Focus and Scope
"Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproduction" - a specialized medical journal for healthcare specialists. Among the priorities of the publication - the development of scientific and information support and networking in the "professional community".
From 2007 to 2009, the journal was called "Orgyn. Obstetrics, gynecology and reproduction. " In 2010, the editorial board decided on the modernization of the journal, which provides for the expansion of the publication of scientific papers, review articles, lectures,case studies. In addition, these you can find information on CME and news in Ob&Gyn field. The journal publishes announcements of congresses, conferences, symposia and other activities. Scientific papers published in the journal after the obligatory peer-review.
4 issues per year
Articles in "OBSTETRICS, HYNECOLOGY AND REPRODICTION" 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).
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 Americas largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
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/).
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: " OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION"
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.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned "OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION" 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 "OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION" journals 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 "OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION" 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 editors 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.
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 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 "OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION" 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 editors 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 reviewers 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
4.1.1. 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 anothers paper as the authors own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of anothers 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 authors obligation to promptly notify the editor of "OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION" 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.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of "OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION" 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 "OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION" 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 specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.
24 Chechersky St., Moscow 117042
Phone: +7 (495) 649 54 95
Editorial Office of the «OBSTETRICS, GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTION» journal:
24 Chechersky St., Moscow 117042
Publication in journal is free of charge for all the authors.
In the journal "Epilepsy and Paroxysmal Conditions" are sent to work (articles, monographs, reviews, lectures), not previously published and not under consideration for publication in other publications. The manuscript may be submitted in English and Russian (for foreign authors) languages. Manuscripts should not contain factual errors. The editors reserve the right to edit the manuscript and to point to factual errors in them, and put styling and reduce the volume of the article. The responsibility for the accuracy of the information and originality of the submissions rests with the authors. Directed to the editor will not be returned. After the publication of all copyrights belong to the publisher. Waiver of publication may not be accompanied by an explanation of its reasons and may not be the negative terminal of the scientific and practical value of work.
Preparing the manuscript, authors are kindly requested to adhere to the following regulations based on the “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals”, developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors:
1. The article should have the signature of the scientific supervisor and be supported by the official letter of referral from the institution where the research has been carried out. The official referral should include the information on the surnames of all the authors and the title of the research work. The expert’s report is presented if needed. The article should be signed by all the authors.
2. It is not allowed to apply to the editorial board those articles which have already been published by other editions or have already been sent to other editions.
3. The editorial board has the right to shorten and edit the presented works. All the articles received by the editorial board of the journal are reviewed according to the requirements of the Higher Attestation Committee of the Russian Federation.
4. The approved articles are published free of charge. The manuscripts/copies of the articles are not returned back to their authors.
5. The manuscripts/copies designed without the accordance with the rules are not accepted for their publication.
6. The number of pages for reviews should not be more than 20 pages of a typewritten text, original research - 15, historical and discussion articles - 10, brief notes and practical notes - 5.
7. The article should be printed on one part of À4 sheet, Times New Roman 12 type, a line spacing - 1,5. Margins: top and bottom - 2,5 cm, left - 3,5 cm, right - 1,5 cm, with pagination (at the top in the centre, the first page without any number). The document format should be doc or docx.
8. The articles should be sent by e-mail to the address email@example.com in MS Word format with the enclosure of scanned copies of the letter of referral and of the first page of the article with the signatures of all the authors of this article in Adobe Acrobat (pdf) format. The printed copy of the manuscript signed by the authors, and the original letter of referral are sent by post to editorial office.
9. The title page should have the following information:
- the title of the article (it should be short and informative, abbreviations and trading (commercial) names of preparations, medical equipment, diagnostic equipment, diagnostic tests, etc. are not allowed);
- the author’s surname and initials (it should be indicated what institution each of the authors works by figures in the upper case next to the surname of the author and the name of the institution. If all the authors work in one institution it is not necessary to indicate the place of work of every author separately);
- the names of the institutions where the authors work with the indication of the department competence (Ministry of Public Health of Russia, the Russian Academy of Sciences, etc.), city/town, country (without the indication of the form of property, the organization status (State Institution of Higher Professional Training, Federal State Budgeted Institution, etc.);
- all the information is given in both Russian and English languages. The authors’ surnames should be transliterated according to BGN (Board of Geographic Names) system, presented by the site www.translit.ru. There should be given an officially accepted English variant of the name of the organization!
10. A separate sheet should have the information about the authors: surname, name, patronymic (full form) in Russian and by transliteration, scientific degree, academic status, position at the institution/institutions, address of the organization with its postal/ZIP code, phone number and e-mail address of all the authors. Abbreviations are not allowed.
11. After the title page there should be placed a resume (summary) of the article in both Russian and English (about 250 words each). The resume of an original article should have the following structure: aim, materials and methods, results, conclusion. All the parts are indicated in the text. For other types of articles (review, lecture, discussion) a resume should include the summary of the basic concept of the article. The resume should not have abbreviations. The resume is independent from the article source of information to be placed in various scientific databases. We pay special attention to the quality of the English version of your resume! It will be published separately from the basic text of the article and should be understandable without the reference to the publication. The keywords or word combinations are given at the end of this part in both Russian and English (not more than 8 ones) according to their significance.
12. The text of an original research should have the following sections indicated by the headings: “Introduction”, “Aim of the study”, "Research tasks", "Materials and methods", "Results", "Discussion", "Conclusions" or "Conclusion", "References».
13. If the article has a description of some human observation, there should not be used any patient’s surname and initials or number of his/her case history, especially in figures or photos/pictures. In the case of a factual report of animal experiments there should be specified whether the content and usage of laboratory animals is performed according to the rules accepted in the institution, the recommendations of national board of research, and national laws.
14. At first mentioning of the terms constantly used in the article (but not in the title of the article or in its resume), it is necessary to give their full names with their shortened forms/abbreviations in brackets, and to use only the abbreviations further, but their usage should be minimal. Abbreviations are given according to the key letters of Russian words, for example: èñòî÷íèê èîíèçèðóþùåãî èçëó÷åíèÿ (ÈÈÈ) (ionizing radiation source – IRS) etc. The type of devices or installations should be given in original language; in inverted commas; with the indication (in brackets) of the producer country. For example: spectrophotometer «ÑÔ-16» (Russia) and spectrofluorimeter produced by "Hitachi" (Japan) were used. Units of measurement are given in SI system. Rarely-used and very specific terms should be deciphered as well. In the case of a medical product description its first mentioning should be specified by the active substance indication (international unlicensed name), commercial name, manufacture company, producer country, all names and dosages should be carefully verified.
15. The tables should have only the necessary data and present the generalized and statistically processed materials. Each table should have its heading, number, and be placed in the text right after the reference to it. The illustrations should be accurate and contrasting. Digital versions of the illustrations should be saved in separate files in Tiff format with 300 dpi resolution and consecutive numbering. Figure explanations should be placed in the basic text. There should be a reference before every figure, diagram or table in the text. The explanation given for micrographs or electronic micrographs should indicate the painting method and scale factor. The diagrams should be presented in initial files. The figures (diagrams, charts) should have the indication of all axes with the units of measurement according to SI system. The legend is presented beyond the figure place.
16. Bibliographic references in the text should be given by figures in square brackets according to the list at the end of the article. Number the references consecutively, according to their first mentioning in the text (but not alphabetically)! For original articles there should not be given more than 30 sources, for lectures and reviews - not more than 60 sources, for other types of articles - not more than 15 sources.
17. Two lists of references are attached to the article on a separate paper sheet.
18. In the first list of references (Literature) the bibliographic description of references should be made according to the norms of ÃÎÑÒ 7.1-2003 "Bibliographic registration. Bibliographic description of the document. General requirements and composition rules”.
All articles received by the editorial staff are reviewed according to the approved order.
For review of the articles the leading specialists working in the scientific areas relevant to the subject of the article are involved.
The manuscript of the scientific article received by the editorial staff of the journal is reviewed by the executive secretary for compliance with the profile of the journal, formatting requirements and then registered. After registration, the executive secretary sends the article for review to one reviewer, but if the subject of the manuscript includes several branches of medicine, it can be sent either simultaneously or sequentially to two or more specialists.
In some cases, the choice of the reviewer can be resolved after discussion at the meeting of the editorial staff.
The reviewing is anonymous; the identity of the reviewer is confidential information. Breach of confidentiality is possible only with the consent of the reviewer at the request of the author. The reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them are the private property of the authors and include information not subject to disclosure. The reviewers are not allowed to make copies of articles for their needs.
Sending the article for review is accompanied by a letter signed by the head of the editorial staff on the pre-printed form of the journal, which indicates the deadline for submission of the review (no more than 2 months) and in the future, this deadline is monitored.
Receiving a review is recorded in the passport of the article by specifying the date.
The review should objectively evaluate the article, contain reasonable comprehensive analysis of its advantages and disadvantages. The review should reflect the reviewers comments and the conclusion about the possibility of publication of the article as presented, in the revised form or about inadvisability of its publication.
If the reviewer gave a positive or negative opinion on the article, the executive secretary sends the article to the regular meeting of the editorial staff for a final decision on the article – to print or to reject.
If the review contains significant comments and suggestions for correction of the manuscript, the executive secretary sends the article to the authors “for revision” and attaches a cover letter and the full text of the review. After correction the article is reviewed again in the wording or sent to the reviewer; subsequently the editorial staff makes the final decision on the article. In this case, the date of receipt by the editorial staff is the date of return of the revised article.
The editors reserve the right to reject articles in case of inability or unwillingness of the author to take into account the comments of the editors.
The final decision on all articles is made by the editorial staff at its meeting after the discussion of each manuscript which is recorded in the protocol and passport of the article.
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.