About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The journal “Social Pharmacy in Health Сare” was created with the purpose of informing research teams, health care professionals and the pharmaceutical sector about the latest achievements of Ukrainian and foreign scientists in the field of social medicine and pharmacy; medical and pharmaceutical education; extreme medicine, technological aspects of drug development; state regulatory policy in the field of organization and management of health, pharmacoeconomic research in medical and pharmaceutical practice.

The scientific journal “Social Pharmacy in Health Сare” publishes original and review papers on the main issues of public health and pharmacy at the current stage, namely, social medicine and pharmacy, organization and management of health care and pharmacy, drug technology and quality control, biotechnology and pharmacoeconomics, socioeconomic, pharmacoepidemiological, marketing research in world health and pharmacy.

The results of the studies that are covered in the journal can be used in the practical activities of a wide range of people: scientists, practitioners in the pharmaceutical and medical industries, health care organizers.

The target audience of authors and readers of the publication are scientists in the field of social medicine and pharmacy, organization and management of health care; health managers at all levels; managers and employees of pharmaceutical enterprises (manufacturing organizations, wholesale and retail sale of drugs); employees of regulatory bodies of public health and pharmacy, medical and pharmaceutical higher educational institutions (teachers, scientists, graduate students and undergraduates).

Peer Review Process

General provisions

The scientific periodical "Social Pharmacy in Healthcare" is a peer-reviewed journal that practices the selection of manuscripts for publication based on their assessment by independent industry experts using double-blind type of reviewing (the authors do not know the names of reviewers; the reviewers do not know the names of the authors of the manuscript).

The procedure for blind reviewing pass all manuscripts after checking for plagiarism, received by the editor. The review takes place in order to provide an objective assessment of the content of a scientific article, determine its compliance with the requirements of the journal, comprehensively analyze the advantages and disadvantages of the article’s materials, make specific recommendations for their improvement, and select original author's manuscripts for publication. Only those manuscripts that have scientific value, the direction of research on the subject of the journal “Social Pharmacy in Healthcare” and which contribute to solving actual problems and tasks are accepted for printing. Reviewers evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of the article, its practical value and scientific significance. In addition, reviewers determine the compliance of the article with the principles of ethics in scientific publications and make recommendations for eliminating cases of their violation.

Basic requirements for reviewing manuscripts

Manuscripts are submitted for review, which have been preliminarily evaluated by the responsible secretaries of the publication (and / or editors of the rubric) for compliance with the requirements of the publication regarding the structure, content and design; and checks for plagiarism. Manuscripts that do not meet accepted requirements are not registered and are not allowed for further consideration, about which their authors are notified.

Reviewers for manuscripts are selected by the editors from among authors and readers, scholars competent in the subject matter of the publication, or members of the editorial board in the absence of a conflict of interest on the subject of the manuscript, who work on a voluntary and free basis.

The reviewing procedure involves the participation of reviewers, both from the editorial board, and other competent research issues.

Scientists are chosen as reviewers whose research topics correspond to the profile of the publication, and the scientometric indicators correspond to paragraph 6 of the Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine No. 32 of January 15, 2018.

Review period is up to 2 weeks from the time the reviewer is appointed.

The review process takes place in the form of a closed questionnaire survey of reviewers on the journal's website and, if necessary, the reviewer can download the file with an extended review and interpretation of comments.

During the review process, the reviewer assesses the manuscript on the aspects outlined in the review, can give a text commentary on the manuscript or make a version of the manuscript for the editors with the proposed amendments.

After the review procedure is completed, copies of reviews are sent to the author’s e-mail from the journal’s website for revision and to the responsible secretary. The names of the reviewers are not disclosed.

After the review procedure is completed, the reviewer may make a decision on the recommendation: manuscripts for publication without revision; publication of the manuscript after the elimination of minor remarks (grammatical and stylistic errors, the design of figures and tables, the design of core bibliography, etc.); manuscripts for publication after finalizing the serious comments of the reviewer and undergoing the re-reviewing procedure; manuscript deviations. The deviation of the manuscript is possible in the following cases: the subject matter does not correspond to the direction of publication; there is no scientific novelty, theoretical and practical value; unreliable and unreasonable results of the study are presented; the text of the manuscript was previously published, and the like.

The manuscripts sent to the author for the elimination of serious comments, after resubmission to the editor, are sent to the reviewer, who reviewed the initial version of the manuscript to undergo the re-review procedure.

In case of contradictions between the author and the reviewer and the impossibility of eliminating the comments, the editorial board may decide on the appointment of the procedure for reviewing the manuscript with the involvement of another reviewer.

The final decision on the publication of the manuscript is made by the editors and approved by the Scientific Council of the National University of Pharmacy.

Responsibility for copyright infringement and failure to comply with existing standards in the article rests with the author of the article. The author and the reviewer are responsible for the accuracy of the facts and data presented, the validity of the conclusions and recommendations made and the scientific and practical level of the article.

Publication Frequency

Journal is published four times per year.

Open Access Policy

This journal is practicing an open access policy in accordance with the Budapest BOAI Initiative (http//www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org), which provides authors and readers with the right to read, download, copy, distribute materials of journal, as well as to find or attach them to full texts of relevant articles, use for indexing and use for other legitimate purposes in the absence of financial, legal and technical barriers, with the exception of those governing direct access to the network internet.

Payment

The authors pay only the cost of providing services for the editorial preparation of articles for printing. The payment is made only after receiving a positive review of the article and the adoption by the editorial board of the decision to publish in the journal, which the journal is informed by the responsible secretary of the journal. The cost and procedure for rendering services for editorial preparation (editing, correction, layout of texts) of manuscripts of articles submitted for publication, are fixed in the calculation of services, which is calculated by the planning and financial department of National Pharmaceutical University. The editorial preparation of the manuscripts filed for publication does not involve the translation of the manuscript by English.

There is no fee for submitting and reviewing articles in the journal.

Plagiarism

All manuscripts submitted for publication are subject to compulsory examination to prevent academic plagiarism. To perform the analysis of documents in National Pharmaceutical University, software Anti-Plagiarism (licensee – Khmelnytsky National University) is used.

The criteria for the originality of the text in the manuscripts are defined in the Regulations on Measures for the Prevention of Academic Plagiarism (POL A 2.8-03-101) and have the following indicators:

over 90% – the text of the manuscript is original (insignificant amount of borrowing);
from 80 to 90% – the originality of the text is satisfactory (insignificant amount of borrowing), however, it is necessary to make sure that the quotations and references to used sources are correct;
from 60 to 80% – the manuscript is accepted for consideration after completion by the author (authors) and the availability and correct execution of quotes and references to used sources, since it has a significant amount of borrowing;
less than 60% – the manuscript for consideration is not accepted and can not be recommended for printing (protection), since it has a significant amount of borrowing, which is treated as plagiarism.

Editorial ethics issues

The editors of Social Pharmacy in Healthcare adhere to international standards for the ethics of publications, guided by the recommendations for the list and content of the general duties of editors - the COPE Code of Conduct, approved by the Committee on Publication ethics of COPE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors). Committee of Medical Journal Editors - ICMJE (recommendations of the "Vancouver Group") - http://www.icmje.org/), World Association of Medical Editors (World Association of Medical Editors - WAME - http://www.wame.org/), The journal catalog is open go access (Directory of Open Access Journals - DOAJ - https://doaj.org).

General principles:

The Editorial Board undertakes to:

maintain neutrality and objectivity in relation to all participants of the editorial process;
constantly improve the magazine;
to ensure the quality of the published material, by carrying out the review process, observing the principles of confidentiality of information, not to disclose ideas and / or information obtained during the review of the manuscripts;
preserve the integrity of scientific research;
exclude personal gain in the process of implementation of editorial activities; if necessary, publish corrections and explanations.

Principles of editorial ethics:

In its activities, the editorial staff of the scientific journal Social Pharmacy in Healthcare is guided by the following ethical principles:

The decision to publish an article in a journal is made by the editorial board of the journal on the basis of:

check the article for compliance with the requirements for registration;
evaluation of intellectual content, scientific and practical significance of the material;
the results of the review;
results of discussion at the meeting of the editorial board.

When making a decision on the publication of an article, the editorial board is guided by the publication ethics of the journal and does not allow publication of articles with signs of plagiarism, copyright infringement, slander and insult in case of sufficiency of facts to consider them as such.

The final decision on the publication of the article or on the refusal of publication is made by the editor-in-chief of the journal.

The editorial board evaluates the provided articles regardless of the race, gender, nationality, origin, citizenship (citizenship), occupation, place of work and residence of the author, as well as his political, philosophical, religious and other views.

The editorial board examines claims for unethical behavior of the authors of submitted manuscripts or articles already published and takes action in connection with the claims submitted.

Ethical principles (responsibility) of the editor

The editor is responsible for the publication of copyright works, which leads to the need to comply with the following basic principles:

the editor has the authority to accept (reject) manuscripts;
the editor should not have a conflict of interest in relation to articles accepted (rejected) for publication;
the editor accepts the article only when there is complete confidence in this decision;
when finding errors, the editor contributes to the publication of the corrected article;
the editor has no right to use the unpublished materials contained in the submitted manuscript without the written consent of the Author. Confidential information or ideas obtained during the review should not be disclosed by the editor or used by him for personal gain;
when making a decision on the publication of the manuscript, the editor is guided by the accuracy of the data presented and the scientific significance of the work considered
the editor should evaluate the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of the authors;
the editor should not allow the publication of information if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarized;
the editor, together with the publisher, should not leave unanswered claims regarding the reviewed manuscripts or published materials, as well as take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights when a conflict situation is discovered;
the editor may be guided by the editorial policy of the journal, the decisions of the editorial board of the journal, being limited by the applicable legal rules relating to libel, copyright and plagiarism;
the editor and the Editorial Board of the journal are obliged not to disclose without need the information about the accepted article to anyone, with the exception of those directly involved in the process of its consideration.

Principles of reviewer’s ethics:

The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of copyright materials, as a result of which his actions should be objective in nature, consisting in the observance of the following principles:

the reviewer is obliged to provide an objective and reasoned assessment of the stated research results, guided by the principal remarks and suggestions aimed at improving the scientific level of the manuscript;
personal criticism of the author is unacceptable;
the article is reviewed, considered as a confidential document that cannot be transferred for review or discussion to third parties who do not have the authority of the editorial board of the journal;
unpublished data obtained from articles submitted for consideration should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.
the response to the article is confidential and is not subject to disclosure;
the reviewer should not have a conflict of interest regarding the research, authors or research sponsors;
in the event of a conflict of interest between the research results and the reviewer's personal work, or in the case of such professional or personal ties between the reviewer and the author that may affect the reviewer's judgment, he must return the manuscript indicating the conflict of interest;
the reviewer must indicate relevant published works that are not referenced in the manuscript;
an article that has been received for review must be treated as a confidential document, which cannot be transferred for review or discussion to third parties who do not have the authority of the editorial board;
a reviewer who does not possess, in his opinion, sufficient qualifications to evaluate the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the event of a conflict of interest with the author or organization, should inform the editorial board of this with a request to exclude him from the review process of this manuscript;
the reviewer's goal is to objectively assess the quality of the submitted manuscript and determine the degree of its compliance with scientific, literary and ethical standards;
since the reviewer should note any cases of insufficient citation by the authors of the works of other scientists working in the field of the article under review, comments about the insufficient citation of the reviewer's own research are identified as biased;
maintaining a constant frequency of publication of a scientific journal requires the reviewer to have a high level of his own discipline, revealed through the timeliness of providing a manuscript review and in respectful attitude to the authors of the manuscript (in case of bad manners regarding the authors or systematically providing poor quality reviews or violation of the deadlines for providing reviews of the relationship with this the reviewer is terminated)
if a reviewer is prohibited from using or disclosing unpublished information or the author's arguments, it is not considered contradictory to the ethical standards to discontinue some of the reviewer's own research if they in his opinion become ineffective.

Requirements to publication and authors

availability of high-quality references;
publication of data on financial support for research;
lack of plagiarism and fraudulent data;
prohibition of the publication of the same results in more than one journal

Principles of ethics of authors of scientific publications:

the fact that the author has provided an article for publication in a journal confirms the authorship of a scientific study;
in the case of co-authorship, the article is submitted by one of the authors with the consent of the co-authors;
among co-authors it is inadmissible to indicate persons who did not participate in the study;
materials presented in the publication should contain the results of original scientific research;
when fragments from the works of other persons are included in the article, proper registration of such inclusions (quotations) is necessary by indicating the original source in the bibliography in the article;
the authors are responsible for the content, originality and translation of the text of the articles, the scientific level and accuracy of the information provided, as well as the fact that the materials do not contain information with limited access;
the authors guarantee that the submitted article has not been published previously, and is not reviewed in another edition;
in case of detection of errors or inaccuracies in the submitted scientific material at any stage of the publication process, the author undertakes to inform the editorial board or the editor or editor of the journal heading about this fact;
aAll authors must provide refutation or correction of errors in case of their detection.
if significant errors or inaccuracies are found in the article at the stage of its consideration or after publication, the author should report this to the journal’s editor as soon as possible.

Ethical principles (responsibility) of the author

The author (or a group of authors) is aware that he is initially responsible for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, and assumes the observance of the following principles:

all authors should contribute to the study, that is, the participation of all authors in the study and in the preparation of the article should be determined; co-authors of the article should indicate all persons who have made a significant contribution to the study. - it is necessary to recognize the contribution of all individuals, one way or another influenced the course of the study, in particular, the article should contain references to the works that were relevant during the study;
the author must provide reliable results of the research. Obviously false statements are unacceptable;
the author must not submit to the journal a manuscript that has been sent and / or published in another edition;
the author must ensure that the results of the study presented in this manuscript are completely original. Borrowed fragments or statements must be made out with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form, including decorated quotes, paraphrasing, or the assignment of rights to the results of other people's research, are unethical and unacceptable.