- » 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
- » Journal's policy on advertising
- » Principles on informed consent
- » CrossMark policy
- » Article retraction
Aim and Scope
The Eurasian Heart Journal is an international journal dealing with cardiovascular medicine. It is an official journal of the Eurasian association of cardiologists. The Eurasian Heart Journal aims to publish the highest quality materials and achievements, both clinical and scientific, on all aspects of cardiovascular medicine and related medical areas. It helps to improve the skills of physicians, researches and other medical officers of the Eurasian countries. These activities are the important step to improve the management and treatment of cardiovascular diseases.
The main focus of the publication is scientific articles on original and experimental research in the field of arterial hypertension, atherosclerosis and dyslipidemia, ischemic heart disease, ACS, chronic heart failure, rhythm and cardiac conduction disorders, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, cardiomyopathies, ischemic stroke, new methods of functional diagnostics, interventional cardiology and cardiac surgery, prevention and pharmacotherapy of cardiovascular diseases, cardiogenetics.
The scientific concept of publication does the publication of modern achievements in the field of cardiology, the results of research, national and international clinical trials.
For publication in the journal are invited both domestic and foreign scientists and clinicians working in the field of cardiology, as well as doctors of other specialties.
The Eurasian Heart Journal’s Editorial Board accepts cutting-edge and original articles and materials, brief reports, notes from practice, lectures, reviews reflecting new scientific views, significant results and achievements of fundamental and applied theory in the field of cardiology and related specialties.
All members of the group of authors should meet all four criteria of authorship set forth in the ICMJE recommendations:
1) concept and design development or data analysis and interpretation;
2) manuscript justification or verification of critical intellectual content;
3) final approval for publication of the manuscript;
4) consent to be responsible for all aspects of the work, and assume that issues relating to the thoroughness and diligent execution of any part of the study submitted are duly investigated and resolved.
The journal publishes the texts of national clinical guidelines, developed by the working groups of the Eurasian Association of Cardiology and other societies, as well as translations of the latest recommendations of the European society of cardiology in issues.
The journal publishes the results of the congresses and forums dedicated to cardiology, the calendars of the all-Russian and international symposia, conferences and congresses on cardiology.
Section Policies
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
4 issues per year
Open Access Policy
"Eurasian heart journal" 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 manuscripts are peer reviewed and discussed by the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board reserves the right to shorten and edit any manuscript.
- A bilateral anonymous ("blind") peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of «Eurasian heart journal». This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.
- The aim of the peer review of all incoming materials (leading articles, original articles, reviews, lectures, clinical cases and experimental observations) is to provide an objective evaluation of their content (aims, methods, results and discussion in the light of current status of the issue).
- Each article is sent to 2 reviewers.
- Articles are forwarded to experts in the areas that are similar or related to the topics presented and discussed by the author (s) of a manuscript. For peer review, members of the Editorial board/Editorial Council can be recruited, as well as external experts who are highly qualified researches and recognized specialists with professional qualification and expertise on reviewed materials and who have published on the topic of a manuscript being reviewed within the last 3 years. If a manuscript covers wide spectrum of topics, the peer review procedure shall be performed by a large number of specialist.
- Reviewers submit their opinions to the Journal’s Editorial Office to be considered at an upcoming meeting of the Editorial Board, with one of the following decisions to be taken:
a) recommended for publication;
b) rejected based on the results of peer reviewer or the decision of the Editorial Board;
c) modifications and/or amendments required due based on comments of reviewers or members of the Editorial Board. - We politely request that the editor to be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
- If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
- The Editorial Office sends copies of peer review documents or the document with motivated refusal to publish to the authors, and also takes the responsibility to send copies of peer review documents to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, if requested.
- Papers that have been positively reviewed and accepted for publication by the decision of the Editorial Board are incorporated into the upcoming issue and are submitted to the publisher of the Journal.
- Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
- Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.
- Peer review documents are archived by the publisher and in the Editorial Office for 5 years.
Indexation
Articles in "Eurasian heart journal" are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Index for Science Citation (RISC) – 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.
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal Eurasian heart 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 behavior 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 Eurasian heart 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 Eurasian heart 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 Eurasian heart 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 Eurasian heart 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 Eurasian heart 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 behavior 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 behavior 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 behavior 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. 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 Eurasian heart 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 Eurasian heart 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 Eurasian heart 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
- OOO «InterMedservice»
Author fees
Publication in "Eurasian heart journal" 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
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
"Eurasian heart journal" 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 "Eurasian heart journal", 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 "Eurasian heart journal" 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)
Data sharing policy
Authors are encouraged to make the research data that support their publications available but are not required to do so. The decision to publish will not be affected by whether or not authors share their research data.
Definition of research data
This policy applies to the research data that would be required to verify the results of research reported in articles published in the Eurasian heart journal. Research data include data produced by the authors (“primary data”) and data from other sources that are analysed by authors in their study (“secondary data”). Research data includes any recorded factual material that are used to produce the results in digital and non-digital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio, documents, video, maps, raw and/or processed data.
Definition of exceptions
The data that is not a 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 only and/or description of the method of access to the data under requests from other scholars.
Data repositories
The preferred mechanism for sharing research data is via data repositories. Please see or https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/ for help finding research data repositories.
Data citation
The Editorial Board of the Eurasian heart journal welcomes access to data under Creative Commons Licenses. Editorial Board of the Eurasian heart journal does not insist on the obligatory use of Creative Commons in case when the data is deposited in the repositories of the third party. The Publisher of the Eurasian heart journal does not assert any copyrights for the data submitted by the author together with the article.
Questions regarding the observation of that policy shall be sent to the executive secretary of the Eurasian heart journal.
Journal's policy on advertising
- The material containing advertising or presenting a comparative study of the properties of a pharmaceutical product is separated from from scientific content.
- Color inserts containing advertising meet all the requirements of the Russian legislation and the advertiser is responsible for their content.
- The advertisement is intended for a specialized and professional community of practitioners and does not contain information about the product that is harmful to health.
- The advertisement is not in conflict with other policies of the journal or the opinion of the editor-in-chief.
- The percentage of advertising published in the publication is not more than 3%.
Principles on informed consent
The journal "Eurasian heart journal" relies on the principles of the World Medical Association's (WMA) policy statement – the Declaration of Helsinki – a statement of Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects) and endeavours to ensure compliance with ethical and data collection standards for research involving human subjects. Before beginning research, the researchers should familiarise themselves with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration on informed consent and carry out the research in strict accordance with those principles as set forth below (Articles 25-32 of the Helsinki Declaration are given):
- Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although, it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he/she freely agrees.
- In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of his right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw his consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as the methods used to deliver the information.
After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject's freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, verbal consent must be formally documented and witnessed.
All medical subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study. - When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study, the physician must be particularly cautious when the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations, the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
- For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from his legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails minimal risk and burden.
- When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject's dissent should be respected.
- Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative.
- The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient's decision to withdraw from the study should never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
- For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptions where consent would be impossible or impractical to obtain for such research. In such situations, the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee.
Human Rights Policy
When presenting the results of experimental research involving human subjects, the authors should indicate whether the procedures performed adhered to the ethical standards prescribed in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the study was conducted without adherence to the principles of the Declaration, the authors should justify the chosen approach to the study and guarantee that the ethics committee of the organisation in which the study was conducted approved the chosen approach.
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.
Download Patient Informed Consent Template
Animal rights statement
When conducting experimental studies on animals, the authors must indicate compliance with institutional and national standards for the use of laboratory animals. Link to CONSENSUS AUTHOR GUIDELINES FOR ANIMAL USE doc: http://www.veteditors.org/consensus-author-guidelines-on-animal-ethics-and-welfare-for-editors
CrossMark policy
CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content. By applying the CrossMark logo, journal "Eurasian heart journal" is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.
Clicking the CrossMark logo on a document will tell you its current status and may also give you additional publication-record information about the document.
Article retraction
The present document is created on the basis of "Guidelines on article retraction" of Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers (RASEP).
Definition
Article retraction is a mechanism of published information correction and readers notification of the fact that the publication contains serious flaws or invalid data that should not be relied on, it also serves for warning readers on redundant publications (when authors present the same data in several publications), plagiarism, and conflict of interest non-disclosure that could influence data interpretation or recommendations for their use.
Rationale for article retraction:
- detection of inappropriate borrowing (plagiarism) in the publication;
- redundant publication that appears in several issues;
- detection of falsifications or fabrications in the publication (for example, experimental data fabrication);
- detection of major errors (for example results misinterpretation) that cast doubt on publication scientific value;
- incorrect authors list (a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included);
- concealed conflict of interest (and other publication ethics violations);
- article republication without author's approvement;
- peer review was not performed for the article.
The procedure of article retraction
I. Article retraction is performed after formal request from editorial board or author.
Iа. The editorial board retracts the article after a formal written request from the author/ team of contributors with a motivated explanation of the reason for the decision. After that the editorial board performs the entire article retraction.
Ib. The editorial board performs the article retraction on the basis of their inspection or submitted information of scientific publication ethics violations. The editorial board must inform the author/ team of contributors of the decision and state the reasons for it (in case of plagiarism the sources should be indicated), it also appoints the date of the retraction. If the author/ team of contributors ignores the notifications, the board informs the ASEP Council of Scientific Publication Ethics.
II. The article and abstract remain on the journal website in the relevant issue, but an electronic version of the text is marked withRETRACTED sign and retraction date, the same marking is placed on the article in the contents list.
III. The information about retracted articles is passed to:
- the ASEP Council of Scientific Publication Ethics (to be included to a unified retracted articlesdatabase)
- the Scientific Electronic Library (elibrary.ru). The retracted articles and their citations are excluded from RSCI and are not included in citation scores.
