- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Data Sharing Policy
- » Retracted Articles
Aim and Scope
The main goal of the "Russian Journal of Parasitology" is to provide the public with and disseminate advanced scientific research in the field of parasitology.
The main objectives of the journal are: generalization of scientific and practical research, professional development of specialists, coverage of current global problems in the field of parasitology in both fundamental and applied aspects.
The “Russian Journal of Parasitology” is intended for the veterinary, biological, medical and agronomic community in Russia, CIS countries and Far Abroad as the only publication in the country on veterinary parasitology and phytohelminthology.
The journal accepts original articles and reviews for publication.
The author's team of the journal is represented by scientists of research institutes, scientific and pedagogical staff members of educational institutions of higher professional education and specialists in the field of parasitology.
The “Russian Journal of Parasitology” unites a wide audience of parasitologists working in different areas and representing all regions of Russia (from Vladivostok to Murmansk), countries near and far abroad.
The journal addresses current and challenging global issues in parasitology, covering a geographically wide range of research (Russia, Slovakia, Poland, UAE, etc.).
Section Policies
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
4 issues per year
Open Access Policy
"Russian Journal of Parasitologу" 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
All scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial staff of «Russian Journal of Parasitology» undergo mandatory bilateral anonymous ("blind") peer review (the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers and receive comments signed by the editor-in-chief).
- Scientific papers are peer-reviewed by members of the editorial board and invited reviewers who are leading experts in the corresponding area in Russia and other countries. All reviewers are recognized experts in areas of peer-reviewed materials, and have publications in the subject area of the peer-reviewed article over the past 3 years. The editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief and scientific editor decide on the choice of a particular reviewer for evaluation of a scientific paper. The review process is 2-4 weeks, but the reviewer may request for its extension.
- Each paper is sent to 2 reviewers.
- Each reviewer may abnegate the assessment should any express conflict of interest arise that may affect the perception or interpretation of the manuscript materials. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer presents recommendations on the outcome of the paper (each decision of the reviewer is substantiated):
- to accept the paper in its present state;
- to recommend the paper for publication after addressing specific concerns observed by the reviewer;
- that the paper needs further reviewing by another specialist;
- that the paper cannot be published in the Journal. - If the reviewer has recommended any corrections or refinements, the editorial staff of the Journal would send a text of the review to the author and suggest the author either to implement the corrections or refinements in preparing a new revision, or to dispute them reasonably in whole or in part. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 2 months from sending an email message to them that changes are needed, and to resubmit their adapted manuscript for peer-review.
- We politely request that the editor staff to be notified by authors verbally or in writing of their refusal from publishing the manuscript should they decide to refuse any adaptation. In case authors fail to return the adapted material within 3 months from sending the initial review, even without any notice from authors refusing adaptation of the paper, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register. In such cases, authors are notified accordingly that the manuscript is taken off the register due to expiration of the adaptation period.
- If the author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editorial board may submit the manuscript for further peer-review. The editor-in-chief resolves any conflict on the hearing of the editorial board.
- The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations. Manuscripts previously rejected by the board are not accepted for reevaluation. Authors are duly notified of the refusal from publication via e-mail.
- Upon a decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial board notifies the authors of such decision and the scheduled date of publication.
- Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance. The final decision on publication lies in all cases with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.
- Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited in the editorial office for 5 years.
Indexation
Articles in "Russian Journal of Parasitologу" are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
- Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
- Dimension
- DOAJ
- CyberLeninka
- WorldCat
- SOCIONET
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal “Russian Journal of Parasitologу ” are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org, and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, 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: " Russian Journal of Parasitologу "
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 " Russian Journal of Parasitologу " 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 " Russian Journal of Parasitologу" 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 " Russian Journal of Parasitologу " 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 " Russian Journal of Parasitologу " 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 " Russian Journal of Parasitologу " 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 " Russian Journal of Parasitologу" 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 " Russian Journal of Parasitologу " 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 State Budget Scientific Institution “Federal Scientific Centre VIEV”
Author fees
Pursuant to the open access policy, activities carried out by the “Russian Journal of Parasitology” are funded by authors who wish to publish results of their scientific research.
Articles by the FSC VIEV’s employees and postgraduate students are published free of charge. Independent authors’ studies are published in the Journal on a fee basis. Editorial-and-publishing services shall be paid at RUB 15,000.
Such editorial-and-publishing services shall only be paid after an Article is accepted for publication. No fee shall be charged for the Article submission, verification or reviewing.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
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.
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.
Plagiarism detection
" Russian Journal of Parasitologу " 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
The Editors of the Russian Journal of Parasitology allow authors to publish the manuscript as a preprint before it has been submitted for peer review to the Journal, and to archive their papers independently in disciplinary and institutional repositories.
Preprints
The Editors of the Russian Journal of Parasitology encourages publication of preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as a scholarly manuscript placed by an author(s) on an open access platform usually before or alongside with the peer review process.
A preprint publication shall not be considered as duplicate publication or influence the editor's decision to publish in the Russian Journal of Parasitology.
The author shall notify the Editors of the Russian Journal of Parasitology of the published preprint at the time the manuscript is submitted for peer review, and provide a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and terms and conditions for dissemination thereof.
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 paper 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 paper.
Do not delete the preprint text.
Manuscripts Accepted for Publication
The Editors of the Russian Journal of Parasitology allow manuscripts that have been reviewed and accepted for publication to be archived independently.
Authors may use the following to publish such manuscript version:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this manuscript version for personal use.
The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information on the planned publication
Example: The “Paper Title” has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in Issue 2021 (3) of the Russian Journal of Parasitology.
Once the final manuscript version is published, the author undertakes to add a link to the published paper to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The text of the posted manuscript version shall not be replaced or deleted.
Final Manuscript Versions
The Editors of the Russian Journal of Parasitology allow manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication and editorialized (proofread and composed) to be archived independently.
Authors may use the following to publish such manuscript version:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this manuscript version for personal use.
Once the final manuscript version is published, the author undertakes to add a link to the published paper to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The text of the posted manuscript version shall not be replaced or deleted.
Data Sharing Policy
Authors are encouraged but not required to make the research data that support their publications available. The decision to publish will not be affected by whether or not authors agree to share their research data.
Definition of Research Data
Research data includes any factual material recorded on any medium that are used to produce the results in digital and non-digital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio and video files, documents, maps, raw and/or processed data. This policy applies to the research data that would be required to verify the results of research reported in articles published in the Russian Journal of Parasitology. Research data include information produced by the authors (“primary data”) and data from other sources that are analysed by authors in their study (“secondary data”).
Definition of Exceptions
This policy does not apply to research data that is not required to validate the results presented in published articles.
The data that is not 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 of research data only and/or description of the method of access to such data under requests from other scholars.
Data Repositories
The preferred mechanism for sharing research data is via data repositories. Please see the list of repositories at https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/ for help finding research data repositories.
Data Citation
The Editorial Board of the Russian Journal of Parasitology welcomes access to research data under Creative Commons Licenses. The Editorial Board of the Russian Journal of Parasitology does not insist on the obligatory use of Creative Commons in case when the data is deposited in the repositories of any third party. The Publisher of the Russian Journal of Parasitology does not assert any copyrights for the research data submitted by the author together with the article.
Questions regarding the observation of this policy shall be sent to the executive secretary of the Russian Journal of Parasitology.
Retracted Articles
When submitting the article the author accepts standards of publication ethics.
Authors are expected to adhere to the ethical guidelines; infractions ethical guidelines may result in the application of sanctions by the Editor(s), including but not limited to the suspension or revocation of publishing privileges.
In the case if the Editor(s) receives alert to plagiarism or duplicate publication, or if the publication contains unethical information, the Editor can consider the necessity of the paper’s retraction.
The Editor(s) act in accordance with the rules presented by the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP).
The process of retraction includes:
1) An author, reader, reviewer, editor or publisher alerts the Editorial Team of the case of misconduct.
2) The Editorial Board considers and checks this information and make a decision to retract the paper or not. If the paper is to be retracted, the Editor notices the author mentioning the reasons and basis for the retraction.
3) Notices of retraction appear both in the print and electronic versions of the Journal.
4) The paper is retracted from all bibliographic databases, where the Journal is indexed and abstracted.
