CONDITIONS OF PUBLICATION'S ETHICS IN
“Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology” JOURNAL
Editorial board of “Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology” journal sticks on international ethic standards for scientific publications and takes all necessary measures for exclusion of improper publications.
All manuscripts addressed for consideration in the journal undergo the review of originality, ethics and scientific significance.
Any income (e.g. from the advertisement, reprints or any other commercial source) does not affect the editorial board’s decision.
The respect for the ethic standards is important for all participants involved in the publication process: authors, editors, reviewers, publishers.
Editorial board duties
1. Acceptance for review
1.1. Accepted manuscript undergoes primary review by external or internal reviewer (editorial board member). Depend of reviewer’s recommendation the manuscript is transferred to editorial board or returned back to the author for correction.
2.1. Editorial board reviews accepted manuscripts and takes a decision about rubrics, scientific areas and the priority of the publications in the journal.
2.1. Editorial board evaluates only the intellectual content of the manuscripts independently from profession, race, gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality or political convictions of the author.
3.1. Editorial stuff and reviewers should not disclose any information about the manuscript, because it is confidential.
4. Informational disclosure and conflict of interests
4.1. Unpublished materials of the addressed manuscripts could not be used by editorial stuff or reviewers for personal matters or for the transfer to third persons.
5. Input to the editorial’s decision
5.1 Reviewers evaluate the urgency and scientific significance of the manuscript and help the author to improve the manuscript.
6.1 The process of the review should take no more that 14 days. If the manuscript could not be reviewed in 14 days, the reviewer should inform the editorial board.
7.1. Reviewed manuscripts should be considered as confidential documents.
8. Objectivity standards
8.1. Manuscripts should be reviewed by the leading specialists in radiology and interventional radiology. Reviewers receive for review the text of the manuscript, figures and tables without the author’s information. Reviewers should express their opinion in clear and argument way.
9. Source confirmation
9.1. Materials published in other journals are not accepted for the review. Previously described methodic, statements and arguments should be confirmed by the reference. Reviewers should inform the editorial board about any similarity or partial coincidence between the reviewed manuscript and previously published material.
10. Informational disclosure and conflict of interests
10.1 Private information or the ideas revealed during the review process should stay confidential and could not be used personally. In case of the conflict of interest (due to concurrent, partner or another type of relationship with published material) reviewer should not review the manuscript.
11. Publication standards
11.1 Authors of the original work should provide the detailed report about this publication and objective discussion of its significance. Main data should be presented documental. Document should provide sufficient amount of details and references. False or deliberately inaccurate statements are unethical and are considered inadmissible.
12. Access to data and safety
12.1. Author should be ready to provide the data related to the publication. Author should keep this data for a reasonable period of time after the publication.
13. Originality and plagiarism
13.1. Author should guaranty the fact that manuscript is an original work. In case of usage of materials or text from co-authors this fact should be mentioned.
14. Multiple, redundant, concurrent publication
14.1 Author should not published materials, describing the result of one work more that once or more that in one journal.
14.2 Addressing the manuscript in more than one journal simultaneously is considered inadmissible
15. Source confirmation
15.1 Authors should cite the publications related to the manuscript.
16.1 Authorship should be restricted to the persons who made significant input to the conception, project, implementation, interpretation of the publication.
16.2. Persons involved in the certain phases of the project should be mentioned as assistance.
16.3. Author should guarantee that only actual authors are included in the authors list and that all co-authors are aware of the publication and approved the final text.
17. Informational disclosure and conflict of interests
17.1. All authors should mention any financial or other conflict of interest that can affect the results and interpretation of the manuscript.
17.2. All financial sources of the project should be mentioned.
18. Errors in publications
18.1. Author should immediately inform the editorial board about any discovered error or inaccuracy in published paper.