Publication Ethics

Ethical principles of the activities of the editorial board of the journal "Actual Problems of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Gynecology"

General Provisions

The ethical principles of the editorial board were developed in accordance with the Recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International standards for editors and authors, and the Ethical Code of the Scientist of Ukraine.

The Editorial Board considers monitoring the ethics of the provisions set out in the articles as one of the main aspects of its activity and the peer review process.

The Editorial Board does not accept for publication materials that contain offensive statements, manifestations of aggression or any discrimination, or incite interethnic and racial enmity, violate international legal norms and the current legislation of Ukraine.

The Editorial Board is not responsible for the opinions, judgments, results, and conclusions made by the authors of the articles and printed in the journal. The authors' results do not present the point of view of the Editorial Board.

The Editorial Board of the journal is not responsible to the authors and/or third parties and organizations for possible damage caused by the publication of the article.

Responsibility for the absence of plagiarism or any other unfair use of intellectual property of other authors, as well as for the reliability of information in articles, accuracy of names, surnames, and citations, lies with the authors.

The Editorial Board reserves the possibility to revise the given ethical principles of activity with the aim of their improvement.

Ethical Obligations of the Editorial Board:

  • The Editorial Board bears ethical responsibility for everything published in the journal. Therefore, all materials submitted for publication undergo rigorous selection and peer review. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject an article or return it for revision.

  • The Editorial Board adheres to the principles of fairness and impartiality, makes decisions independent of commercial or other interests, and ensures an honest peer review process within reasonable terms.

  • The Editorial Board may reject a manuscript without peer review if it believes that the work does not align with the editorial policy of the publication, its ethical principles, and requirements for manuscripts.

  • Members of the Editorial Board do not transfer information related to the content of the manuscript under consideration to other persons, except for those involved in the professional assessment of this manuscript.

  • The Editorial Board has the right to remove the electronic version of an article published in the printed version of the journal, provided that a violation of someone's rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics is established. The Editorial Board notifies the author who submitted the article and the organization where the work was performed about the fact of article removal. The Editorial Board also places a notification about the fact of article removal in the next issue of the journal.

  • The Editorial Board/Council allows the distribution in electronic networks of any articles from the journal or extracts from them, but requires a reference to the original source of publication. Publication and/or distribution of journal materials by third parties or organizations on paper and hard electronic media is prohibited.

Ethical Obligations of Authors:

  • Research published in the journal must be conducted in accordance with current legislation and ethical norms. It is necessary to clearly indicate any dangerous manifestations and risks associated with the conducted research.

  • Authors must present their results clearly and unambiguously without falsification or improper data manipulation so that the research results can be verified by other scientists.

  • Authors of articles bear responsibility for the content of articles and for the very fact of their publication; plagiarism as original work is unacceptable; submission of a previously published article for publication is unacceptable.

  • The study may contain scientifically grounded criticism of the work of another researcher. Personal criticism cannot be considered appropriate.

  • Sources of funding and other grounds for the emergence of a conflict of interest must be disclosed. Authors must guarantee the absence of contractual relations or proprietary considerations that could influence the publication of data or results presented in the manuscript.

  • Authors must indicate the sources of information used, including quoted information, and format references to them in accordance with the requirements of the scientific publication.

Ethical Obligations of Reviewers:

  • If the selected reviewer is not sure that their qualification corresponds to the level of research presented in the manuscript, they must immediately return the manuscript.

  • The reviewer must objectively assess the quality of the manuscript, the presented experimental and/or theoretical results, their interpretation and presentation, and also determine to what extent the work corresponds to scientific and literary standards. The reviewer must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.

  • The reviewer must consider the possibility of a conflict of interest in the case when the given manuscript is closely related to the current or published work of the reviewer. If there are doubts, the reviewer must immediately return the manuscript without review, indicating the conflict of interest.

  • The reviewer cannot evaluate a manuscript with the author of which they have personal or professional connections if such relationships can influence the judgment of the manuscript.

  • The reviewer should not show the manuscript provided for review to other persons or discuss it with other colleagues, except in cases where the reviewer requires special consultation.

  • Reviewers must argue their judgments so that members of the editorial board and authors can understand what their remarks are based on.

  • The reviewer must point out any cases of insufficient citation by authors of the works of other scientists, any significant similarity between the given manuscript and any published article or any manuscript simultaneously submitted to another journal.

  • The reviewer must provide a review without unjustified delays.

  • Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in the provided manuscript unless there is the author's consent.