Ethical standards

Ethical principles Authorship of publications Borrowing and plagiarism Generative artificial intelligence policy Procedure for considering deviations from established ethical standards Retraction of articles Data sharing statement Publication fee

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

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

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

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

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE);
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE);
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME);
European Association of Science Editors (EASE).

The editorial board and publisher of the journal:

adhere to the documents on editorial policy developed by the Council of Science Editors (CSE), which describe the responsibilities and rights of editors of peer-reviewed journals;
accept the Core Practices and Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scientific Publishing prepared by COPE, as well as the provisions of the Sarajevo Declaration on the Integrity and Visibility of Scientific Publications.

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

1. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

1.1. Duties of the editor

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1.2. Responsibilities of a Reviewer

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

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

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

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

See also Peer review.

1.3. Author’s Responsibilities

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed:

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

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

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

2. AUTHORSHIP OF PUBLICATIONS

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

ICMJE recommends defining authorship according to 4 criteria:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

3. BORROWING AND PLAGIARISM

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

The editors classify the following forms of plagiarism:

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

Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and unacceptable.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4. GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COPE (Authorship and AI tools);
WAME (Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts);
ICMJE (Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology);
International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM, Generative AI in scholarly communications).

5. PROCEDURE FOR CONSIDERING DEVIATIONS FROM ESTABLISHED ETHICAL STANDARDS

5.1. Identification of deviations from ethical standards

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

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

5.2. Investigation

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

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

5.3. Minor ethical deviations

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

5.4. Major ethical deviations

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

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

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

6. RETRACTION OF ARTICLES

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

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

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

Mechanism of retracting an article

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8. PUBLICATION FEE

Authors are not charged a fee for checking, reviewing, publishing articles, preparing the journal for printing, and any payments (including payment of remuneration to the author) for articles submitted for publication (as well as for the transfer of exclusive rights) are not made.