Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The editors' responsible approach to support academic reputation, and we are closely following the conformity of published materials to the highest standards.

The editors are guided by the recommendations of editorial associations:

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

World association of medical editors (WAME)

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) 

THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EDITOR

The editor is responsible for what they publish and must ensure that the journal is respected through ethical behavior:

  • Strictly evaluate the work in terms of ethical standards, methodology, clarity, and completeness of presentation of the material;
  • Identify potential conflicts of interest for editors, reviewers, authors and prevent its influence on the decision to publish;
  • Monitor confidentiality and prevent the use of manuscript materials in personal benefits for editors and reviewers;
  • Improve the quality of the journal, choosing for publication the most relevant and interesting articles for readers.
  • Have a tough stance against unlawful actions on the part of authors, reviewers, and editors. Take timely action if you suspect Scientific Misconduct.

THE DUTIES OF THE REVIEWERS

  • The reviewer should critically, but constructively evaluate the manuscript, prepare a comment so that the authors can improve their work.
  • The reviewer evaluates the following parameters: originality of work, importance, design, research methods, statistical methods of processing and presentation of results, graphic elements, the strength of conclusions and overall quality of the manuscript.
  • The reviewer must conclude that the manuscript is suitable for publication and provide it to the editor-in-chief.
  • Evaluate the existence of a potential conflict of interest in relation to the author or the content of the article. If there is a conflict of interest, the reviewer should inform the editor and refuse to review.
  • The reviewer needs to evaluate the manuscript within the agreed time frame (up to 14 days).
  • The reviewer must maintain confidentiality and not disclose to anyone the contents of the article, not use it for personal purposes. The journal uses blind peer review, so the reviewer should not communicate directly with the authors of the article.
  • The reviewer must make an impartial assessment, regardless of the identity of the author, his gender, social status, religion, and nationality.

AUTHORSHIP 

The author is responsible for the information presented in the article. Authorship has important academic, social, and financial implications.

The journal adheres to the recommendations of ICMJE in determining the role and responsibilities of the author. ICMJE recommends authorship based on the following 4 criteria:

  • Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;
  • Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
  • Final approval of the version to be published;
  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

All authors must meet all four criteria of authorship.

Those who do not meet all four criteria, but have helped in the study, should be acknowledged and listed in the confirmation section, indicating the contribution made during the study or writing the article. For example, assistance in obtaining financial support, secretarial assistance, proofreading, administrative support, laboratory assistance and more.

Since acknowledgment may imply endorsement by acknowledged individuals of the data and findings of the study, editors are encouraged to require that the corresponding author obtain written permission for confirmation from all acknowledged individuals.

The corresponding author is the person who is primarily responsible for communicating with the journal in the process of submitting the manuscript, reviewing and publishing, and usually ensures that all administrative requirements of the journal are met. An appropriate author should be available throughout the submission and review process to respond to editorial requests promptly. After publication, it should be available to respond to criticism of the work and respond to any journal inquiries about data or additional information if questions about the work arise after publication.

ETHICAL NORMS FOR THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)

Users of artificial intelligence (AI) are required to openly acknowledge the fact of its use when creating texts, images, program code or other materials. Persons using AI should verify the accuracy of the generated information, especially in cases where errors could cause harm.

It is prohibited to submit AI-generated content as one’s own, unless it has been significantly modified by the author.

It is necessary to adhere to the principles of academic integrity and not use AI to prepare texts submitted as independent scientific works without proper reference or appropriate disclosure of the fact of the use of such tools.

It is prohibited to enter personal, confidential or official data into AI systems without prior depersonalization or without the permission of their owners.

AI should be used as an auxiliary tool that supports critical thinking, creativity and increases work efficiency, and not replace human thinking or the learning process.

Submission of a manuscript to the journal Public Health constitutes authors' agreement to this policy and their obligation to disclose the use of AI tools in the manuscript. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in rejection of the material or retraction of the published article.

RETRACTIONS POLICY

Scientific Misconduct, Expressions of Concern, and Retraction

As defined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Scientific misconduct in research and non-research publications includes:

  • fabricate data;
  • falsification of data, including fraudulent manipulations with images;
  • intentional failure to disclose a conflict of interest;
  • plagiarism.

If any type of scientific misconduct is confirmed post-publication, the questioned article is considered for retraction. The following COPE retraction guideline will be consulted: 

The Journal editors will investigate the retraction case and the editor-in-chief will publish a retraction notice, explaining its reasons. The flawed article will remain in the public domain marked retracted along with the retraction notice.