- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Revenue Sources
Aim and Scope
The area of publication activity of practicing doctors, teachers of medical universities and medical students is quite extensive, but there is no specific division into the areas of junior and specialized work. Therefore, the goal of the “Bulletin of Youth Medical Science” is to accumulate knowledge in the field of student research and assist in developing the potential of this area. The journal provides the opportunity to publish articles for young scientists on specialized topics in the field of theoretical and clinical medicine, education, healthcare organization, innovations in medical science and practice.
The key objectives of the journal include:
- Assistance in the development of a scientific peer-reviewed publication that meets high international requirements and is aimed at a youth audience;
- Improving the level of student scientific work by providing a high-quality platform and providing open access to published materials to all interested parties;
- Encouraging youth science in the field of medicine and assisting in the consolidation of scientific student societies;
- Increasing the publication activity of national authors, the rating of educational medical organizations and the level of scientific publications in the student scientific community according to their citation data;
- Publication of articles reflecting the results of original open research works, theoretical and experimental studies, covering the current state of certain areas of science and medical practice.
Section Policies
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
4 times per year
Open Access Policy
This is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
Reviewing is a mandatory procedure for all materials submitted to the editorial office. When submitting a manuscript to the editorial office of the journal, it is initially reviewed and checked for compliance with the subject matter and formal requirements of the journal. In case of inconsistency with the topic, the manuscript is not accepted for consideration, and the author is notified of this.
The journal has a two-way blind (anonymous) review: the personal data of the author/authors is not disclosed to the reviewer; The reviewer's personal information is not disclosed to the author/authors.
Articles of graduate students and applicants are accepted and submitted for review only if there is a positive review from the supervisor.
The editors of the journal send for review all incoming materials relevant to the subject of the journal for the purpose of independent examination (by reviewers).
The editors of the publication send reviews of submitted materials to the authors in electronic form.
In case of a positive review and recommendation of the manuscript for publication, the manuscript is included in the portfolio of texts accepted for publication, from which the next issue is formed, and a corresponding notification is sent to the author. Manuscripts approved for publication are (1) approved by reviewers and (2) prepared by the authors in full accordance with the requirements of the journal (not requiring literary editing, correctly formatted).
In case of a negative expert assessment, the manuscript is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the comments when preparing a new version of the article, or, if it is impossible to finalize, it is rejected. Changes made by the author must be made into the electronic version of the text and returned to the editor. After revision, the manuscript is again sent for scientific review to the same reviewers. In case of a positive review and recommendation of the manuscript for publication, the manuscript is included in the portfolio of texts accepted for publication. In the event of a repeated negative review, the manuscript is finally rejected and the author is notified of this.
In case of rejection of the manuscript, a reasoned refusal to publish is sent to the author. Failure to comply with the rules for publishing materials may serve as grounds for rejection of the manuscript without a detailed review, with justification for the refusal.
Manuscripts rejected based on review results are not reconsidered. Other articles by the authors of such manuscripts are accepted for consideration in the usual manner.
The unconditional grounds for rejecting a manuscript with the conclusion “Do not allow articles by this author for further consideration” and including the authors in the journal’s Stop List are: (1) violation of scientific citation standards, or plagiarism, (2) submission of a manuscript previously published in another publication .
Internal and external reviewers are invited to examine published materials. All reviewers are recognized experts on the subject of the materials being reviewed and have published on the subject of the article being reviewed over the past 3 years. The names of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors. In controversial cases, the manuscript is sent for additional anonymous review. Articles are approved for publication by the editorial board. Texts of reviews are stored in the publishing house for five years.
The editors get acquainted with the texts of all letters, but do not enter into correspondence on issues related to a specific publication.
Publishing Ethics
The editorial board of the journal Humanities Research Collection adheres to the principles of publication ethics accepted by the international community, reflected, in particular, in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit of Elsevier , Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications.
The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications combines and reveals the general principles and rules that should guide their relationships among participants in the scientific publishing process: authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, distributors and readers. The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications was developed and approved by the Committee on Ethics for Scientific Publications (www.publicet.org/code).
Key terms:
Ethics in scientific publications is a system of standards of professional conduct in the relationships between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers in the process of creating, distributing and using scientific publications.
An editor is a representative of a scientific journal or publishing house who prepares materials for publication and also maintains communication with the authors and readers of scientific publications.
An author is a person or group of persons (team of authors) participating in the creation of a publication of the results of scientific research.
A reviewer is an expert acting on behalf of a scientific journal or publishing house and conducting a scientific examination of copyright materials in order to determine the possibility of their publication.
Publisher is a legal entity or individual who publishes a scientific publication.
Reader – any person who has read the published materials.
Plagiarism is the deliberate appropriation of authorship of someone else’s work of science or art, someone else’s ideas or inventions. Plagiarism may be a violation of copyright and patent laws and, as such, may result in legal liability.
Principles of professional ethics in the activities of an editor and publisher
In his activities, the editor is responsible for the publication of copyrighted works, which imposes the need to follow the following fundamental principles:
When making a decision on publication, the editor of a scientific journal is guided by the reliability of the data presented and the scientific significance of the work under consideration. The editor must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of the authors.
Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during editing related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
The editor should not allow information to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarized.
The editor, together with the publisher, should not leave unanswered claims regarding the reviewed manuscripts or published materials, and if a conflict situation is identified, take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights.
Ethical principles in the activities of a reviewer
The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of the author's materials, as a result of which his actions must be unbiased, consisting in the implementation of the following principles:
A manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document that cannot be passed on for review or discussion to third parties not authorized by the editor.
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment of the presented research results. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.
A reviewer who, in his opinion, does not have sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the case of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, must inform the editor about this with a request to exclude him from the review process of this manuscript.
Principles that should guide the author of scientific publications
The author (or team of authors) is aware that he bears primary responsibility for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, which presupposes compliance with the following principles:
The authors of the article must provide reliable results of the research conducted. Claims that are known to be erroneous or falsified are unacceptable.
Authors must ensure that the research results reported in the submitted manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be formalized with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form, including unquoted, paraphrased, or appropriation of the results of others' research, is unethical and unacceptable.
It is necessary to acknowledge the contribution of all persons who in one way or another influenced the course of the study, in particular, the article should provide links to works that were important in the conduct of the study.
Authors should not submit to the journal a manuscript that has been submitted to another journal and is under review, or an article that has already been published in another journal.
Co-authors of the article must include all persons who made a significant contribution to the research. Among co-authors, it is unacceptable to indicate persons who did not participate in the study.
If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, he must notify the editors of the journal as soon as possible.
Founder
- Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
Author fees
Publication in “The vector of youth medical science" 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
“The vector of youth medical science" 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 “The vector of youth medical science", 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 “The vector of youth medical science" 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.
