Aim and Scope

The purpose of the journal is to bring together scientists and cardiologists, specialists in related specialties to widely cover and discuss the results of scientific, practical, experimental and fundamental scientific work on diseases of the circulatory system, including those developing against the background of various comorbid conditions.

Diagnosis, adequate treatment and prevention of emergency conditions in cardiology require high professionalism, the ability to highlight the priority, make the right choice of organizational, therapeutic, interventional, and cardiac surgery tactics (especially against the background of comorbid conditions that repeatedly worsen the prognosis of the underlying disease) from health care providers.

The publication aims to provide the medical community with up-to-date information in Cardiology and related specialties, to improve the level of postgraduate education and the quality of providing medical care to the population.

The opportunity to get acquainted with the modern scientific and practical approach to the management of urgent conditions, to discuss the results of scientific research in the  field of cardiovascular pathology forms deep professional thinking and the need for constant self-improvement.

Original articles, reviews, clinical cases, data sets, and articles on topical issues of innovative technologies in diagnosis and treatment of the circulatory system diseases are accepted for publication.

Section Policies

Клинический случай

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Master-class

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Обзоры и лекции

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Original Scientific Research

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Fundamental studies

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Интересный клинический случай

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Reviews of the lectures

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

2 times a year

Open Access Policy

This 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 articles submitted to the editorial board of the Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks Journal  undergo mandatory two-way anonymous ("blind") review (the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers and receive a letter with comments signed by the person responsible for the review department).

The review of articles submitted to the editorial office includes the following steps::

I. The article is reviewed by the executive secretary of the journal, a specialist in the protection of exclusive intellectual property rights and the person responsible for the review department for its compliance with the basic requirements for publications approved by the editorial board of the journal. It is carried out within no more than 3 days from the date of receipt of the article by the editorial office. The initial examination of the article involves checking the material using the Anti-Plagiarism system. The manuscripts drawn up without taking into account the "Rules for Authors", which are fully described in the journal and its electronic version for convenience, are not considered.

They are not allowed to be published:

• manuscripts the subject matter of which does not relate to the scientific field of the journal;
• manuscripts that are not properly designed, the authors of which refuse to technically refine the articles;
• manuscripts the authors of which have not been revised based on the constructive comments of the reviewer;
• manuscripts, according to the recommendations of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), representing significant plagiarism due to copying research data from another author or conclusions from his work without proper citation; re-submission of the publication under the name of another author (in the original language or in translation); verbatim copying of more than 100 words from another (including his own) publication in the absence of a proper citation; They are not quotations of borrowings from previously published ideas or hypotheses of other authors, and / or have not been verified by the automatic text verification system for borrowings from publicly available information sources "Anti-Plagiarism".

If plagiarism is suspected:

In case of detection of numerous borrowings, the editorial board acts in accordance with the rules COPE.

The editorial board of the journal informs the experts and the author(s) of the material in writing about the initiation of the editorial investigation and its expected timeframe (2 months). Based on the results of the editorial investigation, a written report is drawn up (kept in the editorial office), copies of which are provided to the person who identified the plagiarism and to the author(s) about the decision and actions taken. In case of minor plagiarism, the editorial board of the journal must notify the author of the discovery of plagiarism and receive written explanations. If the violation on the part of the author is qualified as unintentional, limit yourself to a remark and a message about the inadmissibility of repetition. The corrected manuscript with references to all the original sources of the borrowings can be published. in case of detection of numerous borrowings, the editorial board acts in accordance with the rules.

II. External review

1. The review process involves scientists who are recognized experts on the subject of peer-reviewed materials and who work in the field of knowledge to which the content of the manuscript belongs and who have published on the subject of the reviewed article within the last three years. The reviewer cannot be the author, the supervisor of the PhD candidate, or the co-authors of the reviewed work. The decision on the selection of a reviewer for the examination of the article is made by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, scientific editor, and the head of the editorial office. A review of a scientific article is prepared in accordance with the Memo to the reviewer of scientific articles and materials in the "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks" journal. The review period is no more than 4 weeks, but it can be extended at the request of the reviewer.
2. Each article is sent to 2 reviewers.
3. Each reviewer has the right to withdraw from a review in the event of a clear conflict of interests affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of the review of the manuscript, the reviewer makes recommendations on the future of the article (each decision of the reviewer is justified):

• The article is recommended for publication in its present form;
• The article is recommended for publication after correcting the shortcomings noted by the reviewer;
• The article needs additional review by another specialist;
• The article cannot be published in the

4. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the editorial board of the journal sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them (partially or completely). The revision of the article should not take more than a month from the moment of sending an e-mail to the authors about the need to make changes. The article revised by the author is re-sent for review to the reviewer who made critical comments. The date of receipt by the editorial office is the date of return of the revised article. If the author does not agree with the reviewer's comments, he may request a second review with the involvement of a third expert or withdraw the article.
5. If the authors refuse to finalize the materials, they must notify the editorial board in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after 3 months from the date of sending the review without a valid reason, even if there is no information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the article, the editorial board removes it from the register. In such situations, an appropriate notification is sent to the authors about the withdrawal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the deadline for revision.
6. If the author and the reviewers have unresolved contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.
7. The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article that is not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board will not be accepted for reconsideration. A notice of refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.
8. Presence of a positive review is not a sufficient reason for the article publication. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

III. Assessment of the editorial board. Articles and their reviews are discussed at a meeting of the editorial board, which is held no later than one month before the issue of the journal, and serves as the basis for accepting or rejecting the article. The decision of the editorial board is formalized by the protocol. The order and the priority of publication of an article is determined depending on the volume of published materials and the list of sections in a particular issue. The Editorial Board approves the list of articles to be published in the current issue of the journal. It has the right to reject the article if there are problems about certain aspects and send the work for additional external review. The Editorial Board does not guarantee the publication of all submitted materials. The editorial board reserves the right to edit the article without notifying the authors.

IV. Informing the authors about the progress of reviewing the articles

1. In case of positive external review and approval by the editorial board, the article is queued for publication in accordance with the priority level, which is determined individually for each article. The author has the opportunity to receive information about the approximate dates of publication upon his request to the editorial office's e-mail address: emcardio@bsmu.by
2. The author should familiarize himself with the layout of the article and confirm his consent to its publication.
3. Upon receiving a negative review, the editorial board sends the author a copy of the review and a letter rejecting publication of the manuscript.
4. If, on the recommendation of the reviewer, the article is returned to the author for revision, the revised manuscript is reviewed again by the editorial board.
5. If the author of the article does not agree with the reviewer's opinion, he has the right to submit a reasoned response to the editorial board of the journal. In this case, the article can be sent either for additional external review by a third expert, or for approval by the editorial board.
6. In the following cases the articles are not allowed to be published: § when design of the articles does not meet the requirements for publication; the authors of the articles refuse to technically refine the article; the authors of the articles do not comply with the constructive comments of the reviewer or do not refute them in a reasoned manner.
7. Manuscripts and media of electronic versions of both published and unpublished materials are not returned. The original 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 "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks"  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 of materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only an easy way of scientific communication, but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to set standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Editors of the journal, Reviewers, Publishers and Scientific Society for "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks" journal.

1.2 The educational institution "Belarusian State Medical University" (hereinafter referred to as the Founder) not only supports scientific communication and invests in this process, but is also responsible for compliance with all modern recommendations in the published work.

1.3 The Founder undertakes obligations for the strictest supervision of scientific materials. The Founder is aware of the responsibility for the proper presentation of the materials published in the journal, especially from the point of view of the ethical aspects of the publications described in this document.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1 Decision on publication

The Editor-in-Chief of the scientific peer-reviewed "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks" journal is personally and independently responsible for making a decision on publication, taking into account the opinion of reviewers, and in collaboration with members of the Editorial Board of the journal (International Advisory Committee). The reliability of the work in question and its scientific significance should always underlie the decision to publish. The editor can be guided by the policy of the Editorial Board of the ” Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks” journal , being limited by current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism.

2.2 Decency

The Editor-in-Chief should assess the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the authors.

2.3 Confidentiality

The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board of the “Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks” Journal are obligated not to disclose information about the accepted manuscript unnecessarily to all persons, with the exception of the Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific consultants and the Publisher.

2.4 Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

2.4.2 The Editor-in-Chief, the Executive Secretary, members of the Editorial Board and the Editorial Board should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely, request an Assistant Editor or cooperate with other members of the Editorial Board and/or the Editorial Board when reviewing the work instead of reviewing and deciding on their own) in case of conflict of interests due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with authors, companies, and possibly other organizations related to the manuscript.

2.5 Supervision of publications

The Editor-in-Chief, who has provided convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in the publication are erroneous, should inform the Founder (and/or the relevant Scientific Society) about this in order to notify as soon as possible of changes, withdrawal of the publication, expression of concern and other relevant statements.

2.6 Engagement and collaboration in research

The Editor-in-Chief, together with the Founder, takes adequate response measures in case of ethical claims concerning the reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures generally include interaction with the authors of the manuscript and argumentation of the relevant complaint or claim, but may also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

3.1 Influence on the decisions of the Editorial Board

Reviewing helps the Editor-in-Chief to make a decision about publication and, through appropriate interaction with the authors, can also help the author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communication, which is at the heart of the scientific approach. The Founder shares the view that all scientists who want to contribute to a publication, are required to do substantial work on reviewing the manuscript.

3.2 Compliance

Any selected Reviewer, who feels insufficiently qualified to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to complete the work quickly, should notify the Editor-in-Chief of the “Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks” journal and ask to be excluded from the review process of the relevant manuscript.

3.3 Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. This work should not be opened or discussed with any persons who do not have the authority from the Editor-in-Chief.

3.4 Requirements for the manuscript and objectivity

The Reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and reasonably.

3.5 Recognition of primary sources

Reviewers should identify significant published works that correspond to the topic and are not included in the bibliography of the manuscript. Any statement (observation, conclusion, or argument) published earlier should have a corresponding bibliographic reference in the manuscript. The reviewer should also draw the attention of the Editor-in-Chief to the discovery of significant similarities or coincidences between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work within the scope of the Reviewer's scientific competence.

3.6 Disclosure Policy and conflicts of interest

3.6.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts may not be used in personal research without the written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained during the review process and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

3.6.2 Reviewers should not participate in reviewing manuscripts in the event of conflict 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.

4. Responsibilities of the Authors

4.1 Requirements for manuscripts

4.1.1 The authors of the original research should provide reliable results of the work done, as well as an objective discussion of the study significance. The data underlying the work must be presented accurately. The work should contain sufficient details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. False or knowingly erroneous statements are perceived as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

4.1.2 Reviews and scientific articles should also be accurate and objective and the Editorial Board's point of view should be clearly indicated.

4.2 Data access and storage

Raw data relevant to the manuscript may be requested from the authors for review by the editors. Authors should be prepared to provide open access to this kind of information (according to the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if feasible, and in any case be prepared to retain this data for an adequate period of time after publication.

4.3 Originality and plagiarism

4.3.1 Authors should ensure that the original work is presented in full and, in case of using works or statements by other authors, should provide appropriate bibliographic references or excerpts.

4.3.2 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as copyrighted to copying or paraphrasing essential parts of someone else's work (without attribution) to claiming one's own rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and unacceptable.

4.4 Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications

4.4.1 In general, an author should not publish a manuscript, mostly devoted to the same research, in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and unacceptable.

4.4.2 In general, an author should not submit a previously published article for review in another journal.

4.4.3 The publication of a certain type of article (eg., clinical recommendations, translated articles) in more than one journal is in some cases ethical under certain conditions. Authors and editors of interested journals should agree to a secondary publication that necessarily presents the same data and interpretations as in the first published work. The bibliography of the primary work should also be presented in the second publication. More detailed information about acceptable forms of secondary (repeated) publications can be found on the page www.icmje.org.

4.5 Recognition of primary sources

It is always necessary to acknowledge the contributions of others. Authors should refer to publications that are relevant to the performance of the submitted work. Data obtained privately, for example, during a conversation, correspondence, or in the process of discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the express written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as the evaluation of manuscripts or the provision of grants, should not be used without the express written permission of the authors of the work related to confidential sources.

4.6 Authorship of the publication

4.6.1 The authors of the publication may only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the idea of the work, development, execution or interpretation of the submitted research. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as co-authors. In cases where study participants have made significant contributions in a particular area of the research project, they should be listed as individuals who have made significant contributions to this study.

4.6.2 The author must ensure that all participants who have made significant contributions to the study are represented as co-authors and not those who did not participate in the study are listed as co-authors, that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and agreed to submit it for publication.

4.7 Risks, as well as people and animals that are the objects of research

4.7.1 If the work involves the use of chemical products, procedures, or equipment that may pose an unusual risk, the author should clearly indicate this in the manuscript.

4.7.2 If the work involves  participation of animals or humans as objects of research, the authors should make sure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of research comply with legislation and regulatory documents of research organizations, as well as approved by the relevant committees. The manuscript should clearly reflect that informed consent has been obtained from all people who have become research subjects. It is always necessary to ensure that the rights to privacy are respected.

4.8 Disclosure Policy and Conflict of Interest

4.8.1 All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that may be perceived as having an impact on the results or conclusions presented in the work.

4.8.2 Examples of potential conflict of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consulting, joint-stock ownership, royalties, expert opinion, patent application or patent registration, grants, and other financial support. Potential conflict of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.

4.9 Significant errors in published works

If the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the author should inform the Editor-in-Chief of the "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks" journal and interact with the Editor-in-Chief in order to withdraw the publication as soon as possible or correct the errors. If the Editor or Publisher has received information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the author is obliged to withdraw the work or correct the errors as soon as possible.

5. Responsibilities of the Founder

5.1 The Founder must follow the principles and procedures that facilitate the performance of ethical duties by Editors, Reviewers and Authors of the “Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks “journal in accordance with these requirements. The Founder must be sure that the potential profit from advertising or reprint production has not influenced the Editors' decisions.

5.2. The Founder should support the Editor-in-Chief of the “Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks” journal in reviewing claims to the ethical aspects of published materials and help interact with other journals and/or Publishers if this contributes to the performance of the duties of the Editor-in-Chief.

5.3. The Founder should promote good research practices and implement medical standards in order to improve ethical guidelines, procedures for the removal and correction of errors.

5.4 The Founder must provide appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice), if necessary.

The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/). 

Founder

On August 8, 2017, the Ministry of Information of the Republic of Belarus registered the journal "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks" in the State Register of Mass Media No. 1886 The founder is the educational institution "Belarusian State Medical University"

Author fees

Publication in "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks 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

"Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks 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 "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks 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 "Emergency Cardiology and Cardiovascular Risks 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)

Revenue Sources

The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints, article processment charges.