Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The Journal Pain. Joints. Spine, an official journal of the Ukrainian Association of Osteoporosis, is a professional scientific-practical specialized peer-reviewed publication for rheumatologists, traumatologists, neurologists, internists, family practitioners, covering issues of pain, current approaches to diagnosis and treatment of diseases of joints and spine.

The journal publishes original articles, reviews, discussions for practitioners and researchers involved in the pathology of the spine and joints. Articles reflect best practices and results of scientific research relating to diseases of the musculoskeletal system.

The journal pays special attention to the problems of osteoporosis.

 

Section Policies

Editor’s Page

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Lead Article

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Problem of This Issue

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Latest Developments

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Evidence-based medicine

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Original Researches

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Discussion Club

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Congresses, Symposiums, Schools

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Reviews

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Practical Medicine

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Practical Guidelines

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Young Scientists

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Clinical Case

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Hot Topic

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

All received articles go through the procedure of Double-blind Review. The tasks of review - promoting a 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 journal 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 can take about 1 month.

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 the substandard practice of scientific research and to ensure the coordination and compliance of 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 its 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 the article (terms of reception, contents, stages, and features of the review, review comments and the 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

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 Platinum Open Access policy. All published content is available immediately. The journal does not charge authors and readers.

We are supporting the principles of the free flow of scientific information and the global exchange of knowledge for the common social progress.

The policy of the journal permits and encourages the publication of the article on the Internet (in an institutional repository or on a personal website) by the authors, because it contributes to productive scientific discussion and a positive effect on efficiency and dynamics of the citation of the article.

 

 

Archiving

The journal archives all materials in the National Library "Scientific Periodicals of Ukraine", the Scientific Electronic Library "CyberLeninka".

 

Editorial policy

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.

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.

 

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 one or more of these misconducts is discovered or suspected, the editors initiate an investigation into Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) recommendations. The editor-in-chief expresses concern and requires a written explanation on this issue from the authors of the article. He also informs the institutions and sponsors involved in the study. Manuscript processing stops for the duration of the investigation. If scientific misconduct is confirmed, the publication is retracted.

If scientific misconduct is discovered after the publication of an article, it is retracted. The editors will require the authors to publish a refutation, and in case of refusal on their part, the editor-in-chief will write a refutation on their own, explaining its reasons. The publication will remain in the public domain with the note “Retracted” and the date of retraction.

Plagiarism is the expression of scientific ideas, results or texts without a correct indication of the source of borrowing. The editors reserve the right to screen submitted manuscripts for plagiarism. 

 

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

By establishing a conflict of interest policy, the journal follows the principles of The World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

A conflict of interest arises when there is a personal interest of the author for any reason to distort the accuracy of the information presented in the article.

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

Having a potential conflict of interest is not in itself an offense. However, hiding it leads to a decrease in confidence in the results of this study and medical journals in general.

Types of potential conflicts of interest, according to WAME:

Financial ties. Receiving financial payment for participating in research or writing a manuscript. Commercial sources of research funding from pharmaceutical companies interested in selling research drugs.

Academic commitments. Participants in the publication process may have strong beliefs that associate them with a specific statement, method or idea. As a result, they may be biased in conducting studies that test accuracy, or in reviewing the work of others that supports or contradicts their beliefs.

Personal relationships. In the process of reviewing the manuscript, having a personal relationship with the author (family, friends, enemies, competitors, etc.) can adversely affect the impartiality of conclusions regarding the work.

Institutional affiliations. A participant in the publication process is directly connected to an institution that is interested in certain results of a study. For example, interested private sponsors fund institutional laboratories, or the institution itself is the official sponsor of the study.

Before you sign a declaration of conflict of interest, examine in detail all its possible types.

The journal may ask additional questions or ask for clarification about the declared conflict of interest or its absence. 

If there is a conflict of interest, the reviewer or editor will be excluded from the publication process. If the editor-in-chief considers the conflict of interests declared by the author to be inadmissible, the manuscript will be rejected. If a conflict of interest is discovered after publication, an investigation of the conflict situation will be conducted, and the journal will publish the results of the investigation as a correction to the article and ask the author to explain in a published letter why the conflict of interests was not disclosed earlier.

 

The Reference List Guidelines

Reference should be given following the National Library of Medicine (NLM) standards.

The proper compiling of the references is a very important aspect while preparing a paper and requires particular accuracy.

Each resource is numbered and begins a paragraph. Its number in Arabic numerals is located in square brackets in the text. The references are listed in the order they appear in the article, NOT in alphabetical order. 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 that 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. The author is responsible for the adequacy of the data in the references.