The editorial policy of the scientific and practical journal for doctors "FORCIPE" is based on the traditional ethical principles of Russian scientific periodicals, as well as on modern legal requirements regarding copyright, legality, plagiarism and libel, set out in Russian legislation.
The editorial Board observes the Code of ethics of scientific publications prepared by the Committee on the ethics of scientific publications (Russia, Moscow), and builds its activities to reflect the ethical standards of editors and publishers established the Code of conduct and guidelines of best practice for the editor (Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors) and the Code of conduct for the publisher (Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers), which was developed by the Committee on publication ethics Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Introduction
1.1. Publication of materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only a simple 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, Reviewers, Publishers and Scientific society for the journal " FORCIPE»

1.2. The publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in this process, but is also responsible for compliance with all current recommendations in the published work.

1.3. The publisher undertakes the strictest supervision of scientific materials. Our journal programs provide an unbiased "report" of the development of scientific thought and research, so we are also aware of the responsibility for the proper presentation of these "reports", especially in terms of the ethical aspects of the publications set out in this document.

Duties Of Editors
2.1. Decision to publish
The editor of the scientific journal "FORCIPE" is personally and independently responsible for making the decision to publish, often in cooperation with the relevant Scientific society. The reliability of the work in question and its scientific significance should always be at the heart of the decision to publish. The editor may be guided by the policy Of the editorial Board of the journal "FORCIPE", being limited to current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright, legality and plagiarism.
The editor may confer with other Editors and Reviewers (or officials of the Scientific society) when making a decision on publication.

2.2. Decency
The editor must evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, or political preferences of the Authors.

2.3. Privacy
The editor and Editorial Board of the journal "FORCIPE" are obliged not to disclose information about the accepted manuscript to all persons, except for 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 in the course of reviewing and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

2.4.2 Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (i.e., request a Co-editor, Assistant editor, or collaborate with other members of the Editorial Board when reviewing the work instead of personally reviewing and making a decision) if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other interactions and relationships with Authors, companies, and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.

2.5. Supervision of publications
The editor who provides convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions presented in the publication are erroneous should inform the Publisher (and/or the relevant Scientific society)in order to promptly notify the changes, withdraw the publication, Express concern and other relevant statements.

2.6. Research engagement and collaboration
The editor, together with the Publisher (or the Scientific society), shall take 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.

Reviewers ' Responsibilities
3.1. Influence on the decisions of the Editorial Board
Reviewing helps the Editor make a decision about the publication and through appropriate interaction with the Authors can also help the Author to improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communications, which is at the very heart of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scientists who want to contribute to the publication must do the essential work of reviewing the manuscript.

3.2. Sense of duty
Any selected Reviewer who does not feel qualified to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to complete the work quickly should notify the editor of FORCIPE and ask to be excluded from the review process of the corresponding manuscript.

3.3. Privacy
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. This work can not be opened and discussed with any persons who do not have the authority of the Editor.

3.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should clearly and argumentatively Express their opinion.

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) previously published in the manuscript must have a corresponding bibliographic reference. The reviewer should also draw the Editor's attention to the discovery of a significant similarity or coincidence between the manuscript in question and any other published work within the scientific competence of the Reviewer.

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 in the course of reviewing and related to possible benefits should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

3.6.2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts if there are conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies, or other organizations associated with the submitted work.

Responsibilities of authors
4.1. Requirements for manuscripts

Authors of reviews, scientific articles, reports on the original research should provide reliable results, objective discussion of the research. The work should contain enough details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

4.1.1. If the Authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, they should report it to the editorial Board of the journal and interact with it in order to withdraw the publication as soon as possible or correct errors. If the editorial Board has received information from a third party that the publication contains significant errors, the Authors must withdraw the work or correct the errors as soon as possible.

4.2. Data access and storage

Authors may be asked for raw data related to the manuscript for review by Editors. Authors should be prepared to provide open access to the information (according to the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), it is necessary to preserve this data for an adequate period of time after publication.

4.3. Originality and plagiarism

4.3.1 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as an author's work to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's work (without indicating authorship) and to claiming their own rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.3.2 Authors must make sure that the original work is presented in its entirety and, if other Authors ' works or statements are used, must provide appropriate bibliographic references or excerpts.

4.4. Recognition of primary sources

It is always necessary to recognize the contributions of others. Authors should refer to publications that are relevant to the performance of the work presented. Data obtained in private, such as during a conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the explicit written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as evaluating manuscripts or providing grants, should not be used without the explicit written permission of the Authors of the work related to confidential sources.

4.5. Multiplicity, redundancy and simultaneity of publications

4.5.1 the Author must not publish a manuscript 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.

4.5.2. The author should not submit a previously published article for consideration in another journal. 

4.5.3. The publication of a certain type of article (for example, clinical recommendations, translated articles) in more than one journal is in some cases ethical under certain conditions. Authors and Editors of interested journals must 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.

4.6. Authorship of the publication

The authors of the publication can only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the idea of the work, the development, execution or interpretation of the presented research. The author must make sure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and have 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, the operation of which may be any unusual risk, the Author should clearly indicate this in the manuscript.

4.7.2.  If animals or people are expected to participate in the research, the Authors should make sure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the research comply with the laws and regulations of research organizations, as well as approved by the relevant committees. The manuscript should clearly indicate that informed consent has been obtained from all the people who have become the subjects of research. Privacy rights must always be respected.