Open Access Policy
"Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" 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, 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
Digital archiving and policy of data keeping
Bulletin of Restorative Medicine is a RoMEO green journal
The author can:
- archive pre-print (ie pre-refereeing)
- archive post-print (ie final draft post-refereeing)
However, we recommend to wait until the publisher’s version is issued because it has a set of data that facilitate you future citation.
- author can archive publisher’s version/PDF
Policy of data keeping
Storage policy is aimed at selection, storage and access to journal archives and includes the following objectives:
- Compliance of archiving materials to Archives' state standards.
- Registration and publication of articles in accordance with professional standards.
- Ensuring wide access to archived material, provided by editorial practice.
Archive includes texts of articles, peer-reviews, abstracts and bibliographies, which are published in the journal. These materials are of great scientific value, as they comprise the most significant results of scientific research.
Information on all the articles published in the journal is stored on the publisher's server and is available in the public domain on the website of the journal.
The journal is available in the public domain on the platform of the Scientific Electronic Library eLIBRARY.ru: https://www.elibrary.ru/contents.asp?titleid=10019
In Scientific Electronic Library everybody can use the advanced search by journal articles (by keyword, author, title, chapter). Link to the full text of the article is marked on the page in the Scientific Electronic Library eLIBRARY.ru that complies with the storage stadards of digital data.
Articles in «Bulletin of rehabilitation medicine» are indexed by several systems. "Citation Index" is a numerical indicator that characterizes the significance of this article and is calculated on the basis of subsequent publications referring to this work.
RISC impact factor:
5 years – 0.857,
2 years – 1,188
The journal is presented in the following international databases:
- 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). By 2020 the e-library platform has hosted more than 5600 Russian magazines.
- The Russian Citation Science Index database on the Web of Science platform is a database of authoritative Russian journals selected in expert groups by leading Russian scientists based on formal criteria, bibliometric indicators of journals in the RSCI and public expertise.
List of journals included in the RSCI database (https://elibrary.ru/projects/rsci/rsci.pdf)
- 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.
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" 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)
1.1. 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: "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine"
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 «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
- Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). 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 "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" 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 (or society officers) 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 "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" 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 themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
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.
- 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 referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" and excuse himself from the review process.
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.
- 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, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
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. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.
- Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" 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 "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" 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.
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.
"Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" 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 "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine", 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 "Bulletin of Restorative Medicine" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.
Postprint - The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author's final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.
POLICY ON REVOCATION OR CORRECTION OF ARTICLES
Editors should consider retracting a publication if:
- They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)
- It constitutes plagiarism
- The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
- It contains material or data without authorisation for use
- Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy)
- It reports unethical research
- It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
- The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.
Notices of retraction should:
- Be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (ie, in all online versions)
- Clearly identify the retracted article (eg, by including the title and authors in the retraction heading or citing the retracted article)
- Be clearly identified as a retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment)
- Be published promptly to minimise harmful effects
- Be freely available to all readers (ie, not behind access barriers or available only to subscribers)
- State who is retracting the article
- State the reason(s) for retraction
- Be objective, factual and avoid inflammatory language.
Retractions are not usually appropriate if:
- The authorship is disputed but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings
- The main findings of the work are still reliable and correction could sufficiently address errors or concerns
- An editor has inconclusive evidence to support retraction, or is awaiting additional information such as from an institutional investigation (for information about Expressions of Concern see https://publicationethics.org/expressions-of-concern-forum-discussion)
- Author conflicts of interest have been reported to the journal after publication, but in the editor’s view these are not likely to have influenced interpretations or recommendations or the conclusions of the article.
For more information:
COPE (Version 2: November 2019)
THE POSITION IN RELATION TO THE AUTHORSHIP
All members of the group of authors should meet all four criteria of authorship set forth in the ICMJE recommendations: 1) concept and design development or data analysis and interpretation, and 2) manuscript justification or verification of critical intellectual content, and 3) final approval for publication of the manuscript, and 4) consent to be responsible for all aspects of the work, and assume that issues relating to the thoroughness and diligent execution of any part of the study submitted are duly investigated and resolved.
Large group of authors sign the authorship on behalf of the group with/without specifying the names of each of them. In this case, the manuscript is authorized by the responsible author, and the group is given a name. The list of names of non-authors, but persons who contributed to the submitted work, do not meet the criteria of authorship is presented separately.
Non-authors and contributors do not meet all four authorship criteria. Their functions may be: funding, General management of the research team, General administrative support, participation in writing, technical revision of the text, scientific revision of the text, correction and proofreading. Their contribution is noted individually or as part of a group in the Acknowledgements section, their contribution to the work must be defined in writing (scientific consultant, critical data analysis, data collection, etc.)
DISCLOSURE POLICY CLINICAL STUDIES
According to the latest ICMJE guidelines, authors must submit a separate Data Sharing Statement when submitting a paper containing clinical trial data.
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) requested that as of July 1, 2018, manuscripts that report clinical trial results must contain a disclosure statement. Clinical trials that begin enrollment on or after January 1, 2019 must include a disclosure plan in the trial registration details. ICMJE's policy on research registration is set out at http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html.
If the disclosure plan changes after registration, this must be reflected in the application filed and published with the manuscript, and the registry entry must also be updated.