- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Delayed Open Access
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aim and Scope
The purpose of the journal:
The purpose of the journal is to inform scientists, doctors, specialists from related fields of science and practice, teachers of specialized departments about the most important results of fundamental and applied research in the field of occupational medicine – occupational health and occupational diseases, industrial ecology.
Tasks of the journal:
- timely publication of results in relevant and promising areas of research on the subject of the magazine;
- improving the level and quality of information exchange between specialists from different regions of the Russian Federation, CIS and foreign countries;
- expansion of opportunities for distribution and promotion of publications in the scientific information space in Russia and abroad with indexing of scientific papers in leading foreign citation databases;
- assistance to improve the quality of scientific papers provided to the editorial Board.
- to promote the development of occupational health as a basis for the preservation and strengthening of the health of the working population
Section Policies
Open Submissions
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
12 issues per year.
Delayed Open Access
The contents of this journal will be available in an open access format 24 month(s) after an issue is published.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
A double-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology». This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.
1. Review of articles is carried out by members of the editorial Board and the editorial Board, as well as by invited reviewers – leading domestically experts in the relevant industry (medicine) inRussia. The decision on the choice of a reviewer for the examination of the article is made by the editor-in-chief, Deputy editor-in-chief, scientific editor, head of the editorial office. The review period is 2-4 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.
2. Each article is sent to 2 reviewers.
3. Each reviewer has the right to refuse the review in case of a clear conflict of interest, which affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Following the review of the manuscript, the reviewer gives recommendations on the future of the article decision of the reviewer must be justified:
- the article is recommended for publication in this form;
- the article is recommended for publication after correcting the shortcomings noted by the reviewer;
- the article needs additional review by another specialist;
- an article cannot be published in a journal.
4. If the review contains recommendations for correction and revision of the article, the editorial board sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them (partially or completely). Revision of the article should not take more than two months from the date of sending an electronic message to the authors about the need to make changes. The article, modified by the author, is re-sent for review.
5. Inthe event of failure of the authors from the refinement of the materials they need in written or oral form to notify the editor of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after 3 months from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the authors with the refusal to finalize the article, the editorial office removes it from the account. In such situations, the authors are sent a notice of withdrawal of the manuscript from the registration due to the expiration of the period allotted for revision.
6. If the author and reviewers have any unsolvable contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.
7. The decision to refuse to publish the manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial Board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. The article, not recommended by the decision of the editorial Board for publication, is not accepted for re-consideration. The refusal of publication is sent to the author by e-mail.
8. After the editorial board makes a decision on the admission of the article to publication, the editorial board informs the author and indicates the date of publication.
9. The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for the publication of the article. The final decision on the publication is made by the editorial Board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
10. Original reviews are kept in the editorial office for 3 years.
Indexation
Articles in «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
- Scopus is Elsevier's abstract and citation database launched in 2004. Scopus covers nearly 36,377 titles (22,794 active titles and 13,583 inactive titles) from approximately 11,678 publishers, of which 34,346 are peer-reviewed journals in top-level subject fields: life sciences, social sciences, physical sciences and health sciences. It covers three types of sources: book series, journals, and trade journals
- Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
- CAS
- EDS
- NLM Catalog
- SOCIONET
- VINITI RAS
- WorldCat
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org, and requirements for peer-reviewed medical journals ((http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf), elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)
1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology»
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.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those materials in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
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 any editorial staff of «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» 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 himself from consideration of manuscripts (to cooperate with other members of the editorial board in the consideration of the work instead of self-review and decision-making) in the case of a conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint and other interactions and relations with the Author, companies, and, possibly, with other organizations related to the manuscript.
2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
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 of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. 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 Reviewer who feels insufficient qualification to review the manuscript or does not have time to do the work quickly should notify the Editor of the journal «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» and ask exclude him from the process of reviewing the relevant manuscript.
3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
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 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.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1.Reporting standards
4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective.
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 takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds 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 acknowledgment 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 on 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. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
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. If the author finds a significant errors or inaccuracies in a publication, the author must inform the editor of «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» and interact with the editor to eliminate publication and correct errors as soon as possible. The autor is obliged to withdraw the work or correct errors as soon as possible.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» 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 should support «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
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.
The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/).
Founder
- Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution Izmerov Research Institute of occupational Health "(“FSBSI IRIOH”) with the support of the Federal service for supervision of consumer rights protection and human welfare (Rospotrebnadzor)
Author fees
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
«Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» 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 «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology», 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 «Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology» 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)
