Preview

User

Not a user? Register with this site Forgot your password?

MD-Onco

Advanced search

Editorial Policies

Aim and Scope

Editorial policy was updated on 25.07.2024

The main objective of the МD-onco journal is publication of up-to-date information on clinical, experimental and basic scientific research, diagnosis and treatment of oncological diseases, as well as supportive materials on all current problems associated with the scope of the journal.

The purpose of the journal is to inform doctors in various fields who provide consulting and treatment care for patients with oncological diseases on current advancements in this area including the newest methods of diagnosis and treatment of solid tumors, as well as malignant disorders of the blood. The journal is an interdisciplinary scientific publication and brings together doctors of various specialties: oncologists, surgeons, radiologists, anesthesiologists, hematologists, clinical pharmacologists, pathologists, molecular biologists et al. to create integrated interdisciplinary approach to therapy with the goal of improved treatment effectiveness for patients with oncological diseases.

 

Section Policies

EVENTS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
MEDICAL AND GENETIC CONSULTATION IN ONCOLOGIST’S PRACTICE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INFORMATION FOR AUTHORS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
QUALITY OF LIFE AND OUTPATIENT OBSERVATION OF ONCOHEMATOLOGICAL PATIENTS -

QUALITY OF LIFE AND OUTPATIENT OBSERVATION OF ONCOHEMATOLOGICAL PATIENTS

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
RARE COMPLICATIONS AND COMPLEX CLINICAL SITUATIONS: DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT SELECTION -

RARE COMPLICATIONS AND COMPLEX CLINICAL SITUATIONS: DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT SELECTION

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
SUPPORTING THERAPY ASPECTS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
THEORETICAL AND DISCUSSIBLE ASPECTS IN ONCOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
DIAGNOSTIC CAPABILITIES
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
CONFERENCE REVIEW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
NEWS AND EVENTS OF SCIENTIFIC LIFE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Publication Frequency

The MD-Onco journal is published 4 times a year

 

Open Access Policy

This is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

For more information please read BOAI statement.

 

Archiving

  • Russian State Library (RSL)
  • National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

 

Peer-Review

The policy is approved by the Editor-in-Chief, M.M. Davydov

The Editorial Board of МD-onco journal adheres to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when working with manuscripts, reviewers, and organizing the review process.

The rejection rate of manuscripts in the Journal corresponds to approximately 25% of the incoming papers.

  1. Review type

All manuscripts submitted to МD-onco journal undergo mandatory double-blind peer review. This means that neither the author nor the reviewer knows each other’s names or affiliations, and all correspondence is conducted through the editor of the journal. Each manuscript is sent to at least two experts.

  1. Review period

The review process in МD-onco journal takes from 1 to 6 months on average. This period includes the initial consideration of the manuscript, selection of reviewers, preparation of the review, revision by the author, re-review, and engagement of additional experts if needed.

  1. Review process

The decision on the choice of reviewer for МD-onco journal is made by the editor.

Each article is sent to at least two experts. If different opinions are received about the manuscript, a third expert may be involved.

The editor of МD-onco journal can convey one of the following decisions to the author regarding the manuscript:

- Accept for publication. In this case, the manuscript will be included in one of the regular issues of the journal and passed to the editor for further processing. The author will be notified of the publication date.

- Accept for publication after addressing the reviewer’s comments. The author will be asked to make the changes suggested by the reviewer within a week. If the deficiencies are addressed or a justified refusal to make changes is provided, the manuscript is accepted for publication.

- Accept for publication after addressing the reviewer’s comments and re-review. The author will be asked to make the changes suggested by the reviewer within two weeks. The manuscript will be re-reviewed. The author will receive the final decision on the manuscript within 30 days.

- Reject. The author will be sent a reasoned refusal for publication. A rejection does not prohibit authors from submitting manuscripts to the МD-onco journal in the future, but if the publication is rejected due to gross violations by the author, the Editor-in-Chief may decide to blacklist the author, in which case other articles by this author will not be considered.

МD-onco journal provides for three rounds of review. This means that after the first decision for revision, the author has two attempts to make changes according to the reviewer’s recommendations or provide a justified refusal. If after the third round of review the expert still has comments, the journal editor will suggest the author consider publishing in another journal or resubmit the article with the necessary changes in six months.

If the author does not plan to revise the article, they should notify the journal’s editorial office. Work on the article will be terminated.

If the author has a conflict of interest with an expert who might become a reviewer of the manuscript, they must notify the journal’s editor. The editorial office of МD-onco  journal will select another reviewer if necessary.

During the manuscript review process, a conflict may arise between the author and the reviewer. In this case, the editor of МD-onco  journal has the right to appoint a new reviewer and involve the Editor-in-Chief to resolve disputes.

Articles by the Editor-in-Chief, their deputy, executive secretary, and members of the Editorial Board may be published in МD-onco journal, but there must be no abuse of office. Manuscripts of the journal’s staff are sent for double-blind peer review to external experts only. External experts are involved to resolve contradictions and conflict situations. In case of a conflict regarding the fate of the Editor-in-Chief’s manuscript, the final decision on the possibility of publication is made by the members of the Editorial Board.

When publishing articles by members of the Editorial Board/Council, the Editor-in-Chief, and their deputy, the “Conflict of Interest” section includes information about their affiliation with the journal.

МD-onco  journal does not exempt manuscripts from peer review regardless of the authors’ status.

Copies of reviews are kept in the editorial office for at least 5 years.

  1. Composition of reviewers

All submitted manuscripts are reviewed by external experts with experience in the relevant subject area and publications on the topic of the reviewed manuscript within the last 3 years.

If the article’s topic is very narrow and/or the author declares a potential conflict of interest with external reviewers, members of the Editorial Board and/or Editorial Council may be involved in the review.

  1. Principles of reviewer selection and editorial measures to ensure high-quality expertise

The editorial office of МD-onco journal regularly works to attract recognized experts in the field of supportive therapy in oncology and timely rotation of reviewers.

Reviewers are invited to work with the journal upon recommendation by the Editor-in-Chief, their deputy, and members of the Editorial Board/Council, as well as authors.

The Responsible Editor of the journal regularly monitors publications on the journal’s topics in databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and RSCI and sends collaboration invitations to the authors of these publications.

The first review of new reviewers is evaluated based on the following criteria:

  1. Did the reviewer comment on the importance of the issue raised in the study?
  2. Did the reviewer comment on the originality of the manuscript?
  3. Did the reviewer identify the strengths and weaknesses of the study (study design, data collection, and analysis)?
  4. Did the reviewer provide useful comments regarding the language and structure of the article, tables, and figures?
  5. Were the reviewer’s comments constructive?
  6. Did the reviewer present arguments using examples from the article to justify their comments?
  7. Did the reviewer comment on the author’s interpretation of the results?
  8. The overall quality of the review.

Each item can be rated from 1 to 5 points, where 1 is the minimum score and 5 is the maximum.

If the quality of the review does not satisfy the editors, collaboration with the reviewer will be terminated.

The editors of МD-onco  journal have the right to evaluate an unlimited number of reviews by all experts involved with the journal.

  1. Mechanism for engaging reviewers

The editors of МD-onco journal consider peer review one of the most important procedures in working on the journal and value the experience and time of experts involved in the review process.

Reviewers of МD-onco  journal are given the right to priority publication.

The names and affiliations of the reviewers are published on the journal’s website in open access without indicating which articles they reviewed.

  1. Confidentiality

The editorial office of МD-onco  journal does not disclose the personal data of reviewers and authors.

Any manuscript is considered by the editorial office as a confidential document. The editorial office expects that reviewers will not disclose or discuss the texts of manuscripts with third parties without the editor’s consent.

Reviewers may involve third parties in the review process only with the editor’s consent.

  1. Reviewer responsibilities

By agreeing to review manuscripts for МD-onco  journal, the reviewer agrees to follow the journal’s policy in assessing the manuscript, preparing the review, and adhering to reviewer behavior and ethical requirements.

The reviewer must strive to ensure the high quality of the materials published in МD-onco  journal and therefore should only review a manuscript if they have sufficient expertise in the field and enough time for a thorough and comprehensive review of the article.

The reviewer is obliged to inform the editor of any conflict of interest (personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious) if it exists. In case of doubt, the situation should be discussed with the editor.

The reviewer must refuse to review if:

  • They are a supervisor or subordinate of the author of the manuscript, as well as a holder of joint grants;
  • They do not plan to prepare a review and only want to familiarize themselves with the text of the article;
  • They are preparing their own article on a similar topic;
  • They are reviewing an article on a similar topic.

The reviewer must notify the editor of their intention to review the article and complete the work within the specified time frame. If a review cannot be conducted for several reasons, it is advisable to recommend another expert to the editor.

The reviewer may not use their status for personal purposes and impose references to their own work on the authors.

All materials received from the journal editor are strictly confidential. The reviewer should not transfer materials to third parties or involve other specialists in the review process without the consent of the editor of МD-onco journal.

 

Recommendations for reviewers

For the convenience of the reviewer, the Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal suggests using a quick review form. It reflects the questions, the answers to which are necessary for the editor to make a decision about the article.

The Editorial Board of the journal asks the reviewer to pay more attention to the “Comments” section to help the authors improve the current and subsequent works.

Content and structure of the review

The recommendations of the National Electronic Information Consortium (NEICON) were used to create the section. The Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal received permission from NEICON to use methodological recommendations in the journal’s review policy.

Ten criteria by which the manuscript should be evaluated:

  • Originality
  • Logical rigor
  • Statistical rigor
  • Clarity and conciseness of writing style
  • Theoretical significance
  • Reliable results
  • Relevance to contemporary research areas
  • Reproducibility of results
  • Literature coverage
  • Application of results

In addition to the quick review form, the Editorial Board of МD-onco journal recommends that reviewers adhere to the following structure of the review:

  1. Comments for the editor

Conflict of interest: Describes a real or potential conflict of interest related to the content of the manuscript or its authors, which may lead to biased conclusions.

Confidential comments: This section is intended for comments that will not be passed on to the authors. It includes the reviewer’s final decision on the fate of the manuscript, the reviewer’s assumptions, expression of doubts regarding possible ethics violations, as well as recommendations and accompanying comments (for example, the reviewer may advise the editor to request additional information from the author).

Proposed decision: Usually, a brief conclusion about the fate of the manuscript (accept for publication, accept for publication after minor revisions, accept for publication after significant revisions, reject, reject and invite the author to resubmit the paper for reconsideration).

  1. Comments for the Authors

Introduction: Describes the main findings and the value of the article to readers.

Main Comments: Describes the relevance to the goals and objectives of the journal, the level of reliability, and ethical behavior.

Special Comments: The reviewer assesses the sections of the article (abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion) or comments on specific pages, paragraphs, or lines.

Recommendations to the Author: The reviewer provides recommendations to the author to improve the quality of the manuscript and possibly future research.

Concluding Comment: A brief description of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript without any additional recommendations.

  1. Evaluation Criteria of the Manuscript

3.1. Compliance with the Subject Area: No time should be spent reviewing irrelevant manuscripts, regardless of their quality. It is necessary, first of all, to determine whether the manuscript corresponds to the subject area of the scientific journal and the interests of its audience.

3.2. Justification: Does the work meet all the necessary requirements in terms of research design, scientific methods, structure and content, as well as the depth of analysis? Does it adhere to the principles of impartial scientific research, are the research results reproducible? Has the study sample been properly compiled? Has it been analyzed in sufficient detail to generalize the research results?

3.3. Novelty: Has the conducted research contributed anything new to the relevant subject area?

3.4. Ethics: Does the study meet the requirements of originality, has it been approved by an expert council (if required), is it impartial in terms of conflict of interest? Regardless of the presumed significance of the manuscript, it cannot be published in case of redundancy, plagiarism, or violation of basic ethical principles of scientific research: legality, benefit, and respect for people.

  1. Assessment of manuscript elements

4.1. Title: Does the title accurately reflect the content of the manuscript? Will the title attract readers’ attention?

4.2. Abstract: Is the content of the manuscript properly outlined in the abstract (is the abstract structured, does it provide a description of the goals, methods, results, and significance)?

4.3. Introduction: Is the introduction concise? Is the research goal clearly defined and the problem defined? Does the author justify the relevance and significance of the research based on the literature review? If yes, does this part meet the volume requirements? Does the author provide definitions of terms used in the manuscript? If the manuscript is submitted to the “Original Research” section, does it contain a clearly formulated hypothesis?

4.4. Literature Review: How comprehensive is the literature review?

4.5. Methods: Can another researcher reproduce the research results using the proposed methods, or are the methods unclear? Do the authors justify their choice when describing the research methods (for example, the choice of visualization methods, analytical tools, or statistical methods)? If the authors propose a hypothesis, have they developed methods that allow for a reasoned verification of the hypothesis? How is the research design presented? How does the data analysis help achieve the stated goal?

4.6. Results: Are the results clearly explained? Does the order of presenting the results correspond to the order of describing the methods? Are the results justified and expected or unexpected? Are there results that are not preceded by a corresponding description in the “Methods” section? How accurate is the presentation of the results?

4.7. Discussion: Is the discussion brief? If not, how can it be shortened? If a hypothesis was stated, do the authors report whether it was confirmed or refuted? If the hypothesis was not confirmed, do the authors report whether a response to the research question was provided? Do the authors’ conclusions correspond to the results obtained during the research? If unexpected results were obtained, do the authors analyze them properly? What potential contribution does the research make to the industry and global science?

4.8. Conclusions: Do the authors note the limitations of the study? Are there additional limitations to note? What is the authors’ opinion on these limitations? What are the authors’ views on the direction of future research?

4.9. Reference list: Does the reference list comply with the journal’s format? Are there bibliographic errors in the reference list? Are references to articles from the reference list in the text of the article correct? Are there important works that are not mentioned but should be noted? Are there more references in the article than necessary? Are the cited references relevant?

4.10. Tables: If the article contains tables, do they properly describe the results? Should one or more tables be added to the article? Are the data presented in the tables processed appropriately and facilitate the perception of information rather than complicate it?

4.11. Figures: Are tables and figures a suitable choice for addressing the research question? Can the results be illustrated differently? Do the figures and graphs reliably show important results? Do the figures and graphs need to be modified for a more accurate and clear presentation of the results? Do the captions for the figures and graphs allow understanding the information without referring to the manuscript itself?

4.12. Disclosure of conflict of interest: Is the information on funding and conflict of interest clearly stated?

  1. Reviewer’s Final Decision
  2. Review Editing
  3. Acknowledgments to Reviewers

 

Publishing Ethics

The policy is approved by the Editor-in-Chief  M.M.Davydov

Policy was updated on 25.07.2024.

  1. Authorship, authors’ contributions, acknowledgments

1.1. Authorship

МD-onco journal adheres to the authorship criteria developed and described in the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE):

  • Substantial contribution to the conception or design of the study, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data;
  • Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it 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.

In addition to responsibility for the parts of the work they personally performed, authors should be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific components of the work. All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors.

Individuals who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgments” section.

1.2. Authors’ contributions and non-author contributors

In the “Acknowledgments” section, individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria may be mentioned, for example, those who provided support to the research, acted as mentors, assisted with data collection, or coordinated the study, among others.

To determine contributions correctly, authors of the journal МD-onco  may use one of the schemes recommended by COPE:

  • General Guidelines for Authorship Contributions;
  • CRediT – Contributor Roles Taxonomy.

1.3. Responsibility

Responsibility for adhering to authorship and author contributions standards lies with the editors of МD-onco journal. Authors must provide transparent and accurate information about the authors of the article and individuals who made a substantial contribution to its preparation.

If the manuscript is submitted to МD-onco journal by the Editor-in-Chief, their deputy, Editorial Board member, or Editorial Council member, manuscript review is conducted only by external experts.

To properly determine the contribution to the preparation of the article, use the following resources:

  • https://www.apa.org/science/leadership/students/authorship-determination-scorecard.pdf
  • https://www.apa.org/science/leadership/students/authorship-tie-breaker-scorecard.pdf

1.4. Authorship Statement

The editorial board of МD-onco journal requires that authors provide a signed statement of authorship along with the manuscript, signed by all co-authors.

By signing the statement, authors guarantee:

  • Each author who signs the statement meets the authorship criteria outlined in the ethical policy of МD-onco journal.
  • All individuals who contributed to the research but are not authors are listed in the “Acknowledgments” section.
  • The contribution of each author is described, and this information will be published in МD-onco journal.
  • Authors take responsibility for the accuracy of the information provided.

Upon receiving the article, the editor checks for author information and all necessary documents. In the absence of an authorship statement or signatures of all authors, the article is not considered for review.

1.5. Disputes

In case of disputes about authorship, work on the article is suspended regardless of its stage (review, peer review, editing, or preparation for publication). All co-authors are informed by email of any disputes regarding authorship.

The editor of МD-onco journal has the right to specify a precise deadline within which authors may provide explanations on the issues raised. After this deadline, the article is withdrawn from publication with an appropriate explanation. If the article was published as Online First, explanations for its withdrawal from publication are made publicly available.

If a dispute arises regarding a published article, the editor of МD-onco journal publishes a correction, refutation, or retracts the article, stating the reason for the changes to the published document.

If it is necessary to add or exclude a co-author before or after publication, the editorial board of МD-onco  journal acts in accordance with COPE rules:

  • https://publicationethics.org/files/authorship-a-addition-before-publication-cope-lowchart.pdf
  • https://publicationethics.org/node/34601.

To prevent authorship manipulation, the editorial board of МD-onco journal uses COPE flowcharts and pays attention to the following when working with an article:

  • Indication that the study was funded by organizations whose authors are absent from the general list. This requires a more thorough examination of the contribution of all authors and, if necessary, requests for explanations from the responsible author;
  • Scientists from another scientific field are listed as authors. This may indicate guest authorship;
  • Mentioning an individual in the “Acknowledgments” section without specifying their specific contribution;
  • Very long or very short author lists, which are uncharacteristic of the scientific field or type of article;
  • Incomplete description of authors’ contributions: for example, lack of information about who prepared the manuscript draft or processed the data;
  • Plagiarism checks revealing borrowing from a dissertation by an author not listed in the author list;
  • Articles on similar topics published by other author groups;
  • Sudden changes in the list of authors during the publication stage without prior discussion with the journal’s editorial board;
  • An author has a significant number of publications, although their position does not imply such publication activity (department head, institute director);
  • The corresponding author cannot respond to reviewer comments.

The Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal expects organizations affiliated with the author to be willing to participate in investigations of authorship disputes.

  1. Complaints and appeals

The Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal pays close attention to complaints about the behavior of editors and reviewers, which may involve issues such as confidentiality breaches, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unauthorized use of confidential information obtained during the peer review process, or disagreements with decisions regarding expressions of doubt about specific articles or complaints about editorial processes.

All complaints can be sent to the email editor@elpub.ru and will be considered in the usual order. The complaint review process takes no more than 7 days. The individual who submitted the complaint will receive information about the decision, the measures to be taken, and the timeline for their implementation.

When reviewing complaints, the editorial board follows COPE guidelines in each of the following cases:

  • Handling post-publication criticism;
  • Post-publication discussions and making changes;
  • Suspicion of review manipulation after publication;
  • Manipulations with images in the published article;
  • Fabrication of data in the published article.
  1. Conflict of interest

This section is prepared following the recommendations of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

A conflict of interest occurs when individuals have conflicting or competing interests that could influence editorial decisions and the interpretation of data in an article. Conflicts of interest can be potential, perceived, or actual. Objectivity can be affected by personal, political, financial, scientific, or religious factors.

Conflicts of interest may encompass the following areas:

  • Financial: This conflict arises when a participant in the publication process has received or expects to receive money (or other financial benefits such as patents or shares), gifts, or services that could influence work related to a specific publication. Examples include payment for research, consultation fees, and speaking fees.
  • Personal relationships: This conflict arises in the case of personal relationships with family, friends, competitors, or former colleagues.
  • Political and religious beliefs: Commitment to a particular religion or political party can influence the outcome of reviewing an article that analyzes these issues.
  • Institutional affiliation: This conflict arises when someone involved in the publication process is directly associated with an organization interested in the publication.

The Editorial Board of МD-onco journal may ask authors additional questions or request additional information if necessary.

Conflicts of interest may involve authors, reviewers, and editors. The following policy provisions are based on the recommendations of the ICMJE.

3.1. Responsibilities of authors in disclosing conflicts of interest

When authors submit a manuscript of any type or format, they are required to disclose all relationships and activities that could influence or be perceived as influencing their work. Authors must inform the editor of any real or potential conflict of interest by including this information in the relevant section of the article. If there is no conflict of interest, authors should also state this. An example formulation is: “The author declares no conflict of interest.”

3.2. Responsibilities of reviewers in disclosing conflicts of interest

Reviewers must inform editors of any conflict of interest that may affect their opinion of the manuscript, and they should recuse themselves from reviewing if there are grounds for bias. Reviewers should not use information from the reviewed work for their own benefit until it is published.

3.3. Responsibilities of editors in disclosing conflicts of interest

Editors making final decisions on manuscripts should recuse themselves from editorial decisions when there is a conflict of interest or relationships that could create potential conflicts related to the articles under consideration. Other editorial staff involved in editorial decisions must inform editors of their current interests (as they may influence editorial decisions) and recuse themselves from decision-making in case of a conflict of interest. Editorial staff must not use information obtained during manuscript handling for personal purposes. Editors should regularly publish reports on potential conflicts of interest related to their activities and those of the journal staff. Guest editors must follow these same procedures.

In articles by the journal’s Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor, Editorial Board members, and Editorial Council members, the connection with МD-onco  journal should be clearly indicated.

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is found in an unpublished article, the Editorial Board of МD-onco journal acts according to COPE guidelines. If an undisclosed conflict of interest is found in a published article, the editorial board of МD-onco journal acts according to COPE guidelines.

  1. Data reuse and reproduction

This section of the policy is based on COPE guidelines regarding data handling.

Authors’ access to research data supporting their publication content is encouraged but not mandatory. Authors’ consent to provide access to research data does not influence the publication decision.

4.1. Definition of research data

Research data includes any factual material recorded on any medium used in the process of obtaining research results, whether digital or non-digital. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio and video files, documents, maps, processed and/or raw data. This policy applies to research data required to verify the validity of research results presented in articles published by МD-onco journal. Research data includes information directly obtained by authors (primary data) and data from other sources analyzed by authors during the research (secondary data).

4.2. Definition of exceptions

This policy does not apply to research data not required to verify the validity of results presented in published articles. Information on data not subject to disclosure can be shared as follows: placed in restricted-access data repositories; anonymized beforehand. Authors can also publicly provide only metadata of the research data and/or descriptions of how to access them upon request by other researchers.

4.3. Data storage

The preferred method of data sharing is using data repositories. If assistance is needed in selecting a repository for data placement, refer to the repository list at https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/.

4.4. Data citation

The Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal encourages access to research data under Creative Commons licenses. The Editorial Board does not require mandatory use of open licenses when data is placed in third-party repositories. The Publisher of МD-onco journal does not claim ownership of research data provided by authors with the article.

Questions regarding compliance with this policy can be sent to the Executive Secretary of МD-onco journal.

  1. Ethical Oversight

МD-onco journal aligns with COPE’s view that publication ethics encompasses not only ensuring the integrity and reliability of published research but also ethical conduct regarding research subjects. This category includes vulnerable populations, laboratory animals, humans (in relevant studies), confidential data, and business/marketing practices.

5.1. Informed consent/consent to publication

МD-onco journal requires informed consent/consent to publication for any research in which an individual or group of individuals can be identified. This consent form is also necessary when the study mentions deceased individuals. Consent must be obtained when publishing clinical cases, photographs, X-rays, etc.

Authors must provide the journal with a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained from the patient or their representative. The published article will contain information about obtaining such consent.

The information that must be included in the informed consent includes:

  • The patient’s name and signature;
  • If the patient cannot sign the consent personally, it must be indicated who is signing the consent and their relationship to the patient;
  • If one person signs consent on behalf of a family or group, this person must confirm that all family members or group participants were informed;
  • It must be stated that the individual or group has no legal, intellectual, or physical impediments to giving consent for publication. If such reasons exist, they must be indicated (e.g., minor children, low intellectual ability, disability, death);
  • The person obtaining the informed consent must be authorized to do so;
  • It must be stated that anonymity cannot be guaranteed even if all rules are followed;
  • It must be stated that the patient can withdraw consent at any time, but not after the article is published;
  • The dissemination method of the article (in print, online) must be indicated;
  • It must be indicated that the patient saw the final version of the manuscript. If this did not occur, it must be stated that the patient or representative gave consent without reviewing the final version of the article.

5.2. Vulnerable populations

Vulnerable populations include (but are not limited to) those unable to protect their interests: pregnant women, newborns, children, fetuses, prisoners, people with disabilities, people with intellectual impairments, economically disadvantaged, critically ill patients, etc.

Research involving vulnerable populations should only be planned if these groups will benefit from it. A concern is that not all research participants may fully understand the research conditions. If informed consent cannot be obtained directly from the participant, a legal representative must sign it. Special care should be taken in research involving children.

МD-onco journal supports COPE’s statement on publishing research involving vulnerable populations. Authors must obtain informed consent for publication and report it to the journal.

5.3. Ethical conduct of research using animals

In experimental animal research, authors must provide information on compliance with institutional and national standards for the use of laboratory animals. For precise and accurate information on animal studies, the journal recommends using the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) standards. These standards will enhance the quality and reliability of published articles and allow other researchers to reproduce the results.

Before a manuscript is accepted for publication, authors must:

  • Confirm in a submission statement that legal and ethical requirements were met regarding the humane treatment of animals described in the study;
  • Indicate in the “Materials and Methods” section the approval by an ethics review committee and the adopted international, national, and institutional bioethics guidelines.

The editorial board reserves the right to reject a manuscript based on ethical considerations or animal welfare if:

  • The manuscript does not meet the above requirements;
  • The study involves unnecessary pain, stress, suffering, or prolonged harm to animals.

5.4. Research involving humans

МD-onco journal follows the WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and strives to ensure compliance with ethical standards and data collection rules for research involving humans. Before starting research, the researcher must familiarize themselves with the informed consent provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki and conduct the study in strict accordance with the principles outlined below (provisions of the Declaration of Helsinki 25–32 are provided). When presenting the results of experimental human studies, authors must indicate whether the procedures followed the ethical standards set out in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the study was conducted without considering the Declaration’s principles, authors must justify the chosen research approach and ensure that the ethical committee of the organization where the research was conducted approved the chosen approach.

“25. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he or she freely agrees.

  1. In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of the right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as to the methods used to deliver the information.

After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.

All medical research subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.

  1. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study the physician must be particularly cautious if the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
  2. For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails only minimal risk and minimal burden.
  3. When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject’s dissent should be respected.
  4. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorized representative.
  5. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient’s decision to withdraw from the study must never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
  6. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptional situations where consent would be impossible or impracticable to obtain for such research. In such situations the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee.

5.5. Human rights statement

When presenting experimental research results involving humans, authors must indicate whether the procedures complied with the ethical standards outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the research was conducted without following these principles, authors must justify their approach and guarantee that the ethical committee of the institution where the research was conducted approved it.”

  1. Working with confidential data

The right to privacy for individuals or organizations involved in research is of paramount importance and should not be violated without their informed consent. Authors must take all necessary precautions to protect the information about research participants. If necessary, authors should take measures to minimize any potential physical and psychological harm to the research participants.

  1. Post-publication discussions and amendments to published articles

In some cases, it is necessary to make changes to an already published article. The Editorial Board of МD-onco journal supports the practice of making changes to published materials and, if necessary, acts in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Any necessary changes are accompanied by a post-publication notification, which will always be linked to the original version of the article so that readers can get information about all necessary changes. The Editorial Board of МD-onco journal uses expressions of concern, corrections, or retractions of articles. The goal of this practice is to ensure the integrity of scientific materials.

All corrections, expressions of concern, and retraction notices are publicly accessible.

7.1. What Should Authors Do If They Find an Error in Their Article?

Authors may discover a technical or substantive error after the publication of the article. In this case, the authors should notify The Editorial Board of МD-onco journal as soon as possible, especially if the errors could affect the interpretation of the results or raise doubts about the reliability of the information. The corresponding author is responsible for reaching a consensus within the author team on further interaction with the Editorial Board.

If you believe that changes need to be made to the published article, please contact us by email at info@abvpress.ru

7.2. Algorithm for Making Changes to an Article

7.2.1. Correction

Corrections are made to an article if it is necessary to correct an error or add missing information, and this does not affect the integrity and scientific significance of the article. Corrections can be made, for example, to a figure caption, to add information about the funding of the research, or to clarify information about conflicts of interest.

In the event of such changes, a separate correction notice is published. The general action algorithm is as follows:

  • The correction is made to the original version of the article.
  • The Crossmark record is updated.
  • A description of the change is added to the “Abstract” field of the original version of the article.
  • A correction notice is published, containing information about the original version of the article, as well as links to it, the names of the authors, and a description of the correction.

Notices of spelling mistakes, typos, and other minor changes are not published separately. The website states that corrections have been made to the article (without detailing).

7.2.2. Retraction of an Article

The Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal decides on the need to retract an article in the following cases:

  • When there is clear evidence that the results are unreliable for various reasons: there are serious errors in the calculations, the data are fabricated, or there has been manipulation of images.
  • Plagiarism is detected in the article.
  • The results have already been published earlier in other journals, and the author has not justified the need for re-publication and has not informed the editor about this.
  • The article contains materials and data for which permission to use has not been obtained.
  • Copyright has been violated or another serious legal problem has arisen (e.g., confidentiality has been breached).
  • The ethics of conducting research have been violated.
  • The peer review process was compromised.
  • The author did not disclose a conflict of interest that, in the editor’s opinion, could have influenced the reviewer’s or editor’s decision to publish the article.

The Editorial Board of МD-onco journal acts according to the following algorithm when a retraction is necessary:

  • Conduct an investigation and ensure that retraction is necessary.
  • Prepare a retraction notice: include the label “Article Retraction” and the title of the article, describe the reason for the retraction, indicate on whose initiative it is conducted, and provide a link to the retracted article.
  • Publish the retraction notice.
  • Replace the original version of the retracted article, noting in the pdf file that the article has been retracted.
  • Notify databases of the retraction.
  • Transfer the information about the retraction to the retracted articles database.

The Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal works with retracted articles according to COPE regulations.

7.2.3. Expression of concern

The Editorial Board of МD-onco  journal issues an expression of concern if there are serious concerns about the published article, but the investigation has not yielded any proof, or for some reason, an investigation will not be conducted or cannot be completed in a timely manner. In this case, it is necessary to notify readers about the situation as soon as possible.

After the investigation is completed, changes may be made to the article, or it may be retracted.

7.2.4. Removal of an article

Articles are removed from МD-onco journal only in extreme cases, when it is impossible to follow the protocol for making changes, retracting an article, or expressing concern.

An article may be removed in the following cases:

  • If the distribution of the article may pose a serious risk.
  • If the article contains content that violates the right to privacy of a research participant.
  • If the article violates rights.
  • If the article is subject to removal by court order.

In the event of the removal of an article, all materials are removed from the journal’s website, requests are sent to databases to delete the full text, and a notice of the article’s removal is posted.

  1. Updates and post-publication discussions of articles

8.1. Supplementing a published article

An author may need to supplement an article some time after its publication. In this case, the Editorial Board of МD-onco may publish a supplement to the article. Supplements to the article are necessarily reviewed by the journal editors and may be sent for peer review.

When a supplement is published, the file with the original version of the article is updated, and a notice of the supplement is additionally placed in the current issue of the journal, including information about the article, its authors, the nature of the changes, and a link to the article.

8.2. Commenting on a Published Article

Comments are short materials in which an opinion or observation about a published article can be expressed. Comments are sent to reviewers and the authors of the article so that they have the opportunity to prepare a response to the comment.

The authors’ response is also sent to the reviewer. The author of the comment will have the opportunity to reply to the authors once more, after which the correspondence between the author of the comment and the authors of the article can continue privately.

The decision to publish comments is made by the editor of МD-onco journal. Comments, responses, and replies are linked to the original version of the article to which they relate.

  1. Responsibilities of the journal’s management: Editorial Board, editors, publisher, and founder

9.1. Principles of forming the Editorial Board

The Editorial Board of МD-onco journal is formed based on the COPE principles. Potential members of the Editorial Board/Council can be recommended to the Editor-in-Chief by current members of the Editorial Board/Council, reviewers, and authors.

Editors wishing to participate in the work of the journal as members of the Editorial Board/Council can apply to the Editor-in-Chief.

All potential members of the Editorial Board/Council must agree to the following conditions:

  • A member of the Editorial Board/Council of МD-onco  journal cannot be an editor holding the same position in more than one other journal.
  • A member of the Editorial Board/Council of МD-onco journal cannot be an editor invited to work on a special issue for another journal.
  • A member of the Editorial Board/Council of МD-onco journal cannot be an editor who is simultaneously the Editor-in-Chief of another journal.
  • A member of the Editorial Board/Council of МD-onco journal cannot be an editor responsible for making final decisions about manuscript publications in another journal.
  • All potential members of the Editorial Board/Council must be willing to provide the Editorial Board of МD-onco journal with information about all potential and actual conflicts of interest (e.g., any involvement in publishing scientific journals and books, membership in the editorial boards/councils of other journals, and any conflicts of interest that may arise after their appointment).

9.2. Duties of a member of the Editorial Board/Council

  • Publishing one article per year to support the journal.
  • Reviewing incoming manuscripts within their area of expertise and in the absence of external reviewers. Each member of the Editorial Board/Council reviews no more than two manuscripts per year. Reviews must be conducted in accordance with the established Peer Review Policy of the МD-onco  journal.
  • Selecting reviewers for incoming articles at the request of the executive secretary, monitoring the peer review process for incoming articles.
  • Deciding on the possibility of publishing an article after all rounds of peer review. Decisions are communicated to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision on the publication.
  • Inviting authors and reviewers to collaborate with the journal.

A member of the Editorial Board/Council can be dismissed for the following reasons:

  • Violation of publication ethics: concealing a conflict of interest, using information or status for personal purposes.
  • Failure to perform duties for a year without a valid reason and without coordinating with the Editor-in-Chief.
  • At the member’s own request.

9.3. Privileges of a member of the Editorial Board/Council

  • Articles by members of the Editorial Board/Council of МD-onco y journal are given priority consideration.
  • Members of the Editorial Board/Council of МD-onco journal are exempt from editorial service fees.
  • A member of the Editorial Board/Council can participate for free in events organized by МD-onco journal and the founding organization.
  • A member of the Editorial Board/Council can serve as a guest editor for a special issue of МD-onco  journal.
  • Information about a member of the Editorial Board/Council is posted on the journal’s website with necessary links to profiles in databases, affiliations, and other necessary data.

The participation of potential candidates for the role of a member of the Editorial Board/Council is considered at regular meetings of the Editorial Board/Council.

The final decision on including a potential candidate in the Editorial Board/Council is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

9.4. Responsibilities of the editor

The editor of МD-onco scientific journal personally and independently is responsible for deciding whether to publish an article. The final decision to publish is made by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.

The editor of МD-onco journal adheres to the journal’s policy when reviewing an article and making a decision on its publication.

The editor may discuss the article and reviewer comments with other editors and reviewers if justified and lawful, without using the discussed materials for personal purposes.

The editor of МD-onco journal must evaluate the content of the manuscript regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, or political preferences.

The editor of МD-onco journal must maintain confidentiality and not disclose manuscript information to third parties (except other journal editors, reviewers, the publisher, and the founder) unnecessarily.

The editor of МD-onco  journal must report all conflict situations and the discovery of critical errors or accusations of authors or reviewers violating publication ethics to the Editor-in-Chief, so that necessary actions can be taken: making changes, publishing retractions, retracting articles, expressing concerns.

The editor of МD-onco journal participates in the investigation of any ethical violations concerning manuscripts under review and published articles, making every effort to resolve conflicts as quickly as possible. If necessary, the editor of МD-onco journal cooperates with the author’s organization for a more thorough investigation.

9.5. Responsibilities of the Publisher

The publisher of МD-onco  journal is responsible for adhering to all modern recommendations and requirements for maintaining the integrity of the scientific materials published in the journal.

The publisher follows the journal’s policy on compensation for manuscript preparation and publication, as well as revenue from advertising and reprints. The publisher of МD-onco  journal does not allow potential revenue from advertising and reprints to influence the editors’ decisions on manuscript publication.

The publisher of МD-onco   journal does not interfere in editorial processes, but if necessary and at the editors’ request, can participate in the investigation of publication ethics violations and send official requests to scientific and educational organizations and other publishers on behalf of the journal.

The publisher of МD-onco journal must implement industry standards in the publishing process to improve the ethical aspect of the journal’s work.

The publisher of МD-onco  journal must provide comprehensive legal support to the journal’s editorial board when necessary.

9.6. Responsibilities of the Founder

The founder of МD-onco journal adheres to the principle of editorial independence: the director of the founding organization and its employees do not interfere in the editorial process.

The founder of МD-onco journal may recommend potential members of the Editorial Board/editorial Council, reviewers, and authors, but the final decision on their cooperation is made only by the Editor-in-Chief.

The founder of МD-onco journal supports the need for geographical and gender diversity among members of the editorial board/editorial council, reviewers, and authors.

The founder of МD-onco journal does not place financial and political gain above the quality of the journal. Editors of МD-onco  journal make decisions on manuscript publication based on their quality and interest for the journal’s target audience.

The founder of МD-onco journal does not interfere in editorial processes, but if necessary and at the editors’ request, can participate in the investigation of publication ethics violations and send official requests to scientific and educational organizations and other publishers on behalf of the journal.

 

Founder

  • M.M. Davydov

 

Publication Fee

Publication in the journal is free for authors. The editorial board does not charge authors for the preparation, placement, and printing of materials.

 

Disclosure policy and conflicts of interest

Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review cannot be used in personal research without the author’s written consent. Information or ideas obtained during the review process, which may provide advantages, must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or other organizations associated with the work.

 

Borrowing and plagiarism

The publication of works containing text, ideas, and/or data plagiarism is prohibited. Authors must submit entirely original works for publication. References to the results of other authors’ work must be accompanied by citations of the appropriate sources, and previously published text must be quoted directly with the primary source clearly indicated.

The editorial board of the journal checks submitted articles using “Antiplagiat” and Google Scholar systems. If unauthorized text and graphic elements are detected, or if the text originality is low, the editorial board has the right to require authors to make corrections or reject the publication.

Plagiarism detection is also carried out within the framework of open scientific peer review and post-publication review by readers. If unauthorized borrowings are found, the editorial board acts in accordance with COPE rules. An article containing plagiarism may be retracted even after publication.

 

Preprint and postprint Policy

The editorial board of the МD-onco 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 МD-onco  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 МD-onco .

The author must notify the editorial board of the МD-onco 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 МD-onco 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 МD-onco

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 МD-onco  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.

 

Revenue Sources

The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints, article processment charges.

 

Sources of Income and Advertising Policy of the Journal

The journal derives its income from the following sources: reprints, organizational support, and advertising.

Decisions made by the editors of the journal are not influenced by the cost of advertising or reprint printing. The roles of the editor and the advertising manager are separate within the journal. Advertisers and sponsors do not control editorial decisions regardless of the terms of advertising placement or other agreements.

Reprints are published only in the form in which they were originally published in the journal (including subsequent corrections).

The content of special supplementary issues is regulated solely by the editor’s decisions, without influence from sponsors or advertisers.

Each issue of the journal includes no more than three advertising materials. Articles in additional issues of МD-onco journal which underwent expert evaluation differing from the standard one are indicated on the journal’s website.

All advertising publications are labeled with the identification of the advertiser and the promoted product or service. Advertisements for pharmaceutical products include the full name of each active ingredient.

Commercial advertisements are not placed adjacent to any editorial article or an article discussing the advertised product, nor do they contain references to the issue of the journal in which they are placed.

Advertising content is distinguished from editorial and other materials so that the difference between them is evident.

Advertisements in МD-onco  journal must not deceive or mislead. They should not exaggerate the actual characteristics of the advertised product. Advertisements must not contain offensive considerations of a religious or racial nature.

Products advertised in the journal are targeted towards medical practice, medical education, or healthcare provision.

МD-onco journal reserves the right to refuse the placement of any advertising message for any reason. The decision to publish an advertisement is made only with the participation of the editor and the Editorial Board of the journal.

For cooperation and advertising placement inquiries, please contact project manager Anna Donskikh at a.donskih@abvpress.ru.

 

Article Retraction

According to the rules of the Council on Ethics of Scientific Publications of Association of Science Editors and Publishers, the grounds for article retraction are:

  • detection of plagiarism in the article;
  • detection of falsifications (for example, manipulation of experimental data);
  • detection of serious errors that cast doubt on scientific value of the article;
  • incorrect list of authors;
  • duplication of the article in several journals;
  • republishing the article without the author’s consent;
  • concealment of conflict of interest and other violations of publication ethics;
  • the fact that the article hasn’t been peer reviewed.

After the decision to retract the article is made, the chief editor informs its authors, indicating the reason and date of retraction. The article remains on the journal’s site as part of the corresponding journal issue, but is marked “retracted” with the retraction date (the mark is placed on top of the text of the article and in the table of contents); in addition, a message about retraction is placed in the news section of the site, and the chief editor sends information about the article retraction to all online libraries and databases in which the journal is indexed.

 

Data Sharing Policy

Authors are encouraged to make the research data that support their publications available but are not required to do so. The decision to publish will not be affected by whether or not authors share their research data.

  1. Definition of research data

This policy applies to the research data that would be required to verify the results of research reported in articles published in the journal МD-onco  Research data include data produced by the authors (“primary data”) and data from other sources that are analysed by authors in their study (“secondary data”). Research data includes any recorded factual material that are used to produce the results in digital and non-digital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio, documents, video, maps, raw and/or processed data.

  1. Definition of exceptions

The data that is not a subject to public disclosure may be delivered as follows: deposited in science data repositories with limited access or preliminary anonymised. An author can also publicly deliver metadata only and/or description of the method of access to the data under requests from other scholars.

  1. Data repositories

The preferred mechanism for sharing research data is via data repositories. Please see or https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/ for help finding research data repositories.

  1. Data citation

The Editorial Board of the Journal МD-onco welcomes access to data under Creative Commons Licenses. Editorial Board of the Journal  МD-onco  does not insist on the obligatory use of Creative Commons in case when the data is deposited in the repositories of the third party. The Publisher of the Journal  МD-onco does not assert any copyrights for the data submitted by the author together with the article.  

Questions regarding the observation of that policy shall be sent to the executive secretary of the Journal  МD-onco



Research Institute of Carcinogenesis
Floor 3, Bld. 15, 24 Kashirskoye Shosse, Moscow, 115478
tel.: +7 (495) 526 60 60
e-mail: m.davydov@mcclinics.ru

Processing of personal data
supported by NEICON (Elpub lab)