borrowings) through the Anti-Plagiarism system. 

Plagiarism is considered to be: 

• the use (verbatim quoting) of any materials in any volume without specifying the source; 

• the use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams and other forms of graphical presentation of information without specifying the source;

• the use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams and other forms of graphic presentation of information published in scientific publications without the consent of the copyright holder; 

• the use of materials without written permission, the authors or copyright holders of which prohibit their use without special consent.

 Articles containing less than 70% of the author's text are not published in the journal. The editors do not welcome an excessive number of citations, even if they are properly worded. Reviews and other articles that require more citations for objective reasons are reviewed individually.

Retraction of articles

The editorial board uses the retraction (recall) of an article in order to warn readers about duplicate publications, plagiarism, conceal conflicts of interest, and provide of inaccurate data that could affect the interpretation of the data or recommendations for its use.

Reasons for article retraction:

• Plagiarism detection; 

• duplication of articles in various publications;

• the discovery of serious errors in the article (incorrect interpretation of the results, etc.), which casts doubt on its scientific value;

• detection of falsifications or fabrications in the text of the article;

• incorrect composition of the authors (inclusion of persons who do not meet the criteria of authorship); 

• conflicts of interest and other violations of publication ethics; 

Retraction of an article can be initiated by:

• the author of the article; 

• the editorial office of another journal;

• persons involved in a conflict of interest in the presence of evidence of violations of scientific ethics by the author of the article;

• the editorial board of the journal upon discovery of violations of scientific ethics by the author of the article.

The retraction of articles is carried out as follows: 

1. After an appeal from the author or another person who provided facts of violations of scientific ethics in an article, the editorial board of the journal appoints a commission that conducts an investigation based on the available facts and verifies the ethics of the publication.

 2. Having decided to withdraw the article, the editorial board indicates in the minutes of the meeting the reason for the retraction (in case of plagiarism, indicating the sources of borrowing) and the date of the retraction. 

3. In order to add information to the database of retracted articles, a protocol is provided to the Council on Ethics of Scientific Publications, indicating the date of the meeting, the result of the examination, an informed decision and a completed form: 

• full name of the author and the title of the article; 

• the publication from which the text is being recalled; 

• initiator of the article retraction;

• the reason for the article retraction and the date of the decision; 

• link to the page on the publication's website that contains information about retraction; 

• output data of the DOI article (if available);

• Subject matter (medical sciences, biological sciences, etc.).

4. Information about the retracted texts is transferred to the scientific information databases. Upon receipt of the request for retraction, information about the article and the full text remain on elibrary.ru and in CyberLeninka, but supplemented with information about retraction. The recalled articles and links from them are excluded from the RSCI and are not included in the calculation of indicators. 

5. In case of serious moral damage to the parties to the conflict of interests, information about the violation of scientific ethics may be transmitted at the author's place of work.

6. The editorial board reserves the right to decide on further cooperation with the authors of the retracted articles (complete withdrawal of cooperation for a certain period of time, additional examination of articles in case of resumption of cooperation).

Founder

Educational Institution "Belarusian State Medical University" Minsk, Dzerzhinsky Ave., 83 220083, https://www.bsmu.by

Author fees

Publication in “Medical Journal" is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

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. Privileged 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.

Plagiarism detection

“Medical Journal" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

Preprint and postprint Policy

Prior to acceptance and publication in “Medical Journal", 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 “Medical Journal" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

Revenue Sources

The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints, article processment charges.