Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Aims and Scope

The journal focuses on:

  • Integration of advanced methods of prevention, diagnostics and management of cardiovascular system pathologies in Russian clinical practice, while relying on those procedures the efficacy and safety of which are confirmed in the course of clinical trials
  • Provision of practicing clinicians with precise scientific information that reflects the world-wide trends in specialty development in order to be able to make the right clinical decisions in daily practice
  • Integration of progressive experience of Russian cardiologists and cardiac surgeons in the international scientific space
  • Being a platform for evaluation of scientific ideas and concepts, sharing experiences, as well as for personal fulfillment of young cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, cardiac anesthesiologists.

The scope of the journal includes:

  • Publication of the findings of peer-reviewed clinical, experimental and fundamental studies, clinical cases, reviews and discussions on cardiology, cardiovascular surgery, cardiac anesthesiology, neurosurgery and oncology
  • Familiarization of practicing specialists with the news from the world cardiological congresses, experts’ recommendations and viewpoints, most recent results of the research focused on the management of cardiovascular diseases.

Researchers, practicing clinicians: cardiologists, cardiovascular surgeons, pediatric cardiologists, specialists in roentgen-endovascular diagnostics and management, anesthesiologists-intensivists, oncologists, neurosurgeons and radiotherapists, medical university teachers and postgraduate students. 


Section Policies

The journal publishes papers on the following specialisms:

  • Congenital Heart Disease
  • Inherited Heart Disease
  • Coronary Artery Disease
  • Vascular Surgery
  • Anesthesiology & Resuscitation
  • Heart Rhythm Disorders
  • Electrophysiology
  • Neurosurgery
  • Oncology
  • History of Cardiac Surgery
  • Original Research Articles
  • Reviews
  • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
  • Case Reports
  • Editorials
  • Personality (History of Cardiac Surgery)
Publication criteria
  • Papers should contain the results of original research
  • The findings are described clearly, honestly, without data fudging and manipulation
  • Papers have not been published in or sent for publication to other journals
  • All authors included into a study should comply with the authorship guidelines
  • Experiments, statistics and other analyses are presented in detail and done to a high specification.
  • The conclusions should be confirmed by the data obtained
  • The research meets the established international ethical standards (respect for patients’ rights and confidentiality), as well as those of the author’s institution or the national ethics committee responsible for the experiments with participation of a human/people or animals
  • The authors abide by the rules of disclosing the conflicts of interest and funding sources.



Original research submitted to Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery journal articles are reviewed by internal and external experts. The editors and members of the Editorial Board of the journal are allowed to publish their articles in the journal, however, in this case they must not hold sway over the reviewing process. Editorials are not subject to external reviewing.

We offer double-blind review, i.e. both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. However, the reviewers if they wish may sign their notes. An open expert overview does not imply that the authors may directly correspond to the reviewers; all requests should be sent as before to the Editorial Team. 

Internal reviewing

On receipt of a manuscript, the managing editor and the executive secretary check for:

  • compliance of the material with the journal’s profile
  • availability of forwarding documents and authors’ signatures
  • design and structure of the article
  • presence of information on research financing, conflict of interest, acknowledgments, authors’ contributions to the research 
  • compliance with Equator Network reporting guidlines
  • compliance with the ethical norms
  • the originality of content by plagiarism screening service.

At the stage of internal reviewing, the paper could be returned to the authors for revision. The papers suited for further reviewing will undergo expert evaluation by two independent reviewers. External experts are chosen by the executive secretary.

External reviewing

All reviewers are competent specialists in the subjects of papers under review and have publications related to the article to be reviewed during the recent 3 years. Eligible for reviewing are the members of the Editorial Board and guest experts in the appropriate branch of medicine. As a rule, an article is reviewed by two external experts and statistical analysis editor.

Statistical reviewing

Original research articles containing statistical methods are forwarded by the Editorial Board to the statistical analysis editor. The requirements for describing statistical methods are given in the For Authors section.

Manuscript correction 

The Editorial Board enters into correspondence with the author pointed out in the cover letter as a corresponding one. The corresponding author adjusts all changes with his/her co-authors.

If a review contains recommendations for any corrections and revisions in the paper, the editors send the reviewer’s comments to the corresponding author requesting to consider these comments while preparing a new version of the paper, or to disprove them (partially or fully) in a well-argued manner. The author italicizes the corrections in colors and gives the answers to the reviewers’ questions while pointing to what he agrees with and what he doesn’t at the end of the manuscript. Revising the manuscript should not exceed 2 months starting from the time the notice to introduce changes is sent to the authors. The paper revised by the author is recurrently forwarded for reviewing. 

If the author disagrees with the reviewer’s opinion, he should submit a well-reasoned response to the editorial office. In the event the author and the reviewers face insoluble conflicts regarding the manuscript, the editorial office is eligible to send it for additional reviewing. In a conflict situation, the decision is to be made by the Editor-in-Chief.

Refusal to correct a manuscript

If the authors decide not to revise their materials, they have to notify the editorial office, in writing or orally, of their refusal from publishing the paper. Should the authors fail to return the revised version within 3 months after receiving the review, even in the absence of the authors’ notice of their refusal to revise the paper, the editorial office will strike it off the register. In such cases the authors are duly notified that their manuscript won’t be published owing to expiration of the time specified for revision of the paper.

Denial of publication

The decision to deny publication of the paper is made by the Editor-in-Chief and editorial staff according to the reviewers’ recommendations. The paper not recommended for publication won’t be reconsidered. The editorial office sends a well-argued denial of publication and recommendations for paper correction to the authors and undertakes to forward copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russian Federation, should the editors receive an appropriate request to do so. 


If the authors do not agree on the editorial office’s decision and think that the denial of publication was unjust, they should send an appeal to the editorial office within 30 days after receiving the denial notice. 

The appeal should contain all of the remarks of the editors and reviewers that the authors do not agree with. The editorial office may change its initial decision, if injustice of the remarks is proved and rebutted by the authors and the latter submit additional documents confirming their point of view. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief. 

Basic principles to which peer reviewers should adhere

Peer reviewers should:
  • only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner

  • respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal

  • not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others

  • declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest

  • not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations

  • be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments

  • acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner

  • provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise

  • recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Irene Hames on behalf of COPE Council March 2013, v. 1

How to review a paper

The journal uses an electronic reviewing process and has an electronic database of reviewers. To get access to a review form, log in and inform the editor about your scientific interests. A reviewer fills out the form in his personal account at the journal’s site.

Review form

After reviewing, the expert gives recommendations. As soon as the recommendation is provided, the paper’s status in the author’s personal account at our site is changed. The following options of the status might pop up:

Manuscript accepted. Reviewers have no major remarks. The paper is to be handled by a proofreader, editor and layout artist.

Corrections needed. The paper needs methodological revision. The author receives an electronic message on the paper status and anonymous reviewers’ comments.

Manuscript denied. Authors get a well-argued denial.


Publishing Ethics

The journal publishes articles which meet the unified international requirements for manuscripts to be published in biomedical journals. The ethical principles of the journal’s scientific papers share the recommendations of international committees and associations contained in the following documents:

  • Elsevier Publishing House guidelines
  • Materials of International Committee on Ethics (COPE)
  • Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (official version on the www.ICMJE.org website)
  • NEICON SHKOLA (National Electronic/Information Consortium School) training/consulting center materials

Duties of Editors

Publication decision

The Editor of a learned “Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery” is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions.

The Editor may be guided by the policies of the “Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery” journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editor and any editorial staff of “Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery” must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’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.

Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

Vigilance over published record

An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of “Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery” and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

Standard and objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources  

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

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.

The reviewers should inform the editors about potential or evident competing interests as quick as possible. 

Duties of Authors

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

The authors bear corporative responsibility for their work and content of the publication. The researchers should check their publications at every stage to ensure that all methods and findings are accurately presented. They should carefully verify all estimates, data presentation, documents drawn up by them and evidence.

False or knowingly fraudulent statements are considered as improper conduct and are unacceptable by the journal’s editors.

Data Access and Retention 

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship credit should be based only on:

  • substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and
  • interpretation of data;
  • drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
  • final approval of the version to be published.

Conditions (1), (2), and (3) must all be met. Acquisition of funding, the collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, by themselves, do not justify authorship.

All authors should agree to be listed and should approve the submitted and accepted versions of the publication. Any change to the author list should be approved by all authors including any who have been removed from the list. 


All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.


All participants who do not fulfill authorship criteria should be named in the Acknowledgement section. Appreciation should be expressed to those who provide technical assistance, or to the department head. Financial and actual support should be also acknowledged.

Corresponding Author

The corresponding author should act as a point of contact between the editor and the other authors and should keep co-authors informed and involve them in major decisions about the publication (e.g. responding to reviewers’ comments). In the cover letter it is necessary to include the corresponding author’s phone number and email. His name should be asterisked on the title page. 

Authors should respond to reviewers’ comments in a professional and timely manner.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects 

When sending a paper to the “Pathology of Circulation and Cardiac Surgery” journal, the authors state that their research meets the existing international ethical standards (respect for patients’ rights and confidentiality) and their institution’s standards or those of the Federal Committee liable for the experiments with participation of a human (s) or animals.  

If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed. The participants of research should be disguised.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of  “Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery” journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.


Competing Interests

Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery journal follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals:

A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients' welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Perceptions of conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest.

Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership or options, honoraria, patents, and paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and of science itself. However, conflicts can occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships or rivalries, academic competition, and intellectual beliefs. Authors should avoid entering in to agreements with study sponsors, both for-profit and non-profit, that interfere with authors’ access to all of the study’s data or that interfere with their ability to analyze and interpret the data and to prepare and publish manuscripts independently when and where they choose.

Who declares conflict of interest?

All participants in the peer-review and publication process – not only authors but also peer reviewers, editors, and editorial board members of journals – must consider their conflicts of interest when fulfilling their roles in the process of article review and publication and must disclose all relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest.


All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. The information on a conflict of interest is placed in the end of the article and in the “Conflict of Interest” section on our online submission system. This will be included in the published article. If there is nothing to declare, the authors add the phrase “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

Peer Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work they’re reviewing before its publication to further their own interests. The information on a conflict of interest is placed in the “Conflict of Interest” section on our online reviewing system.

Editors and Journal Staff

Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts should recuse themselves from editorial decisions if they have conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential conflicts related to articles under consideration. Other editorial staff members who participate in editorial decisions must provide editors with a current description of their financial interests or other conflicts (as they might relate to editorial judgments) and recuse themselves from any decisions in which a conflict of interest exists. Editorial staff must not use information gained through working with manuscripts for private gain. Editors should publish regular disclosure statements about potential conflicts of interests related to the commitments of journal staff. Guest editors should follow these same procedures.

Our Policy on Funding

At the end of the article and before the references there should be a heading “Financing”, with all the sources of funding disclosed. The authors describe the role of the study sponsor(s), if any, in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication. If there was no sponsorship, then the statement “The study had no sponsorship” should be added. 

Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery journal follows COPE’s recomendations:


Plagiarism Detection

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Borrowed parts of the text without reference sources are inadmissible.

Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Antiplagiarism System

The Editorial Board of Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery journal reserves the right to check the materials for plagiarism by means of the plagiarism screening service. Authors can also use plagiarism screening service to screen their work before submission.

Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery journal follows COPE’s recomendations: 


Reporting Guidelines

When describing the research results, please meet the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network guidelines for different types of biomedical study. Authors should follow these guidelines because they help to describe the study in enough detail for it to be evaluated by editors, reviewers, readers, and other researchers evaluating the medical literature. 

If you don’t know which recommendations are suitable for your research, please use an online tool developed by EQUATOR Network and Penelope Research.

Reporting guidelines for main study types are:

  • Randomised controlled trials: CONSORT
  • Observational studies: STROBE
  • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA
  • Case reports: CARE
  • Animal pre-clinical studies: ARRIVE
  • Study protocols: SPIRIT
  • Clinical practice guidelines: AGREE


Publication Fee

The quarterly’s Editorial Board publishes the authors’ papers free of charge. No fees are charged for preparation, reviewing, layout and printing of the materials.




According to the ICMJE authorship is based on the following 4 criteria:

  • Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
  • Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
  • Final approval of the version to be published; AND
  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. 


When registering at the journal’s site, please indicate your ORCID ID in a specially provided field. If you have no ORCID ID yet, please get your digital identifier at http://orcid.org/.


Open Access Policy

The Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery journal offers open access to the full texts of the articles. The authors reserve the copyright for their works and transfer the right of the first publication together with the work to the journal, while simultaneously licensing the article under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms and conditions. The license permits to copy and disseminate the material in any media and format, make remixes, modify and create novel materials on its basis for any purposes including commercial ones.

Please pay special attention to the terms and conditions of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). If you wish another type of license, notify us about it.



ISSN: 1681-3472 (Print)
ISSN: 2500-3119 (Online)