About the Journal
Focus and Scope
The journal Practical Oncology is a Occupational research specialized peer-reviewed publication for oncologists, surgeons and other specialty doctors, devoted to topical issues in the diagnosis and treatment of oncological diseases. The journal publishes original articles, reviews, discussions for practitioners and researchers, which reflect best practices and research results, scientifically and practically modern diagnostic methods and tactics for treating cancer patients.
Peer Review Process
All received articles go through the procedure of reviewing . The tasks of review - promoting strict selection of authors' works for the publication and making the concrete specific recommendations for their improvement. The procedure of the review is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article and the defining the compliance with the requirements of the magazine and this includes a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of article materials.
The independent experts are often involved to enhance the quality of the review process. They represent their conclusion in writing.
The review procedure is anonymous for the reviewer, and for the authors. The main purpose of the review procedure is the removal of the cases of substandard practice of scientific research and to ensure the coordination and compliance the balance of the interests of the authors, the readers, the editorial board, the reviewers and the institution where the study was performed. Reviewers evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of the article, its practical value and scientific significance. In addition, the reviewers determine the matching of the article to the principles of ethics in scientific publications and make recommendations to eliminate their violations.
The reviewers are notified that the manuscript sent to them is the intellectual property of the authors and is reportedly not subject to disclosure. The reviewers forbid to copy provided for the review article or using of the information about the content of the article before its publication. The review takes place with regard to the principles of confidentiality, according to which the information of article (terms of reception, contents, stages and features of the review, review comments and final decision of the publication) is not reported to anyone other except the authors and the reviewers. Violation of this requirement is only possible if there are signs or allegations of inaccuracy, or falsification of article materials.
In the case of receipt of the reviewers any comments on the article, it is returned to the author for revision.
Sent by the author the article after completion is sent for re-review.
The final decision about the publication of the article after the review takes the editor in chief.
The editors reserve the right to reduce and fix the provided articles.
Articles sent to the authors for correction should be returned to the editorial board no later than 10 days after receipt. Returning of the articles in later periods changes the date of its receipt to the office.
Publication frequency: 4 times per year.
№1 - 25-30.04.
№2 - 25-30.06.
№3 - 25-30.10.
№4 - 25-30.12.
Open Access Policy
This Journal is practicing a policy of immediate open access to the published content, supporting the principles of the free flow of scientific information and global exchange of knowledge for the common social progress.
THE BASIC PRINCIPLES:
1. Objectivity and impartiality in the selection of articles for the purpose of the publication.
2. The high demands on the quality of scientific research.
3. Double "blind" review articles.
4. Collegiality in decisions regarding publications.
5. Accessibility and efficiency in dealing with authors.
6. Strict compliance of the copyright and related rights.
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. Revision is guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as take into account the valuable experience in reputable international journals and publishing houses.
THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EDITOR.
The Chief Editor is responsible for deciding on the publication of submitted papers to the journal. This decision is always taken on the basis of the validation work and its relevance to researchers and readers. The Editor in chief can follow the methodological recommendations developed by the editorial board of the publishing house and legal requirements such as the avoidance of libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Also confirming the decision of the chief editor of the publication the chief editor can consult with the members of the Editorial Board or reviewers. He evaluates the intellectual content of the works, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, nationality or political views of the author.
Chief Editor of the journal and the staff should not disclose the information about manuscripts provided to the third parties except for the reviewers, potential reviewers, the editorial board of advisers, and the publisher. The information contained in the article submitted for publication should not be used in any personal work of editor in chief and member of the Editorial Board without the written permission of the author. The confidential information or ideas received by reviewers, should be kept confidential and not be used for the personal gain. The chief editor should give up his participation in the review article in the presence of a conflict of interest in connection with the competition, cooperation, or other relationship with someone of the authors, companies or institutions relevant to the article. The chief editor should require all authors of publications to provide information on the relevant competing interests and publish corrections if the conflict of interest was identified after publication.
When you receive complaints regarding the ethical nature submitted manuscript or published article the chief editor is obliged to take timely measures to resolve the conflict.
THE DUTIES OF THE REVIEWERS.
Reviewing articles is necessary and can help to improve the quality of information presentation. Each selected reviewer who considers himself incompetent to review the scientific study described in the manuscript, must notify the editor and refuse to review this material. Each manuscript received for reviewing must be treated as a confidential document. It should not be discussed with the third parties except the persons authorized by the editor. The reviews should be conducted objectively. The reviewer should express their views clearly, soundly and prevent manifestations of personal claims against the author.
THE DUTIES OF THE AUTHORS.
The authors must guarantee the originality of the work, and using the information or words from other publications that should be properly indicated by reference or referred to in the text. In the case of significant or partly overlap between the manuscript under reviewing and any other known published work the referee must inform the chief editor.
Plagiarism takes many forms, from submitting someone else's work as a copy of yours or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's work without the attribution, as well as the statements about their rights on the results obtained in studies conducted by the others. Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable and unethical behavior in the publication. Providing by the author the same manuscript to more than one publication at the same time is also considered as violation of ethical norms and rules.
The author must declare the presence or absence of a conflict of interests. The conflict of interest declaration is obligatory. The conflict of interest exists (financial relations, service or work in institutions which have a financial or political interest to the materials published, job duties and so on) when any situation can influence the author of the manuscript and cause data concealing or bias or impact data interpreting.
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
If the author finds an error or inaccuracy in his published work, he should notify the chief editor of this publication, and contribute to the refutation or the correction of the article. If the editor in chief is informed of significant errors in the publication by the third party, the author is obliged to make a correction or provide the proof of the accuracy and reliability of his work.
It is unacceptable to copy text and arrogate the study results, which do not belong to the authors of the manuscript submitted.
Authors should ensure that submitted manuscript:
-describes entirely original work;
-is not plagiarized;
-has not been published elsewhere in any language;
-indicates appropriate citation or quotation, if the authors have used the work and/or words of others.
Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement.
The editors reserve the right to screen submitted manuscripts for plagiarism. The plagiarism extend more than 20% is unacceptable.
Informed Consent, Privacy and Confidentiality Statement
Patients and Study Participants: Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published. Authors should disclose to these patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with the journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or laws. The Journal requires that all authors obtain written patient consent and that this be archived by the author and available for inspection for a period of at least three years. A written statement should be included in the manuscript that attests that the authors have obtained and archived written patient consent. Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, authors should provide assurance, and editors should so note, that such alterations do not distort scientific meaning.
Manuscripts that include human subjects must include a statement that written informed consent was obtained. If materials or records derived from humans are included, the statement that approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee was obtained prior to initiation of the study, if it is required by the institution. When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.
The use of laboratory animals must follow the standards established by the NIH Office of Animal Care and Use (OACU ARAC guidelines) and Institute for Laboratory Animal Research as published in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (1996).
Manuscripts will be reviewed with due respect for authors’ and reviewers’ confidentiality. Our editors have been instructed to not disclose information about manuscripts (including their receipt, content, status in the reviewing process, criticism by reviewers, or ultimate fate) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. Manuscripts sent for review are privileged communications. Therefore, reviewers and members of the editorial staff must respect the authors’ rights by not publicly discussing the authors’ work or appropriating their ideas before the manuscript is published. Reviewers may not make copies of the manuscript for their files and will not share it with others, except with the editor’s permission. Reviewers should return or destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting reviews.
Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Information on conflicts of interest received from the authors of manuscripts not available to the reviewers and are available only to the Еditorial Board when deciding about publication of the manuscript. Also information about conflicts of interest is published as part of the full text of the article.
The Reference List Guidelines
|The proper compiling of the references is a very important aspect while preparing a paper and requires particular accuracy.|
The optimal number of citing publications should be 20–30 in original articles and lectures and 40–60 in reviews. It is preferably to cite original papers have been published for the last 5–7 years in foreign journals, oft-cited resources, including Scopus and Web of Science. Try to minimize self-citation or avoid it. Citing the conference proceedings, monographs should be kept to a minimum as well. The references should not include unpublished papers, official documents, manuscripts of master's dissertations, textbooks and manuals.
Additional information on papers DOI, PubMed ID and etc should be given. If fewer than half of resources in the references have DOI index the article cannot be published in the international scientific journal. The resources should be verified. Before compiling the references verify each resource at http://www.crossref.org/guestquery or https://scholar.google.com.ua/
Each resource is numbered and begins a paragraph. Its number in Arabic numerals is located in square brackets in the text.
The authors are listed in order they appear in the article, NOT in alphabetical order. The author is responsible for the adequacy of the data in the references.
Sources of Support
Charitable Foundation "Publishing house Sfera"