- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Peer Review Process
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and Postprint Deposition Policy
- » Human And Animals Rights
- » The policy of exchanging research data
- » Open Access Policy
- » Advertising in journal
- » Informed consent principles
- » The use of large language models (LLM) and other generative neural networks
Aim and Scope
The purpose of the journal is the development of theoretical and applied science in biological and medical specialties through the dissemination of modern scientific knowledge, new technologies and achievements in the field of biology and medicine, integration into the world scientific process, and a qualitative presentation of the achievements of world and Russian science.
The objective of the journal is to publish original articles devoted to practical and theoretical issues in various branches of medicine and biology, clinical, clinical-experimental and biological research, as well as fundamental scientific works, reviews, descriptions of clinical cases and auxiliary materials on all urgent problems of selected branches.
Section Policies
- Loader Loader
- Ольга Павлова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Ольга Павлова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Ольга Павлова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Ольга Павлова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Ольга Павлова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Loader Loader
- Ольга Павлова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Ольга Павлова
- Екатерина Самсонова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Екатерина Самсонова
- Алексей Супильников
- Борис Яремин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
- Ольга Павлова
- Екатерина Самсонова
- Борис Яремин
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
All materials submitted to the journal for publication undergo double-blind peer review (free, independent, and impartial, with confidentiality). Peer review is a process of obtaining recommendations from an expert in the relevant field who is not a member of the journal's editorial board. The journal's editorial board makes a publication decision based on at least two reviews. The publication reviews all submitted materials that match its theme to evaluate them expertly. All reviewers are qualified specialists in the theme of the reviewed materials and have published in the last 3 years on the theme of the reviewed article. Reviews are stored in the publication's editorial office for 5 years. The editorial office sends authors copies of reviews or a motivated refusal. The editorial office sends copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request. The review period is at least 4 weeks. Policy review date: 15.07.2024
Publication Frequency
6 номеров в год
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content based on the following principle: free open access to research results promotes the global exchange of knowledge.
The open access policy corresponds to the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) and means that articles are available in open access on the Internet, allowing all users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or refer to the full texts of these articles, scan them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purposes without financial, legal, or technical barriers, except those inseparable from accessing the Internet itself.
For additional information, refer to the Budapest Declaration.
Policy review date: July 15, 2024.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
The procedure of reviewing the articles sent to the journal "Bulletin of the Institute ReaViz".
All materials for publication, received by the editorial office of the journal, are subject to double blind review (free, independent and impartial, respecting confidentiality). Editorial staff act as reviewers, and if necessary, outside specialized experts are involved.
The materials, subject to review, are sent to the reviewers by the responsible secretary of the journal within 10 working days from the moment of receipt.
Within 7 working days the reviewer gives his opinion about work on the editorial form.
Reviewers on a 5-point scale assess the relevance of the topic, the clarity of the definition of goals and objectives of the study, the validity of the choice of statistical methods and quality of statistical processing, the completeness of the initial characteristics of patients, the correct selection of the control group, the informative presentation of research results, the quality and efficiency of the illustrative material (graphics, drawings), style of presentation of the material, the validity of the conclusions and other characteristics, as well as the expediency of publication in general.
If it is expedient to publish, but there are shortcomings in the work, reviewers indicate possible options for their elimination.
If it is not expedient to publish, the reasons for refusal are briefly explained.
If the editors consider the reviewer's opinion biased, the work is sent for review to another expert.
Review, submitted on paper with the reviewer's signature, is sent to the responsible secretary and can be duplicated on e-mail of the editorial office.
Comments on the work, if any, are sent to the author for elimination. The corrections made are coordinated with the reviewer. In case of refusal of authors to modify materials, they must notify the editorial office in writing or orally about their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return a revised version after 3 months from the date of sending the review, even if there is no information from the authors refusing to improve the article, the editors take it off the record. In such situations, the authors are sent a corresponding notice of the manuscript's withdrawal from the registration due to the expiration of the period of time allotted for revision.
If the author and reviewers have unsolvable contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board may send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.
The decision to refuse to publish the manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of reviewers. An article that is not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board is not accepted for reconsideration. Notification of refusal to publish the manuscript is sent to the author by e-mail.
After the Editorial Board makes a decision on the admission of an article for publication, the Editorial Board shall inform the author about it and indicate the terms of publication.
The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for the publication of the article. The final decision on publication is made by the Editorial Board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
The original reviews are kept by the Editorial Board for 5 years.
Publishing Ethics
The section is based on the materials of Elsevier Publishing House of Scientific and Medical Literature as well as on the materials of the International Publishing Ethics Committee (COPE).
Introduction
1.1 Publication of materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple way of scientific communication, but also contributes significantly to the development of the relevant area of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, Publishers and the Scientific Society for the journal "Herald of the Institute of Reavies".
1.2 The publisher not only supports scientific communications and invests in this process, but is also responsible for compliance with all modern recommendations in the published work.
1.3 The publisher commits itself to strict supervision of scientific materials. Our journal programs provide an unbiased "report" on the development of scientific thought and research, so we are also aware of the responsibility for the proper presentation of these "reports", especially with respect to the ethical aspects of the publications outlined in this document.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Decision on publication
The editor of the scientific journal Vestnik Institute Reaviz is personally and independently responsible for the decision to publish, often in cooperation with the relevant scientific society. The reliability of the work in question and its scientific significance should always be the basis for the publication decision. The editor may be guided by the policy of the Editorial Board of the journal "Herald of the Institute of Revision", being limited by the current legal requirements with regard to libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism.
The Editor may consult with other Editors and Reviewers (or officials of the Scientific Society) during the decision on publication.
2.2. Integrity
The editor should evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the authors.
2.3 Confidentiality
The Editor and the Editorial Board of the journal "Herald of the Institute of Revision" are obliged without necessity to disclose information about the accepted manuscript to all persons, except for the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific consultants and the Publisher.
2.4. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest
2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas derived from peer-reviewed manuscripts and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal benefit.
2.4.2 Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (i.e., request a Co-editor, Associate Editor or cooperate with other members of the Editorial Board in reviewing the work in lieu of personal review and decision making) in case of conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint and other interactions and relationships with the Authors, companies and possibly other organizations related to the manuscript.
2.5. Supervision of publications
The editor who has provided conclusive evidence that the allegations or conclusions presented in the publication are incorrect should inform the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) of this with a view to promptly notifying the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) of changes, withdrawal of the publication, expressions of concern and other relevant statements.
2.6. Research Engagement and Cooperation
The Editor, together with the Publisher (or the Academic Society), shall take adequate measures to respond to ethical complaints regarding the manuscripts reviewed or published materials. Such measures include, in general terms, interaction with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society).
The authors of the manuscript and the reasoning behind the complaint or demand, but may also involve interactions with relevant organizations and research centers.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1 Influence on decisions of the Editorial Board
Reviewing helps the Editor make the decision to publish and through appropriate interaction with the Authors can also help the Author to improve the quality of his work. Reviewing is a necessary link in formal scientific communications and is at the heart of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication must do substantial work on manuscript review.
3.2. Enforcement
Any selected Reviewer who feels he is not qualified enough to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to perform the work quickly should notify the Editor of the journal "Herald of the Institute of Revision" and ask him to be excluded from the process of reviewing the corresponding manuscript.
3.3. confidentiality
Any manuscript obtained for review should be considered a confidential document. This work must not be opened or discussed with anyone not authorized by the Editor.
3.4 Manuscript requirements and objectivity
The reviewer must give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinion clearly and argumentatively.
3.5. Recognition of primary sources
Reviewers should identify significant published works relevant to the topic and not included in the bibliography of the manuscript. Any statement (observation, conclusion or argument) previously published should be referenced in the manuscript with the appropriate bibliography. The reviewer should also draw the Editor's attention to the discovery of significant similarity or coincidence between the manuscript in question and any other published work within the scientific competence of the reviewer.
3.6. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest
3.6.1 Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas derived from peer-reviewed manuscripts and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal benefit.
3.6.2 Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in case there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations related to the submitted work.
4. responsibilities of the authors
4.1 Requirements for manuscripts
4.1.1 The authors of a report on the original study should provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the study. The data underlying the work must be presented accurately. The paper should contain sufficient detail and bibliographic references for possible replication. False or knowingly erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
4.1.2 Reviews and scientific articles must also be accurate and objective, and the Editorial point of view must be clearly stated.
4.2 Access to and storage of data
Raw data relating to the manuscript may be requested from the authors for review by Editors. The authors should be ready to provide open access to this kind of information (according to ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if possible, and in any case be ready to save this data for an adequate period of time after publication.
4.3 Originality and plagiarism
4.3.1 Authors must ensure that the original work is presented in its entirety and, if other Authors' work or statements are used, must provide appropriate bibliographic references or excerpts.
4.3.2 Plagiarism may exist in many forms, from representing someone else's work as an author's work to copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else's work (without attribution) to claiming their own rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable.
4.4. Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications
4.4.1 In general, the author should not publish a manuscript, mostly devoted to the same research, in more than one journal as an original publication. Presenting the same manuscript in more than one journal at the same time is considered unethical and unacceptable.
4.4.2 In general, the author should not submit a previously published article to another journal for consideration.
4.4.3 Publication of a certain type of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translation articles) in more than one journal is in some cases ethical under certain conditions. The authors and editors of interested journals shall agree to a secondary publication that necessarily presents the same data and interpretations as the originally published paper.
The bibliography of the original work should be presented in the second publication as well. More detailed information on permissible forms of secondary (re-published) publications can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.5. Recognition of primary sources
You should always recognize the contribution of others. Authors should refer to publications that are relevant to the work submitted. Data obtained privately, such as through interviews, correspondence or discussions with third parties, should not be used or presented without the clear written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as manuscript evaluations or grants, should not be used without the clear written permission of the authors of a work that is relevant to confidential sources.
4.6. Authorship of publication
4.6.1 The authors of the publication may only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the design, development, execution, or interpretation of the presented research. All persons who have made a significant contribution should be identified as co-authors. Where research participants have made a significant contribution in a particular area of the research project, they should be identified as having made a significant contribution to that research project.
4.6.2 The author must ensure that all participants who made significant contributions to the research are identified as co-authors and that those who did not participate in the research are not identified as co-authors, that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the work, and that they have agreed to submit it for publication.
4.7. Risks as well as People and Animals that are the objects of the research
4.7.1 If the work involves the use of chemical products, procedures or equipment that may present any unusual risk, the author should make this clear in the manuscript.
4.7.2 If the work involves animals or people as objects of research, the authors must ensure that the manuscript states that all stages of the research comply with the laws and regulations of research organizations, and are approved by relevant committees. The manuscript should clearly state that
It is reflected that informed consent has been obtained from all people who have become the objects of research. Privacy rights must always be safeguarded.
4.8. Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest
4.8.1 All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that may be perceived to have affected the results or conclusions presented in the work.
4.8.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest that are required to be disclosed include employment, consulting, stock ownership, fees, expert opinion, patent application or registration, grants and other financial support. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.
4.9 Significant errors in published works
In case the Author finds any significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author should inform the Editor of the "Institute Revision Herald" and interact with the Editor to remove the publication or correct errors as soon as possible. If the Editor or Publishing House has received information from a third party that the publication contains material errors, the Author shall remove the work or correct the errors as soon as possible.
5. Duties of the Publishing House
5.1 The Publisher shall follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the ethical duties of Editors,
Reviewers and Authors of the journal "Herald of the Institute ReaViz" in accordance with these requirements. The Publisher should be sure that the potential profit from advertising or reprint production did not affect the Editors' decisions.
5.2 The Publisher shall support the Editors of the Revision Institute Herald in reviewing claims to ethical aspects of published material and shall assist in interacting with other journals and/or Publishers if this facilitates the Editors' duties.
5.3 The Publisher shall promote good research practices and implement industry standards to improve ethical guidelines, seizure and correction procedures.
5.4 The Publisher shall provide appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice) when necessary.
Founder
- Private institution educational organization of higher education "Medical University "ReaViz"
Author fees
Publication in the journal is free for authors. The editors may charge for additional services in the preparation of article materials.
It is possible to pay for services on the payment gate of the Reaviz University website on the Internet (scroll the page to the "Online payment through the site" section, in the first field indicate the name of the responsible author, as the contract number - the ID of the work in the editorial system, in the drop-down list - "for editorial services").
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.
Plagiarism detection
“Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)" 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 Deposition Policy
The editorial board of the “Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)" allows authors to post the manuscript as a preprint before submission for review and to archive independently their articles in disciplinary and institutional repositories.
Preprints
The editorial board of the “Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)" encourages uploading preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as 'a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.'
A preprint publication shall not be considered duplicate publication nor shall it influence the editor's decision to publish it in the “Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)".
The author must notify the editorial board of the “Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)" about the posted preprint at submission of the manuscript for review, furnishing a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and the dissemination terms and conditions.
It is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published manuscript in the preprint record. The link must contain the DOI and the URL of the article published on the journal's website. The original preprint should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint should not be replaced with the text of the published article.
Do not delete the preprint text.
Manuscripts Accepted for Publication
The editorial board of the “Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)" allows manuscripts that have been reviewed and are accepted for publication to be archived independently.
This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.
The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information about the planned publication.
Example: The ARTICLE TITLE has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in 2021 (3) of the “Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)".
Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.
Final Versions of Manuscripts
The editorial board of the “Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH)" allows manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and ready for publication (proofread and typeset) to be archived independently.
This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.
Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.
Human And Animals Rights
All research must be conducted in accordance with relevant ethical standards. If there are suspicions that a study was conducted in violation of ethical standards, editors will follow the policy of misconduct and may reject the manuscript and/or contact the authors' institution or ethics committee. In rare cases, if the editor is seriously concerned about the ethics of the research, the manuscript may be rejected on ethical grounds, even if approval was obtained from an ethics committee.Research involving human participants, human material, or human data must be conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and must be approved by the relevant ethics committee. A statement with a detailed description of this, including the name of the ethics committee and reference number where necessary, must be present in all manuscripts reporting such research. If the research was granted an exemption from ethical approval, this must also be detailed in the manuscript (including the name of the ethics committee granting the exemption). Additional information and documentation supporting this must be available to editors upon request. Manuscripts may be rejected if the editor believes that the research was not conducted in accordance with proper ethical principles. In rare cases, editors may contact the ethics committee for additional information.If the research was not submitted to an ethics committee before its commencement, retrospective ethical approval usually cannot be obtained, and it may be impossible to consider the manuscript for review. What to do in such cases is at the discretion of the editor.Authors reporting the use of a new procedure or instrument in clinical settings, such as a technical advancement or case description, must provide a clear justification in the manuscript for why the new procedure or instrument was deemed more suitable than standard clinical practice to meet the clinical needs of the patient. Such justification is not required if the new procedure has already been approved for clinical use in the authors' institution. It is expected that authors will obtain ethics committee approval and informed patient consent for any experimental use of a new procedure or instrument when the clear clinical benefit, based on clinical necessity, was not obvious before treatment.
Policy review date: July 15, 2024.
The policy of exchanging research data
Ensuring Access to Research Data
The journal "Bulletin of the Medical Institute 'REAVIZ: Rehabilitation, Doctor, and Health'" encourages authors to provide access to research data supporting the content of their publications, but it is not mandatory. The authors' consent to provide access to research data does not affect the decision to publish.
Definition of Research Data
Research data includes any factual materials recorded on any medium used in the research process, in digital or non-digital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio and video files, documents, maps, processed and/or unprocessed data. This policy applies to research data that may be required to verify the validity of research results presented in articles published in the journal.ExceptionsThis policy does not apply to research data that is not necessary to verify the validity of research results.
Confidential Data
Information that cannot be disclosed may be shared in the following ways: placed in data repositories with limited access; anonymized beforehand. The author may also provide public access to metadata of research data and/or a description of how to access them upon request from other scientists.
Data Storage
The preferred method of data sharing is through data repositories. If you need help choosing a repository for data placement, refer to the list of repositories on the website: https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/.
Citing Data
The editorial board of the journal "Bulletin of the Medical Institute 'REAVIZ: Rehabilitation, Doctor, and Health'" welcomes the provision of access to research data under Creative Commons licenses. The editorial board does not insist on the mandatory use of Creative Commons licenses when data is placed in third-party repositories. The publisher of the journal "Bulletin of the Medical Institute 'REAVIZ: Rehabilitation, Doctor, and Health'" does not claim ownership of research data provided by the author along with the article.Letters with questions about compliance with this policy can be sent to the responsible secretary of the journal "Bulletin of the Medical Institute 'REAVIZ: Rehabilitation, Doctor, and Health'".
Policy review date: July 15, 2024.
Open Access Policy
The journal "Bulletin of the Medical Institute 'REAVIZ: Rehabilitation, Doctor, and Health'" provides immediate open access to its content based on the principle that free open access to research results promotes the global exchange of knowledge. The open access policy corresponds to the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) and means that articles are available in open access on the Internet, allowing all users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or refer to the full texts of these articles, scan them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purposes without financial, legal, or technical barriers, except those inseparable from accessing the Internet itself.For additional information, refer to the Budapest Declaration (https://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/).
Policy review date: July 15, 2024.
Advertising in journal
The text is based on the Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals by WAME.
Many scientific journals receive income from advertising or reprints, which almost always involves a potential conflict of interest. Editorial decisions should not depend on the cost of advertising or reprinting. The functions of the editor and advertising manager in the journal should be separated. Advertisers and sponsors should not have control over editorial decisions, regardless of the terms of advertising or other agreements.The journal "Bulletin of the Medical Institute 'REAVIZ: Rehabilitation, Doctor, and Health'" does not publish commissioned articles of an advertising nature.Reprints should be published only in the form in which they were originally published in the journal (including subsequent corrections), and therefore should not contain additions or changes.The content of special supplementary issues (if any) should be regulated only by the editor's decisions, and should not be influenced by sponsors or advertisers.Limits on the volume of advertising materials in the journal should be described and included in the journal's policy. If articles in supplementary issues undergo expert evaluation different from the standard procedure adopted in the journal, this should be reflected on the journal's website.Journals should have an official advertising policy, which should be accessible to all participants in the editorial and publishing process. Briefly: all advertisements should clearly identify the advertiser and the product or service being offered. In advertisements for medicinal products, the full name of each active ingredient should be specified.Commercial advertising should not be placed next to any editorial article or article discussing the advertised product, and should not contain links to the issue of the journal in which it is placed.Advertising content should be distinguishable from editorial and other materials so that the difference between them is obvious.Advertising should not be misleading or deceptive. Advertising should not exaggerate the real characteristics of the advertised product. Advertising should not contain offensive religious, racial, or ethnic considerations.Advertised products should be oriented towards medical practice, medical education, or medical care.The journal should have the right to refuse to publish any advertisement for any reason. The decision to publish an advertisement should be made only with the participation of the editor and the editorial board of the journal.
Policy review date: July 15, 2024.
Informed consent principles
The journal "Bulletin of the Medical Institute 'REAVIZ: Rehabilitation, Doctor, and Health'" is based on the principles of the World Medical Association (WMA) - the Helsinki Declaration - a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human participation. The journal strives to ensure compliance with ethical standards and data collection standards for research involving human participation. Before starting the research, researchers must familiarize themselves with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration on voluntary informed consent and conduct research in strict accordance with these principles, as stated below (Articles 25-32 of the Helsinki Declaration):
1. Participation of individuals capable of giving informed consent in medical research must be voluntary. Although it may be advisable to consult with family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent can be included in the research if they do not freely consent.
2. In medical research involving human participation, each potential subject must be adequately informed about the purposes, methods, sources of funding, any potential conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, expected benefits, and potential risks of the research, as well as any other relevant aspects of the research. The potential subject must be informed of their right to refuse participation in the research or withdraw their consent at any time without reprisal. Special attention must be paid to the specific informational needs of individual potential subjects and the methods of conveying information.
3. After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or other appropriately qualified individual must then request the freely given informed consent of the potential subject, preferably in writing. If consent cannot be expressed in writing, oral consent must be formally documented and witnessed.
4. All medical subjects must be provided with the option to be informed about the general results and results of the research.
5. When requesting informed consent for participation in research, the physician must be particularly cautious when the potential subject is dependent on the physician or may give consent under duress. In such situations, informed consent must be requested by an appropriately qualified individual who is fully independent of this dependency.
6. For potential research subjects who are unable to give informed consent, the physician must request informed consent from their legal representative. These individuals must not be included in research that does not have the potential to benefit them, unless it is intended to improve the health of the group represented by the potential subject, and if the research cannot be conducted with individuals capable of giving informed consent, and if the research involves minimal risk and burden.
7. When a potential research subject who is considered unable to give informed consent can give consent to participate in the research, the physician must request this consent in addition to the consent of the legal representative. The consent of the potential subject must be respected.
8. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally unable to give consent, such as unconscious patients, may be conducted only if the physical or mental state that prevents informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the study group. In such circumstances, the physician must request informed consent from the legal representative. If there is no such representative and if the research cannot be delayed, the research may be conducted without informed consent, provided that the specific reasons for including subjects with a condition that makes them unable to give informed consent were stated in the research protocol and the research was approved by the research ethics committee. Consent for continued participation in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or legal representative.
9. The physician must fully inform the patient about those aspects of their treatment that are related to the research. The patient's refusal to participate in the research or decision to withdraw from the research must never negatively affect the relationship between the physician and patient.
10. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must request informed consent for its collection, storage, and/or reuse. There may be exceptions where consent will be impossible or impractical to obtain for such research. In such situations, the research may be conducted only after review and approval by the research ethics committee.
The use of large language models (LLM) and other generative neural networks
Large Language Models (LLMs) are a computational technology, a subtype of deep learning models, that process and generate text in human language. LLMs are trained on vast amounts of text data, such as books, articles, and websites, and contain billions of parameters.
Key characteristics of LLMs:
1. Training on large datasets: LLMs are trained on vast amounts of text data, allowing them to understand language and generate texts similar to human ones.
2. Billions of parameters: LLMs contain billions of weight coefficients, enabling them to process and understand complex language structures.
3. Flexibility and universality: LLMs can perform various tasks, such as answering questions, summarizing documents, language translations, and generating sentences.
4. Use of embeddings: LLMs use multidimensional vectors (embeddings) to represent words, allowing them to recognize relationships between words.
Large language models are powerful tools for processing and generating texts in human language, which can be useful in various fields, such as content creation and virtual assistants. Almost all scientific journals, including ours, have faced submissions of "works" created entirely or partially using LLMs. Detecting such use is not always an easy task.
The journal prohibits the submission of works whose text or images were generated using LLMs or other generative neural networks. As there is no universal detection tool for such creation, the responsibility for implementing this rule lies with the authors of the work. The use of neural network services for grammar checking, auto-correction of words, and other text editing tools, as well as image enhancement (upscaling, color restoration), is permitted, but the service used and its purpose must be indicated. All machine translations must be read and verified by human authors. A neural network cannot be a co-author of a work. Authors are also responsible for complying with the copyright laws of neural network service creators if the generated content has licensing restrictions.
Policy updated on July 15, 2024.
