RULES FOR SUBMISSION, REVIEW AND PUBLICATION OF SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES
Conflict of interests
Article Submission Requirements
Authors can specify one of the following types of publications for their material:
Original research — completed scientific papers containing a summary of the state of the issue under consideration and the statement of the problem to be solved in the article; materials and methods for solving the problem and the assumptions made; research results; discussion of the results obtained and their comparison with previously known data; conclusions and recommendations. In original articles, it is necessary to indicate in which of the stages of creating the article each of the authors took part: the concept and design of the study; collection and processing of material; statistical data processing; writing text; editing. The review is a detailed analysis of the current state of topical problems based on the materials of the scientific press.
New methods — a detailed description of the original methodological approaches to diagnosis and therapy; hardware and software.
Text formatting requirements
- The first page should contain the following information: title, full name. authors, authors’ place of work, summary (summary) of the article, a list of 3-8 keywords, contact information of one of the authors (telephone; e-mail). The summary should be structured and contain the following subsections: purpose, materials and methods, results, conclusions (conclusion). It is also desirable to send the English version of the title of the article, summary, keywords.
- To highlight individual items in text or graphic material, only Arabic numeration must be used. All abbreviations at the first mention must be disclosed, except for generally accepted abbreviations.
- At the end is a list of literature used in its writing. The list of literature is compiled in accordance with GOST R 7.0.5-2008. The list is compiled in alphabetical order (first Russian-language, then English-language editions). References to the literature in the text are indicated by the corresponding figure in square brackets. Materials not accepted for publication and personal communications are not included in the bibliography.
- The text must be printed on A4 paper on one side, with one and a half line spacing. The text margins are as follows: top — 4.3 cm, bottom — 6.4 cm, left — 2.7 cm, right — 4.3 cm. Pages must be completely filled with text and numbered.
- When typing, you must use Microsoft Word (no higher than Word 2003), font «Times New Roman». Font size for article titles — 14, full name authors — 12, summaries and keywords — 10, text — 12, captions for figures and tables — 12 points.
- Tables, diagrams, figures and other illustrations should be placed on separate pages each and numbered with Arabic numerals in accordance with their mention in the text. Numbers of illustrations should correspond to the order of placement in the text. Directly under each illustration there should be a caption, as well as explanations that reveal the meaning of the illustration.
- Tables, diagrams must be submitted in Microsoft Excel format without using scanning, without a colored background. The use of abbreviations in the titles of tables and figures is not allowed, with the exception of generally accepted abbreviations.
- Drawings, photographs are submitted in graphic electronic formats .jpeg; .jpg; .gif .tiff; .png .psd with a resolution that allows scaling.
- All physical quantities and units are given in SI, terms — according to anatomical and histological nomenclature, diagnostics — according to the current International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10), drugs — according to commercial names indicating the active substance; test systems, reagents, equipment, devices — indicating the name, model, manufacturer and country of manufacture. Authors: requirements for materials for publication.
The procedure for reviewing articles sent to the editors of the peer-reviewed publication
Each article submitted for publication in the journal «Medicine and High Technologies» is sent for review.
Reviewing of articles is double-blind (anonymous), that is, the names of the authors of the manuscript of the article are unknown to the reviewer, and the names of the reviewers are also not reported to the author.
The executive secretary, within one day after the adoption of the article, transfers it to the deputy. editor in the relevant direction for the appointment of reviewers. The reviewers are specialists who have a Ph.D. or Doctor of Science degree in the relevant field of knowledge. Members of the Editorial Board can act as reviewers, provided that they and the author are not employees of the same organization.
The reviewer within 3 weeks submits a review (in the form) in electronic form to the executive secretary of the editorial board at firstname.lastname@example.org.
The reviewer can recommend the article for publication; recommend for publication after revision, taking into account the comments; do not recommend the article for publication. If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after revision, taking into account the comments, or does not recommend the article for publication, the reasons for such a decision should be indicated in the review.
If the article is recommended for publication after revision, taking into account the comments, the executive secretary sends a review for revision to the author.
After re-receiving the article (corrections by the author of the comments), the executive secretary transfers the manuscript to the same reviewer for re-reviewing.
In case of rejection of the material, the responsible secretary sends a review to the author by e-mail, indicating the possibility of sending the article for re-reviewing at the request of the author. The name of the reviewer can be communicated to the author only with the written consent of the reviewer.
In case of repeated rejection of the article, the executive secretary sends a review to the author by e-mail. More than two times the article is not sent for review.
After reviewing, the article is submitted for technical editing. The technical editor may reject the article and send it to the authors for revision because the article does not meet the formal requirements. Also, the article may be rejected by the editor-in-chief / editor in the direction — due to disagreement with the results of the review, the identification of a conflict of interest, violation of ethics.
Common reasons for publication rejection:
- the article is poorly or incorrectly structured;
- the article is not detailed enough for readers to fully understand the analysis proposed by the authors;
- the article has no scientific novelty;
- the article has an insufficient number of relevant links;
- the article contains theories, concepts, or conclusions that are not fully supported by data, arguments, or information;
- the article does not provide a sufficiently detailed description of the methods and materials that would allow other scientists to repeat the experiment;
- there are no clear descriptions or explanations in the article: tested hypotheses, description of experiments, examples of statistical or experimental samples;
- the article describes the conduct of experiments poorly, or mistakes are made, or statistical analysis is not provided;
- the quality of the language does not meet the requirements of a scientific article;
- the article contains unreasonable criticism of the existing fundamental provisions, generally accepted theories and facts;
• the article has a pronounced political character, contains provisions and appeals that are incompatible with generally accepted norms. The editorial board of the publication sends copies of reviews or a reasoned refusal to the authors of the submitted materials, and also undertakes to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request by the editorial