For printing accepted scientific articles that contain the following elements: UDC code; article title, authors' names and initials (the number of authors should not exceed five persons); name of the institution and the city, evidence of anassociation of publication with the planned research projects (with the number of state registration).
Purpose of the study:
Contains 2–3 sentences. State the specific purpose or research objective of, or hypothesis tested by, the study.
Object and Methods:
The section contains detailed presentation of research methods and apparatus used in the study. Identify selection criteria of animals and patients, the number and the characteristic of patients including their sex and age, if it is necessary for the study. The principle of patients’ grouping is certainly identified, as well as the design of the research design. Identify precisely all drugs and chemicals used including their generic name(s), dose(s), and route(s) of administration. The section should contain maximum information, it is necessary for further possible reproduction of the findings by other authors, the comparison of the findings of similar studies and possible inclusion of the article data into meta-analysis.
At the end of the section “Object and Methods”, in the subsection “Data Processing”, state the manner by which studies were evaluated. If the study was randomized, the principle of randomization is specified. Average values are given in the form of М±m (М – arithmetic average, m – standart error of the mean). In the text of the article and tables, when indicating data reliability, p value is given (р=..., not р<...). Correlation coefficients are given specifying their statistical significance, i.e. indicating p value, e.g.: r=0.435; р=0.006.
Research results and discussion:
When data are summarized in the text of an article or in a table, give numeric results not only as derivatives (for example, percentages) but also as the absolute numbers from which the derivatives were calculated (give the absolute value taken for 100%, e.g., 25% of 120 patients). Another variant: specify the absolute number and the percentage simultaneously, e.g.: 25% (30/120), or 30 of 120 patients (25%).
In case of sequential conversion of percentage, i.e. percent of percent is calculated (the percentage of the number of research objects in the subgroup previously described in percentage), it is necessary to describe clearly the procedure and present the numbers of objects of research taken successively for 100%.
The required accuracy of percentage value depends on sample volume:
- the so called small samples (less than 20 objects of research) are usually not given in percentage (as in such cases the percentage value appears to be considerably larger than the absolute value of frequency for a particular characteristic value). In this case there are given absolute values of frequencies for a particular characteristic value;
- if the sample volume is from 20 to 100 objects of research, the percentages are specified as whole numbers;
- if the sample volume is over 100 objects, the percentage specified has no more than one decimal place.
Emphasize the new and important aspects of the study, explore possible mechanisms or explanations for these findings, and if possible, compare and contrast the results with those obtained by other researchers. Do not repeat in detail data or other information given in the Introduction or the Results section. Explore the implications of the findings for future research and for clinical practice.
Represent as conclusions the results of problem solution indicated in the title and the objective of the article. Avoid claiming priority or alluding to work that has not been completed. Prospects for further developments in this direction.
Prospects for further research.
List of references.
In Russian, Ukrainian - 0,5 page, English - 2 pages.
Key words are mandatory.
Tables - not more than 4.
Graphs (not more than 4) should have a clear calibration axes. If there are a few curves in the figure itself must specifytheir serial numbers. Drawings, except diagrams in electronic form, it is desirable to provide in .PCX extension, photo (no more than 4) - in JPEG.
References should be without cuts.
The authors served in order of mention, transliterated, as required by Vancouver Style. References in the text must be given by numbers in square brackets.
Articles are edited and reviewed by members of the Editorial Board - leading experts from relevant areas of biology and medicine.
The text is printed in 1.5 interval without hyphenation, font size 14 in Тimes New Roman МIСRОSOFT WORD editor.Paragraph indent - 1.25 cm with a tab. Margins on right, left by 25 mm, top, down - 30 mm. The material must provide an e-mail- firstname.lastname@example.org.
The main reasons for rejecting articles
1. The article does not pass by technical parameters
- In the article reveals elements that may be plagiarized or contained in articles that are currently filed in other scientific journals (reprinting an article or its parts, submitting an article to several magazines simultaneously, using texts and illustrations without permission of their rightholder). More in detail with ethical principles it is possible to familiarize on a site Elsevier;
- The manuscript is fragmentary, incomplete, i.e. It may lack such key elements as the name, authors and their institutional affiliation, the text of the article, keywords, bibliographic list, tables, formulas, etc;
- The level of the English language on which the article is submitted is insufficient for the possibility of its consideration by the expert council;
- Formulas, drawings, diagrams, etc. The illustrative material is not sufficiently readable and recognizable;
- The article does not correspond to the "Rules for Authors" of a separate magazine, to which it is submitted;
- The links in the article are incomplete or outdated (too old).
2. The article does not correspond to the "Objectives and tasks of the journal"
- For example, for the magazine "Cabron" the material studied in this article may contain carbon, but should not be carbon;
- The article deals with carbon material, but the focus of the research is on something else;
- The article does not contain scientific novelty in the field of carbon studies.
3. Article is incomplete
- The article contains some observations that are not a full-fledged study;
- The article takes into account some important research, but ignored other important studies (there is incomplete or one-sided coverage of the scientific discourse).
4. Research methods are unsatisfactory
- In the article there is no clear group of subjects under study, there are no clear parameters for their comparison;
- The methods of research do not correspond to the generally accepted scientific methods and procedures (these procedures can not be repeated, and the results of research obtained by non-standard methods can not be verified);
- The analysis does not have sufficient statistical justification or is carried out outside the norms and rules that are universally recognized in a particular scientific field.
5. Conclusions are not substantiated in the text of the article
- Arguments are illogical, unstructured or erroneous;
- The data do not confirm or justify the conclusions;
- Conclusions ignore a significant array of scientific literature on the topic of the article.
6. The text of the article on the basis of another work by the author
- The text of the article is an expanded version of other works or scientific reports of the author or his co-authors, and the results of the research are secondary, not contributing any contribution to the development of the scientific field;
- The work is clearly part of a larger study, divided into the maximum possible number of separate articles for scientific journals.
7. The article is incomprehensible
- The language of the article, its structure, illustrations, calculations, formulas and other elements are so insignificant that they can not be evaluated in the scientific community. Even English speakers may need help.
8. The article is boring
- Article irrelevant, clearly "archival" or "statistical" nature, marginal in relation to the scientific field;
- The problems of the article, as well as the questions that are put and actualized in it, are not of interest to a particular scientific sphere or scientific community;
- The study is not capable of provoking interest in the readers of the scientific journal.
More information about the requirements for scientific articles you will find on article submission page from Elseiver, which contains step-by-step instructions and additional explanations.