Journal policy

Goals and Objectives

The purpose of the journal is to inform scientists, specialists from related fields of science and practice, teachers of specialized departments about the most important results of fundamental and applied research in the field of pharmacy.

Journal objectives:

• timely publication of results on current and promising areas of research on the subject of the journal;
• improving the level and quality of information exchange between specialists from different regions of the Russian Federation, countries of the near and far abroad;
• expanding the possibilities of dissemination and promotion of publications in the scientific information space in Russia and abroad with indexing of scientific papers in leading foreign citation databases;
• assistance in improving the quality of scientific papers submitted to the editorial board of the journal.
• promote the development of pharmacy as a complex of scientific and practical disciplines studying the problems of creation, safety, research, storage, manufacture, dispensing and marketing of drugs, as well as the search for natural sources of medicinal substances.

Frequency

4 issues per year.

Archiving

• Russian State Library
• National Electronic Information Consortium.

Reviewing

All scientific articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal «Questions of Quality Assurance of Medicines» undergo mandatory double-blind reviewing.

1. The articles are reviewed by members of the editorial board, as well as invited reviewers — leading domestic specialists in the relevant field of medicine. The decision to select a particular reviewer to conduct an examination of the article is made by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief and executive secretary. The review period is from 2 to 4 weeks, at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.
2. The reviewer has the right to refuse to review in the event of an obvious conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of reviewing the manuscript, the reviewer gives recommendations on the future fate of the article (the reviewer’s decision must be substantiated):

• the article is recommended for publication in its current form;
• the article is recommended for publication after the deficiencies noted by the reviewer have been corrected;
• the article requires additional review by another specialist;
• the article cannot be published in the journal.

3. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the article, the editorial board of the journal sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them in a reasoned manner (partially or completely). Revision of the article should not take more than two months from the moment the email was sent to the authors about the need to make changes. The article revised by the author is re-submitted for review.
4. If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must notify the editors in writing or orally of their refusal to revise the article. If the authors do not return the revised version within 3 months from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the authors about the refusal to revise the article, the editors remove it from the register. In such situations, the authors are sent a corresponding notification about the manuscript being withdrawn from registration due to the expiration of the period allotted for revision.
5. If the author and reviewers have irreconcilable disagreements regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to 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.
6. The decision to refuse to publish a manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board will not be accepted for re-consideration. The notification of refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.
7. After the editorial board of the journal has made a decision to accept the article for publication, the editors inform the author about this and indicate the publication dates.
8. The presence of a positive review is not sufficient grounds for publishing 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.
9. The original reviews are stored in the editorial office of the journal for 3 years.
Indexing

Publications in the journal «Questions of Quality Assurance of Medicines» are included in the systems of calculating citation indices of authors and journals. «Citation Index» is a numerical indicator characterizing the significance of a given article and is calculated on the basis of subsequent publications referring to this work.

Ethics of scientific publications

1. Introduction

1.1. Publication of materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only an easy way of scientific communication, but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Therefore, it is important to establish standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Journal Editors, Reviewers, Publisher for the journal «Questions of Quality Assurance of Medicines».

1.2. The publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in this process, but is also responsible for compliance with all current recommendations in the published work.

1.3. The publisher undertakes to strictly supervise the scientific materials. Our journal materials represent an impartial «report» on the development of scientific thought and research, therefore we are also aware of the responsibility for the proper presentation of these materials, especially in terms of the ethical aspects of publications outlined in this document.

2. Responsibilities of Editors

2.1. Publication Decision

The Editor of the scientific journal «Problems of Ensuring the Quality of Medicines» is solely and independently responsible for making the decision to publish. The integrity of the work under consideration and its scientific importance must always underpin the decision to publish. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the Editorial Board of the journal «Problems of Ensuring the Quality of Medicines», while being constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality, and plagiarism.

The Editor may confer with other Editors and Reviewers when making publication decisions.

2.2. Integrity

The Editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, origin, citizenship, or political views of the Authors.

2.3. Confidentiality

The Editor and the Editorial Board of the journal «Questions of Quality Assurance of Medicines» shall not disclose information about an accepted manuscript to anyone other than the Authors, Reviewers, potential Reviewers, other scientific advisors, and the Publisher unless necessary.

2.4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts must not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review that may be beneficial must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

2.4.2 The Editor must recuse himself/herself from considering manuscripts or collaborate with other members of the Editorial Board in considering the work instead of personally reviewing and making decisions in case of conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other interactions and relationships with the Authors, companies, and, possibly, other organizations connected with the manuscript.

2.5. Publication Oversight

An Editor who has provided compelling evidence that the statements or conclusions of a publication are erroneous should notify the Publisher so that corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other appropriate notifications can be made promptly.

2.6. Research Engagement and Collaboration

The Editor, in cooperation with the Publisher, will take appropriate action to respond to ethical complaints about manuscripts or published material that have been reviewed. Such action generally includes communication with the Authors of the manuscript and the rationale for the complaint or claim, but may also include communication with the relevant institutions and research centers.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

3.1. Influencing Editorial Board Decisions

Reviewing assists the Editor in making publication decisions and, through appropriate communication with the Authors, may also assist the Author in improving the quality of the paper. Peer review is an essential part of formal scholarly communication and is at the heart of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who wish to contribute to a publication have a responsibility to perform a substantial review of the manuscript.

3.2. Commitment

Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or who does not have the time to complete the review promptly should notify the Editor of Quality Assurance of Medicines and request to be excused from reviewing the manuscript in question.

3.3. Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. The work must not be shown to or discussed with anyone except as authorized by the Editor.

3.4. Manuscript Requirements and Objectivity

Reviewers should be objective. Personal criticism of the Author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and with supporting arguments.

3.5. Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited in the manuscript. Any statement of an observation, derivation, or argument that has previously been published should be accompanied by an appropriate citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

3.6.1 Unpublished data disclosed in submitted manuscripts 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.

3.6.2. 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 organizations connected to the submitted work.

4.  Author Responsibilities

4.1. Manuscript Requirements

4.1.1. Authors of original papers should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The underlying data must be accurately presented. The paper must contain sufficient detail and references to permit reproduction. False or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Reviews and research articles should also be accurate and objective.

4.2. Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide raw data relevant to a manuscript for review by Editors. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such information (in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement Data and Data bases) where practicable and in any event be prepared to retain such data for an adequate period of time after publication.

4.3. Originality and Plagiarism

4.3.1 Authors should ensure that the work presented is entirely original and, where the work or statements of others have been used, should provide appropriate citations or excerpts.

4.3.2. Plagiarism can take many forms, from passing off another author’s work as your own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s work (without attribution), to claiming the results of another author’s research as your own. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.4. Multiple, Redundant, and Simultaneous Publications

4.4.1. In general, an author should not publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit a previously published article to another journal for consideration.

4.4.3. Publication of certain types of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes ethical under certain conditions. Authors and editors of the journals involved should agree to the secondary publication, provided that the data and interpretations are identical to those in the primary work.

A bibliography of the primary work should be included in the secondary publication.

4.5. Acknowledgment of Sources

The contributions of others must always be acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that have been instrumental in the completion of the reported work. Information obtained privately, such as through conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Information obtained through confidential services, such as manuscript review or grant applications, must not be used without explicit written permission from the Authors of the work involving confidential sources.

4.6. Authorship of the publication

4.6.1. Authorship of the publication should be limited to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are participants in the study who have made a significant contribution to some aspect of the research project, they should be listed as co-authors.

4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all participants who have made a significant contribution to the study are listed as co-authors and that no one who was not involved in the study is listed as co-authors, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and agreed to its submission for publication.

4.7. Risks and Human and Animal Subjects (Section 4.7. for medical publications only)

4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that may involve unusual hazards during use, the author must clearly indicate this in the manuscript.

4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animals or human subjects, the author must ensure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the study were in accordance with the laws and regulations of the research organizations and were approved by the appropriate committees. The manuscript must clearly indicate that informed consent was obtained from all human subjects. The rights of privacy must be respected at all times.

4.8. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or conclusions of the work.

4.8.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, expert testimony, patent applications or registrations, grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.

4.9. Material Errors in Published Works

When an Author discovers a material error or inaccuracy in a published work, the Author should promptly notify the Editor of «Voprosy otnosheniya sredstv» and cooperate with the Editor to retract the work or correct the error. The Author should promptly retract the work or correct the error.

Responsibilities of the Publisher
5.1 The Publisher should maintain policies and procedures to facilitate the exercise of ethical responsibilities by Editors, Reviewers, and Authors of «Voprosy otnosheniya sredstv» in accordance with these requirements. The Publisher should be satisfied that potential profits from advertising or reprints do not influence the Editors’ decisions.

5.2. The Publisher should support the Editors of the journal «Quality Assurance of Medicines» in handling complaints about the ethical aspects of published materials and assist in communication with other journals and/or Publishers if this facilitates the Editors’ performance of their duties.

5.3. The Publisher should promote good research practice and implement industry standards to improve ethical guidelines, retraction procedures and correction of errors.

Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts must not be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author.

Information or ideas obtained through peer review that may be advantageous must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Reviewers should not review manuscripts if they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or interactions with any of the Authors, companies, or other organizations connected to the submitted work.

Pick-ups and Plagiarism

When reviewing an article, the Editorial Board of the journal «Questions of Quality Assurance of Medicines» may check the material using the Antiplagiat system. In case of detection of multiple pick-ups, the editors act in accordance with the COPE rules.

Preprint and Postprint Policy

During the submission process, the author must confirm that the article has not been published or accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When referring to an article published in the journal «Questions of Quality Assurance of Medicines», the publisher asks to place a link (full URL of the material) to the official website of the journal.

Articles previously posted by authors on personal or public websites not related to other publishers are accepted for consideration.