Journal’s Policy  Українською

General Principles

The journal’s publication ethics and editorial policies are based on the core practices and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other recognized international standards in scholarly publishing.

The Editorial Board is committed to upholding the integrity of the scholarly record and adheres to established ethical principles, including honesty, transparency, confidentiality, and accountability in all stages of the editorial and publication process. Appropriate measures are taken to identify, evaluate, and manage potential conflicts of interest.

In performing its editorial duties, the Editorial Board is guided by the following principles:

• maintaining high standards of scientific quality, originality, and rigor, and ensuring that editorial decisions are made objectively and without bias;
• treating all authors, reviewers, and other participants in the publication process with fairness, respect, and professionalism;
• ensuring a fair, independent, and confidential peer-review process, involving qualified experts and, where appropriate, blinded review;
• providing clear guidance to authors regarding submission requirements and supporting compliance with the standards of international indexing and abstracting databases;
• safeguarding the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and not using unpublished materials for personal advantage;
• taking appropriate action in cases of suspected misconduct, in accordance with COPE recommendations.

Decisions on Publication

The Editorial Board is responsible for making decisions on the publication of submitted manuscripts in accordance with the journal’s editorial policies and established ethical standards. Editorial decisions are based solely on the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of the manuscript, as well as the reviewers’ recommendations.

The Editorial Board ensures that all submissions are evaluated fairly, objectively, and without discrimination. Assessment of manuscripts is conducted exclusively on the basis of their scientific quality and significance, irrespective of the authors’ race, nationality, ethnic origin, citizenship, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or political beliefs.

The journal upholds strict standards of confidentiality throughout the peer-review and editorial process. All participants involved (including the technical editor, members of the Editorial Board, and external reviewers) must not disclose or use unpublished materials for personal advantage without the author’s explicit written consent.

The Editorial Board takes appropriate measures to ensure compliance with copyright requirements and to prevent plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct.

The Editor-in-Chief has overall responsibility for making final decisions on manuscript acceptance and for addressing ethical concerns or complaints related to submitted manuscripts, in accordance with established ethical guidelines and best practices.

Confidentiality

The Editorial Board is committed to maintaining the confidentiality of all information related to submitted manuscripts. The technical editor and members of the Editorial Board ensure that details concerning manuscripts (including authorship, subject matter, and content) are not disclosed to unauthorized persons.

All submitted manuscripts and associated materials are treated as confidential documents. They are not shared, discussed, or otherwise disclosed except as necessary for the purposes of peer review and editorial evaluation.

Information regarding submitted and accepted manuscripts is disclosed only to those directly involved in the publication process, including the authors, reviewers, editorial staff, and the publisher, and only to the extent required for the performance of their duties.

The Editorial Board ensures the secure handling, storage, and processing of all manuscript files and associated data, in accordance with applicable data protection regulations and best practices in scholarly publishing.

Conflict of Interest Resolution

The journal’s policy on the prevention and management of conflicts of interest is based on the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), including guidelines on the disclosure of financial and non-financial relationships and activities.

All participants in the editorial and peer-review process (including technical editors, reviewers, and scientific consultants) must avoid using unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the authors’ explicit written consent.

Editors, reviewers, and other participants are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest and to recuse themselves from the consideration of a manuscript in cases of competitive, collaborative, institutional, or other relationships that could influence, or be perceived to influence, their objectivity.

The Editorial Board is committed to identifying and managing conflicts of interest at all stages of the publication process and to taking appropriate action where such conflicts are identified.

The Editorial Office considers appeals and complaints from authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders regarding potential ethical concerns or violations related to submitted or published materials. Where appropriate, the journal may issue corrections, clarifications, or other notices and inform readers of the outcomes of investigations, in accordance with established ethical guidelines and best practices.

Ethical Requirements for Research

When research involves human participants or animals, authors must state in the manuscript that all procedures were conducted in accordance with applicable legislation and approved by an appropriate institutional ethics or bioethics committee. For studies involving human participants, authors must also confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants.

The Editorial Office reserves the right to request additional information, reject a manuscript, or contact the authors’ institutional ethics committee if there are concerns regarding compliance with ethical standards. In exceptional cases, a manuscript may be rejected on ethical grounds even where formal ethical approval has been obtained.

Ethical Principles for Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively and in accordance with the criteria specified in the review form. Personal or inappropriate remarks addressed to the authors are not acceptable. Reviews should be expressed clearly and supported by well-reasoned arguments.

Reviewers should assess the adequacy and relevance of the references cited by the authors. If relevant prior work has not been cited, this should be indicated in the review. Any claim that a particular observation, conclusion, or argument has been previously published must be supported by an appropriate reference.

Reviewers should inform the Editor-in-Chief of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published or submitted work of which they are aware.

Authors’ Responsibilities

Authors bear responsibility for the content of their submitted manuscripts. Each submission must be accompanied by a cover letter signed by all authors, confirming that the manuscript has not been previously published, is not under consideration elsewhere, and does not constitute a duplicate or redundant publication.

Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and its results, provide an objective discussion of the findings, and include appropriate and relevant references. The description of methods should be sufficiently detailed to allow replication of the study. Fabrication, falsification, or deliberate misrepresentation of data constitutes unethical conduct and is unacceptable.

Authorship of the Work

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work; the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; and/or the drafting or critical revision of the manuscript. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section.

All authors share collective responsibility for the content of the publication. Each co-author must review and approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission. The inclusion of individuals who did not contribute to the research as authors is unacceptable.

Submission of Manuscripts by Editorial Board Members

Members of the Editorial Board may submit manuscripts to the journal. To avoid conflicts of interest, such submissions are handled independently, without the involvement of the author in the editorial decision-making process.

Where a submitting author is a member of the Editorial Board, the manuscript is managed by the Editor-in-Chief or by a designated handling editor with no conflict of interest. Where the submitting author is the Editor-in-Chief, the manuscript is managed by the Deputy Editor or an independent invited editor.

The published article must include the following statement: “This manuscript was submitted by a member of the Editorial Board. To avoid a conflict of interest, the editorial process was handled by the Editor.”

Academic Integrity Policy

Academic integrity is a fundamental prerequisite for high-quality scientific activity. It underpins public trust in research outcomes and scholarly communication, and promotes respect for ethical standards, human dignity, and intellectual responsibility.

The journal is committed to ensuring transparency in the preparation, evaluation, and publication of manuscripts. All submissions are processed and assessed in accordance with the principles of objectivity, fairness, and equality. Each manuscript undergoes an impartial evaluation, and the Editorial Board provides equal conditions for interaction with all authors, irrespective of their academic status or institutional affiliation.

The Editorial Office implements measures to prevent plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct. In particular, all submitted manuscripts are screened using the StrikePlagiarism software to detect textual similarity and potential duplication with previously published materials. Any identified overlap is further assessed for possible plagiarism or self-plagiarism in accordance with the journal’s editorial policies. As a general guideline, a similarity index not exceeding 10% is considered acceptable, provided that all sources are properly cited.

In assessing manuscripts for potential plagiarism, the following forms are taken into account:

• use of others’ words, ideas, or data without proper attribution;
• self-plagiarism, defined as the reuse of the author’s previously published work without appropriate citation and acknowledgment of the original source;
• paraphrasing that closely follows the structure or wording of the original text without sufficient transformation or proper citation;
• verbatim copying of text without the use of quotation marks and appropriate referencing;
• unintentional plagiarism, including incorrect or incomplete citation, omission of relevant sources, or inaccurate paraphrasing. Authors are required to ensure accurate citation and proper use of quotations where applicable.

Confirmed cases of plagiarism, duplicate publication, data falsification, or other forms of academic misconduct constitute grounds for rejection of the manuscript and may result in further editorial action in accordance with established ethical guidelines.

The journal does not tolerate citation manipulation. Excessive self-citation or inappropriate citation practices are considered unacceptable unless clearly justified by the scientific context and relevance of the referenced work.

Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies may be used by authors during manuscript preparation solely to improve readability, language quality, and stylistic clarity. The use of AI for core scholarly activities—such as the development of scientific or medical hypotheses, interpretation of data, formulation of conclusions, or provision of clinical recommendations—is not permitted.

The journal encourages full transparency regarding the use of AI in the preparation of manuscripts. Authors must disclose any use of AI tools in the appropriate section of the manuscript (e.g., Materials and Methods or Acknowledgements). Such disclosure should include the name of the AI tool or system, a description of how it was used (including prompts or general methodological approach, where relevant), and a clear indication of which parts of the manuscript were generated or assisted by AI.

The undisclosed use of AI—particularly the presentation of AI-generated text, images, data, analyses, or other outputs as the authors’ original work—is considered a form of academic misconduct and may result in rejection of the manuscript or retraction of a published article.

Reviewers are expected to conduct manuscript evaluations independently and are discouraged from relying on AI tools in the peer-review process. The assessment of scientific work requires critical judgment, subject expertise, and accountability, which cannot be delegated to automated systems. Reviewers bear full responsibility for the accuracy, objectivity, and integrity of their evaluations.

Peer Review Policy and Procedure

The journal follows internationally recognized principles of peer review and publication ethics, including the recommendations of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which both authors’ and reviewers’ identities remain confidential. All communication between authors and reviewers is conducted exclusively through the Editorial Office.

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening to assess compliance with the journal’s scope, ethical requirements, and formatting guidelines. Manuscripts that meet the initial criteria are forwarded to at least two independent experts with appropriate scientific expertise in the relevant field. The standard review period is two to three weeks and may be extended upon request or due to justified circumstances.

After receiving the invitation, reviewers first assess the abstract and confirm their willingness to review the manuscript or decline the invitation. In the case of refusal, an alternative reviewer is appointed within a reasonable timeframe.

Reviewers evaluate the scientific quality, originality, and methodological rigor of the manuscript and complete a standardized Review Form (link to the form), which is retained by the Editorial Office. Reviewers may provide detailed comments and, where necessary, attach annotated files or suggestions for manuscript revision.

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:

• accept the manuscript for publication;
• request revision of the manuscript in accordance with reviewers’ comments;
• reject the manuscript.

If revision is required, authors are normally given two weeks to submit a revised version. In the absence of a response within the specified timeframe, and if no extension has been agreed upon, the manuscript may be withdrawn from consideration. Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated as necessary, and if no further concerns are raised, they are accepted and scheduled for publication in the nearest available issue.

Reviewers are encouraged to notify the Editorial Office of any suspected breaches of academic integrity, including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate publication, or other forms of research misconduct.

Reviewer Selection Criteria

Reviewers are selected based on the following criteria:

Scientific competence

The reviewer must hold an academic degree or demonstrate recognized expertise and active research experience in the relevant field, including recent publications related to the manuscript topic.

Publication activity and academic reputation

The reviewer should have a record of publications in peer-reviewed or indexed journals, participation in research projects, and/or membership in relevant professional associations.

Absence of conflicts of interest

The reviewer must not have any personal, financial, institutional, or professional relationships with the authors or their organizations that could influence the objectivity of the review.

Compliance with ethical standards

The reviewer must adhere to principles of academic integrity, confidentiality, and impartiality in accordance with COPE guidelines and other international best practices.

Independence and objectivity

The reviewer must be able to provide clear, constructive, and evidence-based assessments of the manuscript’s scientific quality, methodology, and originality.

Timeliness of review

The reviewer must agree to complete the review within the timeframe established by the Editorial Office.

Reviewers are required to treat all manuscripts as strictly confidential documents. They must not copy, store, share, or distribute manuscript materials, nor use any information obtained during the review process for personal, academic, or professional advantage.

Procedure for Handling Complaints Regarding Violations of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics

The Editorial Office accepts complaints submitted by research institutions, readers, editors of other journals, and other interested parties. All complaints are handled in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Upon receipt, a complaint is acknowledged by the Editorial Office within three working days, and its initial validity is assessed.

A complaint is considered only if it is submitted through official channels and is not defamatory. If a complaint contains unsubstantiated claims or elements of defamation, the Editorial Office may request additional information, evidence, or clarification. If sufficient supporting information is not provided, the complaint may be dismissed without further consideration.

The duration of the review process ranges from two weeks to three months and depends on the complexity of the case and the timeliness of responses from all involved parties, including authors, institutions, and other stakeholders. Throughout the process, the Editorial Office ensures strict confidentiality of all information related to the investigation of alleged misconduct.

If a complaint concerns a published article and is substantiated, appropriate measures will be taken in accordance with the journal’s policies, including the issuance of corrections, expressions of concern, or retraction of the publication, as applicable.

Complaints regarding published articles should be submitted by email to:  submission.ecpb@gmail.com

Procedure for Retraction of Published Articles

The journal’s policy on the retraction of published articles is based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and may be updated in line with developments in international standards and best practices.

Retraction of published articles is applied in cases of serious violations of academic integrity or publication ethics, including, but not limited to, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, significant methodological errors, duplicate or redundant publication, authorship misconduct, undisclosed conflicts of interest, improper or undisclosed use of artificial intelligence tools, and other forms of research or publication misconduct. The retraction procedure may be initiated by the Editorial Office, authors, reviewers, institutions, or other third parties on the basis of a substantiated request.

The decision to retract an article is made by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the Editorial Board, based on the results of an internal investigation conducted in accordance with COPE recommendations. A standard retraction form developed by the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) is used in the process: https://ease.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/EASE-Standard-Retraction-Form-2023-Ukrainian.pdf.

Authors and other relevant parties may appeal the decision within fourteen days by submitting a written appeal. The appeal is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with an expanded Editorial Board within ten working days. The decision resulting from the appeal process is final.

In the event of retraction, an official retraction notice is published, clearly stating the reasons for the decision. The original article remains accessible in the journal archive and is clearly marked as “Retracted” on all available versions (HTML, PDF, and other formats). Information about the retraction is communicated to relevant indexing and abstracting databases to ensure accurate updating of the publication record.

The Editorial Office reserves the right to restrict future submissions from authors found to have engaged in serious ethical violations and may notify the relevant institutional authorities.

In exceptional cases, partial or full removal of an article may be required due to legal, ethical, or safety considerations, including but not limited to violations of privacy or confidentiality, binding court decisions, or risks to public health or the environment.

Where an article is partially or fully removed, its bibliographic metadata (title, authors, abstract, keywords, references) and a removal notice remain publicly accessible to ensure transparency of the publication record.

Copyright and Licensing Policy

All publications in the journal are distributed by default under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction, and adaptation of the material in any medium and for any purpose, including commercial use, provided that appropriate credit is given.

The following conditions must be observed: proper attribution to the authors must be provided; a link to the original publication in the journal, including its DOI, must be included; a link to the CC BY 4.0 license must be indicated; any changes made to the original work must be clearly identified; and no suggestion may be made that the authors or the journal endorse the use of the work.

The adopted licensing model is consistent with international open access principles, including the requirements of Plan S, and provides a clear legal framework for the reuse of published materials in scientific, educational, and professional contexts.

Copyright in published articles remains with the authors, including both economic and moral rights. At the same time, authors grant the journal a non-exclusive license to publish, distribute, and make the final Version of Record (VoR) openly available.

Authors are also permitted to self-archive their work in institutional or subject repositories by depositing preprints and/or accepted manuscripts (Author Accepted Manuscript, AAM), provided that the manuscript status is clearly indicated and a link to the final published version is included upon publication.

Moral rights, including the right to authorship attribution and the protection of the integrity of the work, remain fully with the authors without limitation.

Archiving and Long-Term Open Access Preservation Policy

The journal is committed to the long-term preservation of published content and the continuous availability of its materials through established digital archiving and preservation practices.

Each published article is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) through Crossref, ensuring a persistent link to the publication, stable long-term access, and integration into the global scholarly communication infrastructure.

Archived journal issues are preserved and made openly accessible via the platform of the V. I. Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine, ensuring reliable state-level digital preservation and sustained public access to published materials.

In addition, the Editorial Office performs regular technical maintenance of the journal website and maintains secure backup copies in the repository of Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University (https://library.dmed.org.ua), thereby ensuring continuity of access and data security.

Authors are encouraged to self-archive their published articles in institutional or subject repositories, as well as on personal or academic platforms, immediately after publication of the corresponding issue, provided that a full citation and link to the official Version of Record are included.