- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Delayed Open Access
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aim and Scope
The main objectives of the journal are to highlight the issues of environmental and residential hygiene, human ecology, hygiene of children and adolescents, radiation hygiene, occupational health, nutrition, and social hygiene. The journal publishes materials on important scientific and practical issues of interest to employees of hygiene and epidemiologic centers and departments of the Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare, acquaints readers with new methods of hygienic research. The Journal publishes materials on the organization and planning of sanitary affairs, scientific foundations of sanitary legislation, training of sanitary doctors, sanitary statistics, on health education and the history of sanitary affairs in our country, the state of hygiene science and sanitary practice abroad. The Journal publishes reports on the work of congresses, conferences, and meetings on sanitary and hygienic issues, on the activities of the Scientific Medical Society of Hygienists, reviews of published monographs, and textbooks on hygiene and sanitation.
The journal is intended for sanitary doctors and hygienists, organizers of sanitary Affairs, employees of hygiene and epidemiology centers and departments of Rospotrebnadzor, employees of research institutes of hygiene, and teaching staff of departments of hygiene of medical institutions.
The journal publishes original articles and literature reviews.
The main categories of the journal are: environmental hygiene, occupational medicine, child and adolescent hygiene, radiation hygiene, food hygiene, preventive toxicology and hygienic rationing, methods of hygienic research, social and hygienic monitoring.
Geography of articles accepted for publication: no restrictions. The journal regularly publishes scientific works of foreign authors from Belarus, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia and Georgia. in recent years, we have published articles from Germany (who regional office for Europe, who European center for environment and health, Bonn), Poland. It is planned to attract more articles by foreign authors, as well as increase the share of joint publications.
Section Policies
Open Submissions
Peer ReviewedPublication Frequency
12 issues per year
Delayed Open Access
The contents of this journal will be available in an open access format 12 month(s) after an issue is published.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
All scientific manuscript submitted to the editorial Board of the journal are reviewed according to the approved procedure described below.
1. The editorial Board of the journal determines the compliance of the manuscript with the journal's profile and design requirements and sends it for the first review to the Executive Secretary, who determines the scientific value of the manuscript and appoints reviewers. The manuscripts are reviewed by members of the editorial Board and the editorial Board and external reviewers considered to be experts in the field, working in areas of research relevant to the topic of the article and having in the last 3 years, publications on peer-reviewed articles. The editor-in-chief's scientific publications are reviewed by external reviewers.
2. Review is conducted confidentially. The editorial Board sends the authors of the submitted materials copies of reviews or a reasoned refusal. Copies of reviews can be sent to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of the corresponding request to the editorial office of the journal.
3. The review period is up to 4 weeks. This period can be increased depending on the situation and at the request of the reviewer.
4. Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review if there is a clear conflict of interest. On the base of results of the considered manuscript, the reviewer makes recommendations about the future of the article (each reviewer's decision is justified): a) the article is recommended for publication in this form; b) the manuscript is recommended for publication, taking into account the correction of shortcomings noted by the reviewer; C) it is recommended to transfer the manuscript for additional review to another specialist; d) the manuscript is not recommended for publication.
5. If the review contains recommendations for correction and revision of the manuscript, the Editor-in-chief of The journal sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the manuscript or to refute them in a reasoned way (partially or completely). The manuscript revised by the author is sent for review again.
6. If the author and a reviewer have irrepressible conflicts concerning an manuscript, the editorial Board may send the article to another reviewer. In conflict situations, the manuscript manuscript can be referred to one of the members of the Editorial Board or Editorial Board Counsil. The final decision in such cases is made by the Editor-in-chief.
7. Authors can propose candidates for potential reviewers for their manuscript.
8. The manuscript can be sent for further reviewing to an expert in medical statistics.
9. A message about a negative review is sent to the author by e-mail.
10. A positive review is not a sufficient reason for publishing a manuscript. The final decision on the expediency of publication is made by the Editorial Board based on the validity of the work and its compliance with the journal's subject matter. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the Editor-in-chief.
11. Reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years.
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org and requirements for peer-reviewed medical journals (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf), elaborated by the Elsevier Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)
1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal)/
1.2. Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programs record «the minutes of science» and we recognize our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication decision – The Editor of a learned “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
2.2. Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2.3. Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
2.5. Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
3.2. Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3. Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4. Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
3.6.2. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1. Reporting standards
4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2. Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3. Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
4.6. Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
4.7.1. 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.
4.7.2. 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.
4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1. 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.
4.8.2. 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 possible stage.
4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support “Gigiena i Sanitaria” (Hygiene and Sanitation, Russian journal) journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. Publisher should provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.
Founder
- Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare
Author fees
Publication in “Hygiene and Sanitation" is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
To avoid cases of violation of publication ethics, conflicts of interest of all parties involved in the process of reviewing and publishing an article should be excluded. A conflict of interest arises when an author, reviewer, or member of the editorial board has financial, scientific, or personal relationships that could influence their actions. Such relationships are called dual obligations or competing interests.
To avoid conflicts of interest in accordance with the adopted ethical standards of the journal, each of the parties is assigned the following responsibilities.
The editorial board of the journal is obliged to:
- if the initially selected reviewer has a conflict of interest with the author of the article under consideration in the journal, transfer the text of the article for examination to another reviewer;
- make a decision on the publication of information specified in the author's letter concerning a conflict of scientific and/or financial interests, if it is not confidential and may influence the assessment of the published work by the reader or the scientific community.
The author must:
- in the cover letter indicate existing and potential sources of conflict of interest or indicate their absence;
- indicate the organization affiliated with the author (one or more) and sources of funding for the study.
The reviewer is obliged to:
- inform the editorial board of the existing conflict of interest;
- refuse to participate in the review of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, and other interactions and relationships with any of the authors, companies, or other organizations associated with the submitted work.
A reviewer has not:
to use in personal research submitted for review unpublished data obtained from manuscripts without the written consent of the author;
to use information or ideas obtained during the review and associated with possible for personal advantages.
Plagiarism detection
“Hygiene and Sanitation" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in “Hygiene and Sanitation", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “Hygiene and Sanitation" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
