- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
- » Borrowings and plagiarism
- » Preprint and Postprint Policy
- » Sources of income and advertising policy of the magazine
- » Retracting articles
Aim and Scope
The goals and objectives of the journal are to inform the neurosurgical audience as widely as possible about modern methods of diagnosis and surgical treatment of neurosurgical pathology of the central and peripheral nervous system, taking into account advanced world experience. Target audience: neurosurgeons, neurologists, radiation diagnosticians, rehabilitation specialists, anesthesiologists and resuscitators, ophthalmologists, pathologists, neurophysiologists.
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
All scientific articles received by the editors of the journal “Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after Professor A.L. Polenov” undergo mandatory double-blind reviewing (the reviewer does not know the authors of the manuscript, the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers).
- The manuscript of the article received by the editor is reviewed by the executive secretary for compliance with the journal’s profile and formatting requirements.
- The manuscript must be accompanied by a cover sheet completed by the authors.
- The article is sent for review to two or, if necessary, three reviewers - members of the editorial board or other specialists with adequate experience in a specific scientific area. Specialists working in the same division or subsidiary where the work was performed are not involved in the review.
- The article is transferred to the reviewer anonymously, without indicating information about the authors. The review is also sent anonymously from the editorial board to the author, without indicating information about the reviewer. At the mutual request, the author and the reviewer can also communicate without the editor, if this is necessary for working on the manuscript and there are no obstacles of a personal or other nature specified by them or the editor.
- Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and relate to information that is not subject to disclosure. Reviewers may not take advantage of knowledge of the content of a work prior to its publication.
- The review should contain a comprehensive analysis of the scientific and methodological advantages and disadvantages of the article and constructive comments on the revision of the article.
- The reviewer must evaluate:
- relevance of the content of the article: does the level of what is presented in the article correspond to current problems in neurosurgery and related disciplines;
- novelty, significance and originality of the scientific and practical conclusions of the article;
- completeness and reliability of the information provided;
- correctness and accuracy of terminology, definitions and formulations,
- compliance with the norms and rules of professional ethics.
- The review should include clear recommendations on the article:
- accept without changes,
- accept with minor changes,
- accept with major changes,
- reject.
- The review is sent to the executive secretary within a period not exceeding one month from the date of receipt of the manuscript by the reviewer.
- If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, it is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the recommendations when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them with reason. The article must be returned in corrected form within 1 month. The revised manuscript must be accompanied by a letter from the author containing responses to comments and explaining the changes made in the article. The article revised by the author is re-sent for review to the same reviewer who made the critical comments.
- If the reviewer did not recommend the article for publication, the editorial board may send the article for revision taking into account the comments made, and also send it to another reviewer. The text of the negative review is sent to the author.
- Manuscripts that have received conflicting reviews are sent for additional review. If a manuscript receives two negative reviews, it is rejected.
- The decision on publication after review is made by the editor-in-chief/deputy editor-in-chief, and, if necessary, by the editorial board as a whole. The executive secretary informs the author of the decision made.
- The maximum review period between the dates of receipt of the manuscript by the editor and the editorial board making a decision is 2 months.
- All changes in the text of the manuscript (article) before publication are agreed with the author
- Reviews and correspondence with authors are stored in the editorial office for at least 5 years from the date of publication of articles and, upon request, information (copies of reviews) are provided to the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission, the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
- Reviewers are not paid; all work of reviewers, the editorial board and the editorial council is free.
The review rules are compiled according to the “Unified Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals”
Publishing Ethics
The editors of the journal "Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after Professor A. L. Polenov" follow the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific society. In its activities, the editors rely on the Recommendations for conducting, describing, editing and publishing the results of scientific work in medical journals of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The section was prepared based on materials from the publishing house of scientific and medical literature Elsevier, as well as materials from the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
- Introduction
1.1. Publishing materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Editors of the journal, Reviewers of the Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A. L. Polenova."
- Responsibilities of Editors
2.1. Publication decision
Editor of the scientific journal “Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A. L. Polenova" and the editorial board are responsible for making decisions about publication, often in collaboration with the relevant Scientific Society. The credibility of the work under review and its scientific significance should always form the basis of the decision to publish. The Editor may confer with other Editors and Reviewers (or officers of the Scientific Society) when deciding to publish.
2.2. Decency
The Editor must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the Authors.
2.3. Confidentiality
Editor and Editorial Board of the journal “Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A. L. Polenova" are obliged not to unnecessarily disclose information about the accepted manuscript to all persons, with the exception of the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific consultants and the Publisher.
2.4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
2.4.2 Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely, request a Co-Editor, Associate Editor, or collaborate with other members of the Editorial Board in reviewing the work instead of personally reviewing and making a decision) in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other interactions and relationships with the Authors, companies and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.
2.5. Publication supervision
An editor who has provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in a publication are erroneous must report this to the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) for the purpose of prompt notification of changes, retractions, expressions of concern, and other appropriate statements. .
2.6. Engagement and collaboration within research
The Editor, together with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society), takes adequate response measures in the event of ethical claims relating to reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures broadly include interaction with
Authors of the manuscript and the argumentation of the relevant complaint or demand, but may also imply interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.
- Responsibilities of Reviewers
3.1. Influence on the decisions of the Editorial Board
Reviewing helps the Editor make decisions about publication and, through appropriate interaction with Authors, can also help the Author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communication, located at the very “heart” of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication are required to undertake the substantive work of reviewing the manuscript.
3.2. Performance
Any selected Reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to quickly complete the work must notify the Editor of the journal Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A. L. Polenov” and ask to be excluded from the review process of the corresponding manuscript.
3.3. Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as confidential. This work must not be opened or discussed with any persons not authorized to do so by the Editor.
3.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and with reason.
3.5. Acknowledgment of primary sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that is relevant to the topic and not included in the manuscript's bibliography. Any statement (observation, conclusion, or argument) previously published must have an appropriate bibliographic reference in the manuscript. The Reviewer should also bring to the Editor's attention any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work within the Reviewer's area of expertise.
3.6. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
3.6.1 Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
3.6.2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other interactions or relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.
- Responsibilities of Authors
4.1. Requirements for manuscripts
4.1.1 Authors of original research reports must provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The data underlying the work must be presented accurately. The work must contain sufficient detail and bibliographical references for possible reproduction. False or obviously erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Reviews and scientific articles must also be accurate and objective, the point of view of the Editorial Board must be clearly stated.
4.2. Data access and storage
Raw data relevant to the manuscript may be requested from the Authors for review by the Editors. Authors should be willing to provide open access to this type of information (in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) if feasible, and in any case be willing to retain these data for an adequate period of time after publication.
4.3. Originality and plagiarism
4.3.1 Authors must ensure that the work presented is entirely original and, when using the work or statements of other Authors, must provide appropriate bibliographical references or excerpts.
4.3.2 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as original, to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and will not be tolerated.
4.4. Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications
4.4.1 In general, an Author should not publish a manuscript largely devoted to the same study in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, the Author should not submit a previously published article for consideration to another journal.
4.4.3. Publishing a certain type of article (eg, clinical practice guidelines, translational articles) in more than one journal is, in some cases, ethical, provided certain conditions are met. Authors and Editors of interested journals must agree to a secondary publication that necessarily presents the same data and interpretations as in the primary published work.
A bibliography of the primary work must also be presented in the second publication. More information on acceptable forms of secondary (re)publication can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.5. Acknowledgment of primary sources
The contributions of others should always be acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the work presented. Data obtained in private, such as through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as manuscript evaluation or grant awards, should not be used without the express written permission of the Authors of the work related to confidential sources.
4.6. Authorship of the publication
4.6.1 Authors of a publication can only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the conception of the work, development, execution or interpretation of the presented research. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as Contributors. Where research participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of the research project, they should be listed as significant contributors to that research.
4.6.2. The author must ensure that all participants who made significant contributions to the study are listed as Co-Authors and that those who did not participate in the study are not listed as Co-Authors, and that all Co-Authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and agree to its submission for publication.
4.7. Risks, as well as people and animals who are objects of research
4.7.1 If the work involves the use of chemicals, procedures or equipment that pose any unusual risk, the Author must clearly indicate this in the manuscript.
4.7.2 If the work involves animals or humans as research subjects, Authors must ensure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the study comply with the laws and regulations of research organizations, and are approved by the appropriate committees. The manuscript must clearly state that informed consent has been obtained from all subjects studied. Privacy rights must be respected at all times.
4.8. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1 All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that could be perceived as influencing the results or conclusions presented in the work.
4.8.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consulting, equity ownership, receipt of honoraria, provision of expert testimony, patent application or patent registration, grants and other financial support. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.
4.9. Significant errors in published works
If the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author must inform the Editor of the journal “Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A. L. Polenova" and interact with the Editor in order to quickly withdraw the publication or correct errors. If the Editor or Publisher receives information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the Author is obliged to withdraw the work or correct the errors as soon as possible.
- Responsibilities of the Publisher
5.1 The publisher must follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the fulfillment of ethical responsibilities by the Editors, Reviewers and Authors of the journal Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A.L. Polenova" in accordance with these requirements. The Publisher must be confident that potential profits from advertising or production of reprints do not influence the Editors' decisions.
5.2. The publishing house must provide support to the Editors of the journal “Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A. L. Polenova" in considering claims to the ethical aspects of published materials and help interact with other journals and/or Publishing Houses, if this contributes to the fulfillment of duties by the Editors.
5.3. The publisher should promote good research practices and implement industry standards to improve ethical guidelines, retractions, and correction procedures.
5.4 The Publisher shall provide appropriate specialist legal support (opinion or advice) where necessary.
Founder
- Federal State Institution "Russian Research Neurosurgical Institute named after Professor A.L. Polenov of the Federal Agency for High-Tech Medical Care" (St. Petersburg)
- St. Petersburg Association of Neurosurgeons (St. Petersburg)
Author fees
Publishing in the journal is free for authors.
The editors do not charge authors for the preparation, placement and printing of materials.
Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author.
Information or ideas obtained during the review process related to possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint or other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with with the submitted work.
Borrowings and plagiarism
The publication of works containing plagiarized text, ideas and/or data is excluded. Authors must submit completely original work for publication. Mentions of the results of the work of other authors must be accompanied by links to relevant sources; citing a text previously published somewhere must be framed as direct speech with the obligatory indication of the original source.
When reviewing an article, the editorial board of the journal checks the material using the Anti-Plagiarism and Google Scholar systems. If illegally borrowed text and graphic elements are detected, or a low coefficient of originality of the text is detected, the editors have the right to demand that the authors correct the manuscript or refuse to publish it.
Plagiarism is also detected within the framework of open scientific review and after the publication of manuscripts - upon request from readers. In case of detection of unauthorized borrowings, the editors act in accordance with the rules of the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). An article containing plagiarism may be retracted even after publication.
Preprint and Postprint Policy
During the article submission process, the author must confirm that the article has not been published or accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to a publication published in the journal “Russian Neurosurgical Journal named after. prof. A. L. Polenova" article, the publishing house asks to post a link (full URL of the material) to the official website of the journal.
Articles previously posted by the authors on personal or public websites that are not affiliated with other publishing houses are allowed for consideration.
Sources of income and advertising policy of the magazine
Sources of income for the magazine: reprints, organizational support, advertising.
Advertising in the magazine and on its website is linked to its content. The advertising placed does not in any way influence editorial decisions.
Retracting articles
In accordance with the rules of the Council on Ethics for Scientific Publications of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers, the grounds for retracting an article are:
- detection of plagiarism in the article;
- detection of falsifications in the work (for example, manipulation of experimental data);
- detection of serious errors in the work that cast doubt on its scientific value;
- incorrect list of authors;
- duplication of an article in several publications;
- republication of an article without the consent of the author;
- concealment of conflicts of interest and other violations of publication ethics;
- failure of the article to pass the review procedure.
After making a decision to retract an article, the editors inform its authors about its decision, indicating the reason for the retraction and its date. The article remains on the journal’s website as part of the corresponding issue, but is marked “Retracted” with the date of retraction (the mark is placed over the text of the article and in the table of contents of the issue), and a message about the retraction is posted in the news section of the site. The editor-in-chief of the journal also provides information about the retraction of the article to all online libraries and databases in which the journal is indexed.
