Structure of the Paper and Manuscript Submission Guidelines

Before submission to the editorial staff of the journal, please check Research Misconduct Policies, infringement of which will result in immediate rejection of the manuscript and possible sanctions against the author.
The authors are strongly recommended to read the “Guidelines for Authors and Translators of Scientific Articles to be Published in English” at the website of The European Association of Science Editors (EASE), which guides our work. Make sure that the manuscript presents an academic value, significance of research, as well as that its originality and practical significance are well described; the manuscript makes a contribution to earlier researches concerning the topic.

The author must take a close look at the manuscript requirements. They are not too rigid, but we recommend to meet them. Therefore, we ask the authors to make every effort to meet the requirements, as it will provide the quality of their materials and will make it easier for the editorial staff to set the manuscript for publication.

ARTICLE REQUIREMENTS

Original articles and literature reviews that meet the design requirements and structures listed below are accepted for publication. The journal recommends using the Imrad framework when writing research papers.

The text is printed at 1.5 intervals without hyphenation, font size 14 in Times New Roman in Microsoft Word.

Paragraph indentation – 1.25 cm with a tab. Margins: 2.5 cm on the left and right, 3.0 cm on the top and bottom.

To submit an article for consideration, go to Article submission

The articles are edited and reviewed by members of the editorial board, leading experts in the relevant fields of biology and medicine.

Original articles should have the following structure:

UDC
Surname and initials of the authors.
Title of the article.
Name of the institution, city, and state.
A short abstract of the article (must contain 200-250 words, be structured, and include such sections as an introduction, aim, object and methods, results, and conclusions. Key words (no more than five) should be added to the abstract).
Connection of the publication with planned research works (indicating the name of the work and state registration number)
Introduction. (Statement of the problem in a general form, analysis of the latest (over the last ten years) research, and publications in which the solution of this problem was initiated and on which the author relies, identification of previously unsolved parts of the general problem;)
The aim of the research. (Contains 2-3 sentences, which formulate which problem or hypothesis the author is solving and for what aim.)
Object and research methods.

It includes a detailed description of research methods, the equipment on which it was carried out, the criteria for selecting animals and patients, and the number and characteristics of patients, with a breakdown by gender and age, if necessary for the study. The principle of dividing patients into groups, as well as the design of the study, must be indicated. All drugs and chemicals used in the course of work should be named, including their international non-proprietary (commonly accepted) name, doses, and routes of administration. This section should contain complete information – this is necessary for further possible reproduction of the results by other researchers, comparison of the results of similar studies, and possible inclusion of the article’s data in a meta-analysis.

Compliance with ethical principles is indicated here (both local and international: compliance with the ethical principles of the European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals, Declaration of Helsinki; informed consent of the patient). For more details, see “Research Misconduct Policies.”

At the end of the section “Research object and methods,” there is a subsection, “Data processing,” which indicates which data processing methods the author used. If the study was randomized, the principle of randomization is demonstrated. Average values are given in the form of M ± m, where M is the arithmetic mean, and m is the standard error of the mean. In the text of the article and the tables, when specifying reliability, it is desirable to give the full value of p (p = …, not p <…). Correlation coefficients should be given only with an indication of their statistical significance, with the value of p, for example, r = 0.435; p = 0.006. Finally, specify the name of the program used for statistical data processing.

Research results and their discussion.

They should be presented in a logical sequence. No literary references. The data is presented very clearly, in the form of short descriptions with graphs, tables, and figures (do not copy the information, only one way of presentation).

Percentages must be presented in the text of the article or table while indicating the absolute value of the value that is taken as 100%, for example, 25% of 120 patients. Another way is to simultaneously specify percentages and absolute values, for example, 25% (30/120) or 30 out of 120 patients (25%).

Suppose a sequential recalculation of percentages is carried out, i.e. In that case, a ratio is calculated from a percentage (percentage of the number of research objects in the subgroup previously described by percentages); it is necessary to clearly define this procedure and present the number of research objects that are accepted consistently as 100%.

The required accuracy of the given percentage values depends on the sample size:

so-called small samples (less than 20 research objects) are generally not described by percentages (since the percentage value turns out to be much larger than the absolute number of research objects in such cases). In these cases, the absolute values of the frequencies for the values of one or another feature are indicated.
if the sample size is from 20 to 100 research objects, then the percentages are presented as whole numbers.
if the sample size is more than 100 research objects, the percentage is indicated with no more than one decimal place.

It is necessary to highlight new and important aspects of the results of the conducted research, analyze possible mechanisms or interpretations of these data, and compare them with the data of other researchers. You should not repeat the information indicated in the “Introduction” section and detailed data from the “Results” section. Reasonable recommendations for clinical practice and the possible application of the obtained results in future studies can be included in the discussion.

Conclusions.

Summarize the work done in one or two sentences: what was obtained, what it may indicate or mean, what it serves, and what possibilities it opens up. To reflect the prospects of using the results. Avoid claiming priority and citing completed work.

Prospects for further research.
References.

The list of references is drawn up without abbreviations.

References to the literature in the text are given in the order of mention [1,2,3,4,5….] with numbers in square brackets. In the bibliography, Ukrainian-language sources are presented in transliterated form with the corresponding designation at the end of the source [in Ukranian]; English-language sources are not transliterated. Literature is drawn up according to the requirements of the Vancouver style.

Abstract in Ukrainian (at least 1,800 characters without spaces, including keywords).
Abstract in English (at least 1,800 characters without spaces, including keywords).
Indicate the surname and first name of the authors in Latin, the ORCID numbers of each author, and their contribution to the article according to the distribution below:

A – work concept and design.

B – data collection and analysis.

C – responsibility for statistical analysis.

D – writing an article.

E – a critical review.

F – final approval of the article.

Correspondence address: author’s full name, institution, full address of the institution, telephone number, and e-mail address. Comments and information will be sent to this address before the article is accepted for printing.
At the end of the article, the author must indicate information about the absence of a conflict of interest.

Review articles should have the following structure:

UDC
Surname and initials of the authors.
Title of the article.
Name of the institution, city, and state.
A short abstract of the article (must contain 200-250 words, be structured, and include such sections as an introduction, aim, main part, and conclusions. Key words (no more than five) should be added to the abstract).
Connection of the publication with planned research works (indicating the name of the work and state registration number)
Introduction. (Statement of the problem in a general form, analysis of the latest (over the last ten years) research, and publications in which the solution of this problem was initiated and on which the author relies, identification of previously unsolved parts of the general problem;)
The aim of the research. (Contains 2-3 sentences, which formulate which problem or hypothesis the author is solving and for what aim.)
The main part.
Conclusions.

Prospects for further research (indicate what the author plans to research in this direction).
References.

The list of references is drawn up without abbreviations.

Abstract in Ukrainian (at least 1,800 characters without spaces, including keywords).
Abstract in English (at least 1,800 characters without spaces, including keywords).
Indicate the surname and first name of the authors in Latin, the ORCID numbers of each author, and their contribution to the article according to the distribution below:

A – work concept and design.

B – data collection and analysis.

C – responsibility for statistical analysis.

D – writing an article.

E – a critical review.

F – final approval of the article.

Correspondence address: author’s full name, institution, full address of the institution, telephone number, and e-mail address. Comments and information will be sent to this address before the article is accepted for printing.
At the end of the article, the author must indicate information about the absence of a conflict of interest.

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, if the article concerns ‘Carbon’, the studied material may include carbon, but it should not consist entirely of 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.