Editorial Policies

Aims and Scope

The scientific and practical peer-reviewed Therapy journal has been published since 2015. It is the official publication of all-Russian public organization “Russian Scientific Medical Society of Internal Medicine” (RSMSIM).

The mission of the journal is to promote the improvement of professional training level of medical workers who make research, teaching and practical work in the field of therapy and related disciplines, to integrate the results of scientific research and clinical experience of domestic and foreign specialists into international scientific space.

The goal of the journal is to promote the education and development of research workers and practitioners, development of new promising studies in the field of therapy and related disciplines.

The target audience of the journal: therapists of outpatient and inpatient institutions, general practitioners, focused specialists.

The journal publishes articles on all issues of internal diseases, results of research works in the field of etiology and pathogenesis of diseases, achievements in their diagnosis, treatment, prevention and organization of therapeutic care, as well as on related issues with other medical specialties, with the exception of materials on pediatric diseases.

The journal publishes clinical guidelines and consensus, original research, reviews, clinical cases, lectures, polemically sharpened articles on current issues of practical medicine, as well as supporting materials on all current problems of medicine. A special section of the journal covers the scientific and practical activities of RSMSIM.

Each issue of Therapy presents a leading topic devoted to a certain medical specialization: cardiology, neurology, gastroenterology, rheumatology, endocrinology, etc. Leading Russian scientists are invited editors (curators) of the issues.

The purposes of the journal:

  • provide an opportunity to publish the results of fundamental and applied research works in the field of therapy and related disciplines;
  • systematically publish materials that contribute to:
    • improving knowledge of practicing specialists and researchers on the etiology and pathogenesis of internal diseases, organization of therapeutic care;
    • informing about the latest achievements and prospects for the development of domestic and foreign medical science and healthcare, new and improved technologies for diagnosis, treatment and prophylaxis;
  • contributing to the increased efficiency of implementing research results in healthcare practice.

SECTIONS

  • Clinical guidelines and consensuses
  • Original studies
  • Reviews
  • Clinical cases
  • Lectures
  • Helping practicing physician
  • Actual issues of pharmacotherapy and preventive treatment
  • Pages of history
  • Activities of RSMSIM
  • Anniversary

FREQUENCY OF APPEARANCE

The journal publishes 10 issues per year (every month except January and July).

 
 

Peer Review Process

The review of articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal Therapy is carried out in accordance with the recommendations of:

Scientific articles submitted to the editorial board undergo mandatory double-blind peer review (the reviewer does not receive information about the authors of the material, the authors of the material do not receive information about the reviewers).

  1. Upon receipt of the article by the editorial board, the head of the editorial board within 1 week evaluates its compliance with the requirements of the journal, and also checks the originality of the article in the Antiplagiat system. If these stages are successfully passed, the material moves on to the peer review stage, the head of the editorial board sends it to the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief to determine the reviewers.
  2. The editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief determines within 2 weeks whether the article complies with the profile of the journal and sends it for review to at least 2 relevant specialists – doctors (candidates) of medical sciences, who have sufficient experience in scientific work in the scientific direction stated in the article. According to the direction of the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief, the head of the editorial board may decide to select a reviewer to perform an examination of the article.
  3. Reviewers may be members of the editorial board or editorial council of the journal or invited experts.
  4. All reviewers are familiar with the requirements imposed by the editorial board on published materials and have publications on the topic of the article under review over the past 3 years.
  5. The review does not involve specialists working in the same research institution where the work under review was completed.
  6. The reviewer works with the article as confidential material, strictly observing the author’s right to non-disclosure of the information contained in the article until publication. The reviewer may involve other experts in the work only with the permission of the editors and also on confidentiality terms.
    The reviewer should not keep a copy of the article under review or use the work in his/her work.
    See also the section on confidentiality in the ICMJE Recommendations.
  7. The review period is 2–4 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.
  8. The review should indicate whether the article corresponds to its title, characterize its relevance and scientific level, advantages and disadvantages, and assess the appropriateness of publication.
  9. Following the review of the article, the reviewer makes one of the following recommendations (each reviewer’s decision is substantiated):
  • the article is recommended for publication in its current form;
  • the article is recommended for publication after correction of the deficiencies noted by the reviewer without additional reviewing;
  • the article requires revision and subsequent re-reviewing;
  • the article cannot be published in the journal even after revision.
  1. In case of minor comments by the reviewer that require only editorial corrections, with the consent of the author they can be made by the editorial board independently, and the article is accepted for publication without additional corrections by the author.
  2. If the reviewer recommends revision of the article, the head of the editorial board sends the text of the review (without the signature and information of the reviewer) to the author for making the appropriate changes to the material. The author is asked to take into account the reviewer’s recommendations or to refute them with arguments (partially or completely). Revision of the article should not take more than 2 months from the moment the letter about the need to make changes is sent to the author.
  3. In case of refusal to revise the material, the author must notify the editors in writing about the refusal to publish the article.
  4. If the author does not return the revised version of the material after 2 months from the date of sending the review (even if the editors have not received from the author a refusal to revise the article), the editors will remove it from registration. The author is sent a notification about the article being removed from registration due to the expiration of the period allotted for revision.
  5. After receiving the revised article, the editorial board act as follows:
  • if the reviewer recommended the article for publication after correcting the deficiencies noted by him without additional review, then the head of the editorial board and the scientific editor (if necessary) check whether the author has made the appropriate corrections. If the corrections are made correctly, the article is accepted for publication. The need for additional corrections is discussed in the correspondence between the editors and the author;
  • if the reviewer recommended sending the article for re-reviewing after making corrections, then the article revised by the author is re-sent for review.
  1. The editors perform no more than 3 rounds of reviewing for each article. If, after three revisions of the material, the reviewers or the editors still have significant comments, the article is rejected and removed from registration. The author is sent a notification of the article being removed from registration.
  2. If the author and reviewers have irreconcilable disagreements regarding the article, the editors have the right to send the material for additional review by another specialist (including at the author’s reasoned request). In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
  3. The decision to refuse publication of an article is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended for publication by the editorial board will not be accepted for re-examination. The author whose article was not accepted for publication is sent a reasoned refusal. The editors do not enter into correspondence with the authors regarding the reason for refusing to publish the article.
  4. A positive review is not a sufficient ground for publishing an article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief. The editors notify the author in writing of the acceptance of the article for publication.
  5. Reviews of articles (as well as correspondence between the editors and the author) are not published in the public domain and are used only in the internal document flow of the editors, as well as when communicating with the author or resolving conflict situations. A copy of the review of the article may be provided to its author upon request. Copies of reviews may be provided to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request by the editors.
  6. The original reviews are kept by the editors for 5 years.

Responsibilities of the reviewer

In order to contribute to the decision-making process on the advisability of publishing an article and help improve its quality, the reviewer must:

  • act objectively and timely;
  • notify the editor if a reviewer does not feel qualified to review an article or does not have enough time to complete the review promptly, and ask to be excluded from the review process for that article;
  • evaluate the article critically but constructively;
  • avoid derogatory comments and personal criticism of the authors;
  • prepare detailed, reasoned comments about the research and the article that can help the authors improve the work;
  • identify and indicate in the review cases where relevant published works have not been cited in the text of the article or are not listed in the reference list; identify and indicate in the review whether all statements, conclusions, and ideas borrowed from other publications are provided with references to the source;
  • notify the editor if a significant overlap or similarity between the article submitted for review and any other published materials known to the reviewer is discovered;
  • notify the editor of any apparent or potential conflict of interests that may affect the perception and interpretation of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational or other relationships between the reviewer and the author). See also the section on disclosing conflicts of interests in ICMJE guidelines.

In operations, the reviewer is guided by Singapore Statement on Research Integrity.

A list of reviewer responsibilities can be found in WAME materials (here and here), and the role and responsibilities of the reviewer can also be found in CSE Recommendations.

Ethical principles for reviewers are presented by COPE.

 

Publication Frequency

10 issues per year

 

Archiving

The journal uses the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN) to digitally preserve all the published articles. The PKP PN is a part of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe) program offers decentralized and distributed preservation, seamless perpetual access, and preservation of the authentic original version of the content.

Also, the journal makes full-text archives on the Russian Science Electronic Library (http://elibrary.ru/) platform.

 

Issue Purchase

Readers without a subscription may still purchase individual issues. The following payment options and fees are available.

Access for an Issue: 110.00 (USD)

You can purchase the access for all articles published in one issue. Access to articles will be provide for an unlimited time.

Access to issue allows you to read, download and print full text (PDF and HTML) of all articles, but does not allow to distribute, copy or reproduce articles materials until the end of the embargo period (3 years) since the publication of the article).

 

Article Purchase

Readers without a subscription may still purchase individual articles. The following payment options and fees are available.

Access for an Article: 16.00 (USD)

You can purchase the access for the article to read, download and print its fulltext (PDF, HTML). Access to article will be provide for an unlimited time.

Purchased access does not allow to distribute, copy or reproduce article's materials until the end of the embargo period (3 years) since the publication of the article).

 

Indexing

Articles in journal are indexed by several systems:

 

Ethical Standards

Publisher LLC “Bionika Media Innovations” issues a large number of publications, including medical and pharmaceutical, most of which are published on behalf of scientific communities and other similar organizations. The main task of the publisher is to disseminate accumulated knowledge and the results of performed research work throughout the world. The publisher keeps a neutral position on all issues that are covered in articles published in journals. Published information serves as a basis for further discussions, regardless of the topic, be it religious, gender, environmental, ethical or other controversial topics.

Publication of an article in a scientific peer-reviewed journal performs several functions, one of which is to check and preserve the progress, stages and reliably accurate results of the research. The publication process includes many stages, each of which plays an important role. The author of the publication, journal editor, reviewer, publisher and representative of the society to which the journal belongs (if applicable) are obliged to observe ethical standards at all stages of the publication, starting from the submission of the article and ending with its publication in the journal.

The editors of the journal will carefully and responsibly consider all justified requests regarding the discovered violations in the published materials.

The publisher LLC “Bionika Media Innovations” strives to comply with the standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process, closely following the recommendations of international committees and associations that set relevant standards and provide guidelines for best practice in order to meet these requirements:

The editorial board and publisher of the journal:

See also the editorial policy of the publishing house LLC “Bionika Media Innovations”.

1. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

1.1. Duties of the editor

1.1.1. The editor must act objectively and fairly in the performance of his or her duties, evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnicity or geographical origin of the authors.

1.1.2. The editor must ensure that published materials comply with international standards of scientific and publication ethics.

1.1.3. The editor is obliged to ensure the high quality of published materials and their substantive integrity, as well as to publish corrections, clarifications, and apologies when necessary.

1.1.4. The editor is obliged to guarantee that all submitted articles will be objectively assessed in terms of their scientific significance without any commercial influence.

1.1.5. If there is a conflict of interests between the editor and the author of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational, or other relationships between the editor and the author), the editor is obliged to transfer the article to another editor.

1.1.6. The editor is obliged to keep the names and details of the reviewers confidential and not to disclose the names and details of the authors of the articles to the reviewers.

1.1.7. The editor is responsible for disclosing any information about the received manuscript to third parties who don’t belong to the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, and publishers.

1.1.8. The editor must warrant that all complaints and contradictions are considered in accordance with the policy of scientific society. The author must be given an opportunity to respond to any complaints and substantiate any contradictions. All complaints must be considered regardless of when the publication was approved. All documentation somehow related to the complaints must be retained.

1.1.9. The editor has the right to reject a manuscript at the stage preceding the peer review if there is a compelling reason for this: the topic of the article does not correspond to the topic of the journal; the article is of obviously low scientific quality; the article has been previously published in another publication; the submitted materials reveal a fundamental contradiction with the ethical principles adhered to by the journal, etc. For more details, see the Rules for authors.

1.2. Responsibilities of a Reviewer

The purpose of the peer review process is to assist the editors in making editorial decisions and to assist the author in improving the submitted manuscript. In this connection, a reviewer should:

  • act objectively and in a timely manner;
  • inform the editors if a reviewer decides, that he / she does not feel qualified to review an article or does not have enough time to complete the review promptly, and request to be excluded from reviewing the relevant article;
  • evaluate the article critically but constructively;
  • avoid derogatory comments and personal criticism of the authors;
  • prepare detailed, reasoned comments about the research and the article that can assist the authors in improving the work;
  • identify and indicate in the review instances where relevant published work has not been cited in the text of the article or is not listed in the reference list; identify and indicate in the review whether all statements, conclusions, and ideas borrowed from other publications are provided with references;
  • notify the editorial board if the reviewed article has a significant overlap or similarity with any other published material known to the reviewer;
  • warn the editorial board if there is an obvious or potential conflict of interest that could affect the perception and interpretation of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational or other relationships between the reviewer and the author). See also the section on disclosing conflicts of interest in ICMJE Recommendations.

In their work, the reviewer is guided by the Singapore Statement of Research Integrity.

A list of reviewer responsibilities can be found in WAME materials (here and here), and the role and responsibilities of the reviewer can also be found in CSE Recommendations. Ethical principles for reviewers are presented by COPE.

See also Peer review.

1.3. Author’s Responsibilities

1.3.1. The author guarantees the authenticity of the material presented in the article and its compliance with the requirements of the current legislation of the Russian Federation and is solely responsible for the content of the article. All claims, lawsuits, and other demands of third parties, as well as claims/orders of government agencies related to the content of the article, are settled by the author independently and at his own expense.

1.3.2. The author confirms that the article does not violate copyright and other rights, including intellectual property rights and personal non-property rights, as well as the current legislation of the Russian Federation. The author takes full responsibility for possible plagiarism of text, illustrations, etc. Any violation of copyright will be considered by the editors in accordance with the COPE algorithm.

1.3.3. The author must have accurate, reliable, objective and complete information on the research described in the article, including the original (raw) research data. This information can be sent at the request of the editors, including for provision to reviewers. The author’s consent to publish the data for the purpose of their further use is required. Submission of false data or knowingly erroneous statements in a manuscript will be regarded as a gross violation of publication ethics, and such a manuscript will be rejected by the editors for publication.

1.3.4. The author guarantees that the article, in whole or in part, has not been previously published, and is not currently under consideration or in the process of publication in another publication. If the article has previously been submitted for consideration to other publications but has not been accepted for publication, this must be indicated in the cover letter, otherwise the editors may misinterpret the results of checking the text for unauthorized borrowing and reject the article. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at a time is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable. The editors will reject from publication any manuscripts that are under consideration or have previously been published in other publications.

1.3.5. The author must confirm that his or her article is original. In the event that information that has been previously published is used in the article, the author must indicate the source and author of the cited information. In addition, the author is obliged to provide the editor with a copy of the cited article.

1.3.6. The author is responsible for compliance with national and local laws and biomedical ethical standards when performing research involving humans and animals (e.g., World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki; National Institutes of Health (NIH) Policy on Animal Research; European Union Directive on Animal Research).

The manuscript should reflect all risks (obvious and potential) to which the research subjects (humans or animals) were exposed: exposure to chemicals (including drugs), procedures or equipment, and other situations that could harm the health or pose a danger to the life of the research subjects.

If the experimental study involved living humans or animals, the author should reflect in the manuscript that all stages of the study were carried out in accordance with the law and regulatory documents. The author should also provide information that the study protocol was reviewed by an ethics committee with the obligatory indication of the name of the committee (or the organization under which the committee was created), the date and number of the minutes of the meeting at which the study was approved. The editors have the right to request certified copies of the relevant protocols from the author.

The manuscript must clearly reflect that voluntary written informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from all human subjects.

The author must obtain permission to publish from the person(s) who participated in the study. The author is solely responsible for ensuring that the manuscript does not in any way reveal the identity of the study participants (or clinical case description). The author should ensure that the data presented in the manuscript cannot be used to identify the study subjects.

See also the Data Sharing Statement and the Protection of Research Participants section of ICMJE Recommendations.

1.3.7. The author should disclose (declare in the appropriate section of the manuscript) actual and potential conflicts of interests (e.g., competing interests that the author believes may directly or indirectly influence the results, conclusions presented in the work, or their interpretation, or the publication process).

Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed:

  • receipt of financial support for any stage of the research or writing of the article (including grants and other financial support);
  • any connection (contract work, consulting, stock ownership, honoraria, provision of expert opinions) with organizations that have a direct interest in the subject of the study or review;
  • a patent application or registration of a patent for the results of the study (copyright, etc.).

See also the section on disclosure of conflicts of interests in ICMJE Recommendations.

1.3.8. Throughout the publication process, the author is obliged to cooperate with the editors and the publisher, supplementing, shortening and correcting the article, if necessary.

1.3.9. Basing on the results of the review, the article may be sent to the author for revision. The author should take an active part in the review process, promptly answering questions and, if necessary, making corrections to the manuscript in accordance with the requirements of the reviewer.

See also Peer review.

1.3.10. If a significant error is discovered in an article, the author must immediately notify the editorial board of the journal (including if it is discovered after the article has been published).

If the editorial board or publisher receives information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the author is obliged to cooperate with the editorial board and publisher in order to objectively consider the received claim and, if necessary, correct the errors as soon as possible.

1.4. Responsibilities of the publisher and the scientific society

1.4.1. The publisher LLC “Bionika Media Innovations”, all-Russian public organization “Russian Scientific Medical Society of Internal Medicine” (RSMSIM) and the editorial board of the Therapy journal will make every effort to ensure that the published material meets all the standards set out above.

1.4.2. The publisher must follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the fulfillment of ethical duties by editors, reviewers and authors in accordance with these standards.

1.4.3. The publisher should, when necessary, provide support to the journal editors in considering complaints concerning ethical aspects of published materials and help interact with other journals and/or publishers if this facilitates the performance of the editor’s responsibilities.

1.4.4. The publisher should provide appropriate specialized legal support (conclusion or consultation) if necessary.

2. AUTHORSHIP OF PUBLICATIONS

In their work, the editors of the journal are guided by the ICMJE criteria for authorship.

ICMJE recommends defining authorship according to 4 criteria:

  • substantial contribution to the development of the concept or design of the work; or collection, analysis, interpretation of the obtained data;
  • writing the article or editing it to enhance its scientific significance;
  • final approval of the version of the work to be published;
  • agreement to take responsibility and to ensure that all questions related to the accuracy or integrity of all parts of the work are investigated and resolved.

Involvement consisting only of providing funding or selecting material for an article does not justify inclusion in the author’s group. General leadership of a research team is also not considered sufficient for authorship.

The article must contain the contribution of each author to its writing (see Rules for authors).

First Author. The first in the list of co-authors should be the head of the author’s group of the manuscript, who took the greatest part in the process of preparing the text and is familiar with the entire process of performing scientific work. The head of the author’s group should also be the “corresponding author” – for communication with the editors of the journal and readers (after the publication of the article).

Co-authors can be those who made a significant contribution to the preparation of the text of the manuscript and performed research. If the study participants made a significant contribution in a certain direction in the research project, then they should be listed as persons who made a significant contribution to this study.

The author confirms that all participants who made a significant contribution to the study are listed as co-authors and that no co-authors are listed who did not participate in the study.

All persons listed as authors must approve the final version of the article and agree to submit it for publication in the Therapy journal under the terms of the offer agreement (including the transfer of exclusive rights), duly authorize the author to submit the article for publication and communicate with the editors.

3. BORROWING AND PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism can exist in various forms – from presenting someone else’s work as the author’s own to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else’s work (without indicating the author), claiming one’s own rights to the results of someone else’s research.

The editors classify the following forms of plagiarism:

  • use (verbatim quotation) of any materials in any volume without indicating the author and the source of borrowing;
  • use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams and any other forms of graphic presentation of information without indicating the author and the source of borrowing;
  • use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams and any other forms of graphic presentation of information published in scientific and popular publications or other sources, without the consent of the copyright holder;
  • use without written permission of materials whose authors or copyright holders have not permitted the use of their materials without special consent;
  • other use of intellectual property that does not belong to the authors in violation of the current legislation.

Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and unacceptable.

When reviewing an article, the editors of the journal check it using the Antiplagiat system. If the editors have reasons for a more detailed check, additional tools may be used to search for plagiarism. Taking into account the variety of forms that plagiarism can take, each case is considered individually. When plagiarism is detected, the editors act in accordance with the COPE rules.

The editors of the Therapy journal strongly discourage the use of any technical methods that can increase the text score in the Antiplagiat system. Articles with signs of technical modifications aimed at artificially increasing the uniqueness of the text will not be published in the journal, even if revised.

If unauthorized borrowings are detected, as well as if the originality coefficient of the text is low (<85%), the manuscript is rejected for publication.

Reviews and other articles that, for objective reasons, require a greater number of citations are considered by the editors on an individual basis.

Authors of manuscripts must present completely original works. Mentions of the results of other authors’ work must be accompanied by references to the relevant primary sources, which must be included in the list of references. Citations of previously published text must be formatted as direct speech (the text must be enclosed in quotation marks) with a mandatory indication of the original source.

The author must not allow duplication of publications. If individual elements of the manuscript have already been published, the author must refer to the earlier work and indicate the differences between the new work and the previous one.

Plagiarism of ideas and data is identified both as part of the manuscript check upon receipt and scientific review, and after the publication of articles – upon receipt of relevant requests by the editors. If the fact of unauthorized borrowing of data (results of scientific work) or ideas is established, the manuscript (article) will be retracted or rejected for publication.

4. GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY

Generative artificial intelligence technologies (for example, chatbots or large language models with artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT) cannot under any circumstances be indicated as the author of an article or a co-author who contributed to the preparation of the manuscript. Programs, services, tools based on generative artificial intelligence do not meet the authorship requirements, since they do not bear (and cannot bear) responsibility for the submitted work, cannot declare the presence or absence of a conflict of interests, and also manage copyrights.

Using of chatbots or other programs, services, tools based on artificial intelligence is not prohibited when preparing a manuscript. In some cases, such programs, services, tools can be used to edit text, search for sources of literature, collect and analyze data. Authors should take into account that chatbots often transmit unreliable or false information, which requires additional and ongoing verification of information.

If a program based on artificial intelligence was used in preparing the manuscript, it is necessary to indicate the name and version of the program, the request criteria, and describe in detail the method of its use (in the Material and Methods section). A detailed description of the use of tools, technologies, programs, and services of generative artificial intelligence can also be provided in the cover letter.

The author alone is responsible for the manuscript submitted to the editorial board of the journal, regardless of what programs, services, and tools based on artificial intelligence were used and to what extent. At the same time, the author also bears full responsibility for violating the rules for using the specified programs, services, and tools, as well as for using the results of their work.

When checking manuscripts, the editors use the appropriate module of the Antiplagiat system, which allows detecting text generated by artificial intelligence. The final decision in each specific case is made by the editorial board in interaction with the author of the publication.

The editorial board of the Therapy journal and reviewers should not process the manuscript received for review or its part using generative artificial intelligence tools, as this may violate the confidentiality and intellectual property rights of the authors, and if the article contains personal information, then also the rights to data privacy. This requirement also applies to the text of the review itself, since it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and / or authors.

The editorial board of the Therapy journal shares the position of the international publishing community regarding the use of artificial intelligence in the preparation of scientific articles, set out in the documents:

5. PROCEDURE FOR CONSIDERING DEVIATIONS FROM ESTABLISHED ETHICAL STANDARDS

5.1. Identification of deviations from ethical standards

Illegal or unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editors or publisher at any stage of the publication process.

Anyone who informs the editors or publisher of deviations from ethical standards must provide sufficient information and evidence. All statements and requests will be accepted, reviewed and processed.

5.2. Investigation

The decision to undertake an investigation is made by the editor-in-chief, who, if necessary, may seek assistance from the publisher.

It is necessary to collect evidence, while avoiding any accusations.

5.3. Minor ethical deviations

Minor deviations do not require consultation with a large number of experts, but the author must in any case be given an opportunity to respond to any allegations.

5.4. Major ethical deviations

In cases of major deviations, the accused’s employer must be notified. The editor-in-chief, together with the publisher and the scientific society, will decide whether to involve the employer, or an investigation can be performed by reviewing the available data and consulting with a limited number of experts.

5.5. Consequences (in order of increasing deviations; may be used alone or in combination)

  • Notification of deviations to the author or reviewer.
  • A formal letter to the author or reviewer notifying him or her of the deviations in order to prevent deviations from ethical standards in future articles.
  • Publication of a formal warning detailing the deviations.
  • Publication of the article detailing the deviations.
  • A formal letter to the author’s supervisor, reviewer, or funding department.
  • Formal refusal of publication, as well as formal notification to the author’s supervisor, indexing and refereeing agency, and readers of the journal.
  • Ban on publication of the given author for a certain period.
  • Transfer of the results of the investigation to higher organizations for further decisions on these rejections.

6. RETRACTION OF ARTICLES

Withdrawal of an already published article (retraction) is an extreme measure and is applied in the event of the discovery of facts that were not known during the review:

  • detection of facts of violation of the law and defamation;
  • violation of publication ethics requirements (including detection of plagiarism in an article, concealment of a conflict of interests, the emergence of claims regarding copyright for an article or its individual parts by third parties, detection of the fact of publication of an article in another publication before the date of its publication in the journal);
  • disclosure of falsifications, false or inaccurate data, especially such data, the use of which may create a risk for health;
  • disclosure of serious errors (for example, incorrect interpretation of results), which casts doubt on the scientific value of the article).

See also the Rules for withdrawal (retraction) of an article from publication of the Ethics Council of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP).

Mechanism of retracting an article

6.1. Authors, readers, reviewers, editors and publishers may initiate the retraction of an article by submitting a written request to the journal’s editorial board.

6.2. The journal’s conflict resolution committee reviews the received request and initiates an investigation, based on the results of which the published article may be retracted.

6.3. The decision to retract a published article is made by the journal’s conflict resolution committee if there are sufficient facts in favor of retraction. An act on the retraction of the article is drawn up and signed by the editor-in-chief.

6.4. The journal’s editorial board notifies the initiator of the retraction of the article in writing about the results of the review of the request.

6.5. If the journal’s conflict resolution committee decides to retract an article, the journal publishes information that the article has been retracted, indicating its metadata. In this case, the article is not physically removed from the published print run and the issue file on the website. The editors publish a statement on the retraction of the article and post it on the corresponding page of the issue’s contents on the journal’s official website.

6.6. If articles from the journal are indexed by any databases, a letter is sent to these databases stating that the article has been retracted, stating the reasons for the retraction.

7. DATA SHARING STATEMENT

The Therapy journal adheres to ICMJE recommendations on data sharing policy. All manuscripts reporting the results of clinical trials must provide a data sharing statement in accordance with ICMJE recommendations of July 1, 2018. Authors may refer to the editorial article Data sharing statements for clinical trials: A requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in the Ann Intern Med journal. 2017;167(1):63–65. https://www.doi.org/10.7326/M17-1028.