Editorial Policies

Archive of Issues

---

 

Editorial policies and malpractice statement

The Heart, Vessels and Transplantation applies editorial, publishing and ethics policies in compliance with international standards set by ICMJE, NLM, CSE, WMA, WAME, EASE and COPE (1-9).

Editorial independence

Editors and owner/ publisher of the journal exercise principle of editorial freedom and independence. Editors` decisions are not affected by influence of governments, institutions, organizations, owners/publishers, sponsors and commercial advertisement providers or medical industry; authors race, gender, sexual orientation, political choices, citizenship, ethnic origin or institutional affiliation. The decisions are made solely based on importance, originality, validity, quality and relevance of submitted manuscripts for consideration for publication to the scope of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority and responsibility over content of the journal and its publication.

Peer-review (1-4, 7-9)

Articles submitted to the journal undergo unbiased double-blind (authors`, editors`, reviewers` names or their institutions, cities and countries of origin are not disclosed in articles, all authors, editors, reviewers participating in peer-review process are blinded) review by editors and external international reviewers (usually 2, but in case of disparate opinions 3rd reviewer is invited) experts on the topic of the manuscripts and authors of published manuscripts in international indexed journals relevant to the topic of the submitted for consideration manuscript.

After receipt of submitted article, Editor-in-Chief evaluates whether manuscript is within the scope of the journal and is presented in format required by the rules of the journal (see Instructions for Authors and guideline documents (CONSORT, STROBE, STARD, etc) in the Author Corner); conducts the content similarity check for the  plagiarism using Ithenticate software.  If the manuscript passes these initials controls, it is further sent  for review to deputy/section and international board editors experts on: cardiovascular surgery and transplantation; cardiology, thoracic surgery and internal medicine; electrophysiology, arrhythmias; interventional cardiology, circulatory support; cardiovascular imaging;  MRI and CT imaging and external reviewers, with expertise and publications on the topic of manuscript (we use databases to select and invite reviewers and list of reviewers with expertise suggested). Editors also evaluate articles on relevant disciplines/public health policies/education according to their additional areas of expertise.

Editors return article to Editor-in-Chief within 1 week and reviewers within 2 weeks with recommendation to accept, accept after minor revision and major revision, resubmit and reject.

Research articles and brief reports, meta-analyses and systematic reviews undergo evaluation by statistics editor of the journal. After receipt of editors`, external independent reviewers` and statistics editor`s recommendation, Editor-in-Chief makes decision based on the section editors` advice and reviewers’ reports: accept for publication, accept with minor revision, major revision with re-evaluation and reject. In cases of decisions, accept with minor revision or major revision, authors are required to submit the revised according to recommendations of editors and reviewers manuscript, highlighting changes in the articles, list of responses to comments and list of changes and letter to the editor accompanying revised manuscript within 3 weeks of receiving decision letter.

Editor-in-Chief of the journal carries responsibility for the content of the journal and has right to reject article at any step of evaluation after submission and peer-review in presence of any type of  scientific or ethical misconduct. We use Crosscheck/Ithenticate software for similarity check, to prevent any ethical misconduct - plagiarism, etc.

The articles might also be rejected after ``in-house`` review by Editor-in-Chief and editors on priority basis or when submitted work is out of scope of the journal, the work is returned to authors with recommendation of submission to other journals.

Editors of the journal do not exercise policy to reject manuscripts with negative results of the study or inconclusive results, as both types of research with well-explained rationale and design might contribute to current scientific evidence and may be used in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

 

Responsibility of Editors (1-4, 7-9)

Editors are responsible for:

- the content originality and quality of published articles;

-meet needs of authors and readers;

-work to constantly improve content of journal;

-decision to reject/revise/accept submitted manuscript;

-their decision is based on importance, originality, and clearness of presented work

- providing critical comments and recommendations to improve the content of the manuscript taking in consideration the authors and readers needs in case Editor`s decision is accept with minor or major revision 

-the compliance of manuscript presentation with international guidelines (randomized controlled trials, observational studies. Studies on diagnostic accuracy, meat-analysis and systematic reviews, case reports etc) and instructions for authors of the journal; for the relevance of manuscript to the scope of the journal

-for the compliance of submitted work with the international ethical guidelines

- for taking action in frame of international rules in case of bias between authors, reviewers and editors; 

 -for disclosure of author`s funding sources and funding of research work  

- for publishing erratum  or make corrections when needed

-for publishing retraction of manuscript notice when needed

-for publishing apology and clarification notices when needed

- should not allow any conflict of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and editors

-taking action in case of ethical misconduct in frame of  international rules set by COPE, WAME, ICMJE, CSE (1-6)

-The duration of manuscript evaluation by editors is 7 days.

-to maintain academic record

-to obtain feedback of authors, readers, reviewers and editors and evaluate their responses in roder to improve journal performance– (see attached Survey for readers, authors, reviewers and editors)

-to follow current knowledge on publication ethics, editorial policies and guidelines for studies presentation, and research on peer-review and other relevant topics.

 

Role of reviewers

The reviewers are informed on the principles of unbiased approach, confidentiality of manuscripts sent for review, timeliness of fulfilling reviewer assignment and quality of report. The journal provides the standard reviewer form to be filled by reviewers, including the recommendations for authors and report for editors. Reviewers of the manuscripts are kept informed on co-reviewers reports in blind manner and final editor`s decision on manuscript. The average duration of article peer-review evaluation by reviewers – 2 weeks.

 

Reviewers are responsible (1-4, 9):

-to disclose and decline reviewing manuscript invitation in presence of any type of conflict of interest or competing interest: awareness of the submitted research/case report and authors or their institutions, or if you conduct the similar study being prepared for publication, and  any competing interests including personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political and religious in nature that prevents you carry out fair unbiased evaluation of manuscript.

- not to use confidential data presented in manuscript in any current or future their own projects and publications.

- to report immediately if suspect any ethical misconduct, data fabrication, duplicate publication and plagiarism

- to provide their expert opinion on the manuscript, including critical review of content and recommendations on improvement of content;

-to describe strength and weakness of the manuscript

-to support their views opinions by arguments

-to provide objective evaluation of manuscript

-to provide recommendation if any additional analysis is needed to clarify unclear part of the study

- to check whether the importance of the study and study rationale are clearly explained, research question and hypothesis are clearly presented; design and methods are described in details and  properly selected according to the research question of the study, results are supported proper statistical analyses and clearly presented and discussed, limitations are described and conclusion is logical and answers the research question of the study. Reviewers should take in account whether research article, reviews and case reports are presented according to rules set by journal and international guidelines.

-to check whether the relevant publications are cited in the manuscript

-to return their reviewer report to Editorial office  in 14 days

 

Role of authors (1--9)

-Authors must prepare and submit manuscript in frame of infarctions for authors and rules set by journal.  The must:

- declare manuscripts is their own original work

 - confirm the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.

- the manuscript is not currently under consideration for publication in other journals

-provide statement on authorship (see authorship form in Author Corner www.hvt-journal.com) and declare contribution of every author to research work and preparation of manuscript

-provide statements on Ethics – see relevant section; on approval of research work by Ethics Committee where is required, on obtaining informed consent from patients for procedures and participation in the study

-certify that data are real and accurate

-declare sources of funding of the study if any

-declare potential sources for conflict of interest

- acknowledge contributors to the study who do not fulfill authorship criteria

-must participate in peer-review process: submit cover letter and manuscript and supplementary data according to rules; respond to reviewers and editors comments, if necessary support their statements by data if needed and references, if  disparate from reviewer opinion the response must be supported by scientific arguments and references as needed; must submit response to comments of reviewers and editors as separate document.

- must provide corrections of mistakes

-In case of withdrawal or retraction, authors should send letter on withdrawal with explanation of reason

-must report errors in published articles to the editors

 Please visit author corner and fill the forms on authorship and conflict of interest and submit to Editorial office

 

Ethics (1-9) (https://hvt-journal.com/pages/ethics)

 

Adherence of editorial policies to standards of international publications: ethics and authorship policies are fully endorsed with ICMJE, NLM, CSE, WAME, WMA, COPE rules; presentation of scientific research and case reports are endorsed with guidelines on presentation of research, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, case reports (CONSORT, STROBE, STARD, PRISMA, ARRIVE, SAMPL, CARE, Equator Network, NLM and Heart Group recommendations); editors responsibilities regarding use of drugs and medical tools are presented in detail in the Instructions for Authors and Aims and Scope of journal.

Authors should provide statement of ethical approval of their research work by Ethics Committee, acknowledge that human and animal studies are conducted in frame of international rules on human and animal research (5, 6), provide statement that informed consent is obtained from participants of the study and for diagnostic procedures and treatment applied; provide statement on absence of conflict of interest between authors and institutions involved in study; provide sources of funding of the study if any. Authors are required to submit the conflict of interest statement along with the manuscript (see Author`s corner – www.hvt-journal.com).

 

Scientific misconduct: data fabrication and falsification, plagiarism, manipulation of images (1-4, 9-12)

Scientific misconduct in research includes data fabrication (making up data); data falsification (removing  inconvenient data, changing and adding data) and manipulation of images; plagiarism (presenting someone`s work as own and incorporating in your work without acknowledgement of source) and purposeful failure to disclose relationships and activities.           

Whenever scientific misconduct is suspected, Editor-in-Chief and Editors of the journal will initiate the procedures described by Committee of Publication Ethics (9-12).

Editors ask the authors` explanations, contact their institutions to report scientific misconduct and ask to evaluate case and funding and research governance organizations, as well as publish letters of concern.

Every manuscript is being evaluated for similarity of text by Ithenticate software to detect plagiarism. Editors also run check for similar articles in  databases to prevent duplicate publications.

The similarity is allowed for common medical terms and references. Every other case of copying using the same sentences paragraphs are accepted as plagiarism.

If reviewer or editor detects plagiarized text – few sentences – we ask authors to provide explanation and to revise/ re-write in own words. If the authors do not comply with request or significant amount of text is plagiarized the manuscript is rejected and authors superiors and research governance are notified to investigate and letter of concern is published.

 

Redundant (duplicate) publication

Redundant or duplicate publication is not allowed. If the major overlap is suspected Editors will act in frame of ICMJE and COPE guideline on redundant publications (1, 10). It includes either when the same manuscript is poublished in 2 or 3 journals (sometime authors submit in parallel in 2 journals), or authors change title and order of authors  (1).

If manuscript has the significant overlap with previous work, it is also considered as redundant publication.

 It is allowed to use the same data, for example subgroup analysis or new research question is addressed and the data is re-analyzed, you should cite the previous study where the original data is published. 

If the study was presented at congresses and conferences and published as abstract, authors should add the note on the authors; title of abstract, congress/ conference name, date, place and journal  or congress book title, year, volume, page numbers. 

Bear in mind that publishing the same data distorts the current evidence that is being used for analysis.

To reduce redundant (duplicate) publication the registration of clinical trials is required – see below.

Every manuscript is being evaluated for similarity of text by Ithenticate software to detect plagiarism. Editors also run check for similar articles in  databases to prevent duplicate publications.

 

Withdrawal of manuscripts

In case of withdrawal of manuscript, authors should submit the letter to the Editors with explanation of the reason for withdrawal and editor will consider each case respond appropriately.

Withdrawal after receiving the decision of revision with recommendations of reviewers and editors to improve the manuscript, and submission and publishing it in another journal is unethical. A

 We provide a note to authors, who ask to withdraw after revise decision, that Editors  follow up such cases in databases whether this study will be  published and we will notify Editors of the that journal and publish letter of concern.

 

Erratum

In case of typographical errors or small correction is required, the erratum is published in the next issues.

 

Retraction

For duplicate publishing and other ethical issues (fabrication, plagiarism) with published article, the retraction is applied according to the rules set by NLM and COPE guidelines (1-4, 10, 12)

Editors publish the retraction notice (source of and reason for retraction), that is also indexed; the published article on website online remains published with Notice retracted with provided explanation.

Registration of clinical trials

Heart, Vessels and Transplantation endorses ICMJE policy on registration of clinical trials (13, 14).

Clinical trials  should be registered at ICMJE recognized registration platforms: primary register of the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (15) or in ClinicalTrials.gov (16).

Data sharing (13)

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and, therefore, Heart, Vessels and Transplantation as a member of ICMJE require researchers/authors to submit a data-sharing statement (2018) and register a data-sharing plan when registering a trial (2019).

Data sharing statements must indicate whether individual de-identified participant data will be shared; what data or additional document (study protocol, statistical analysis plan) will be shared; when the data will become available and for how long; by what access criteria (with whom, for what types of analyses, and by what mechanism) data will be shared..

Prepared by Gulmira Kudaiberdieva - Editor-in-Chief of the Heart, Vessels and Transplantation

References:

1.Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Updated May 2022.. Available at: URL: www.icmje.org. Accessed on 30.06.2022

 2.Scott-Lichter D and the Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Science Editors. CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update. 3rd Revised Edition. Wheat Ridge, CO: 2012. Available at: URL: www.councilscienceeditors.org.Accessed on 09.01.2017.

3.NLM’s Research Reporting Guidelines and Initiatives (www.nlm.nih.gov/services/research_report_guide.html).

4.COPE: Committee on publication ethics. Code of conduct and best practice guidelines for journal editors. 2011. Available at URL: www.publicationethics.org

5.World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: http://www.wma.net/e/ethicsunit/helsinki.htm (https://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html)

 6.International Association of Veterinary Editors` Consensus Author Guidelines on Animal Ethics and Welfare – 2010: http://www.veteditors.org/consensus-author-guideli

7.Editors of the Heart Group Journals. Statement of matching language to the type of evidence used in describing observational studies vs. randomized trials. Eur Heart J 2013; 34: 20-21.

8.EQUATOR Network. http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guideline...

9. COPE Ethical Guidelines  for Peer Reviewers. Available at: URL: www.publicationethics.org

10. COPE: Committee on publication ethics. Full set of English flowcharts. Available at: URL: http://publicationethics.org/flowcharts

11. COPE. Committee of Publication Ethics. Available at: URL: https://publicationethics.org/misconduct

12.COPE Council. COPE Guidelines: Retraction Guidelines. November 2019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4

13. ICMJE. Available at: URL: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html

14. De Angelis C, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Lancet 2004;364:911-2.

15. WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Available at: URL: https://www.who.int/ictrp/network/primary/en/

16. ClinicalTrials.gov. Available at: URL: www.clinicaltrials.go