Aims and objectives

The research and clinical peer-reviewed journal Parodontologiya / Periodontology (Russia) has been published quarterly since 1996. It is the official publication of the Russian Periodontal Association (RPA).

The journal publishes original research articles containing results of clinical, clinical-experimental and fundamental studies, systematic and narrative reviews, case reports in periodontology, implant dentistry, diseases of the oral mucosa and related disciplines, as well as materials and reports on conferences and round tables, supporting materials promoting early implementation of cutting-edge scientific innovations in the clinical practice and professional development of researchers and dental care practitioners.

Objectives:

- to inform scientists, clinicians, teachers and students (postgraduates, residents, undergraduates, students) of the results of original clinical and experimental studies in periodontology, implant dentistry and allied disciplines conducted in Russia and abroad;

- to share practical experience;

- to define the basic areas and trends in the development of dentistry;

- to promote the early implementation of cutting-edge scientific innovations in the clinical practice.

The main target audience of the journal is researchers, dental therapists, dental surgeons, orthopedic dentists, orthodontists, maxillofacial surgeons, as well as radiologists, internists and other clinicians.

The journal aims:

- to select the best clinical, clinical-experimental and fundamental research in accordance with a selected scientific profile based on results of peer review by authoritative experts and distribution of them to the target audience. The journal drafts and publishes its editions in accordance established periodicity;

- to present research results of Russian and foreign academics and practitioners on topics covered by the journal to the international scientific community through the promotion of published materials in international information systems;

- to set up an international platform for academic discussion, share clinical experience and pedagogical practices between researches, healthcare practitioners and teachers of dental universities in Russia, the CIS countries and non-Russian-speaking countries;

- to inform the target readership of the journal about the achievements of world periodontology by publishing translated materials.

Journal Sections

RESEARCH -

Russian and foreign clinical studies on the main topic covered by the journal, as well as interdisciplinary studies with scientific and practical relevance for the development of periodontics are preferred. This section also publishes the results of meta-analysis, applied and experimental works that explore innovative technologies and techniques that are promising for implementation in dental practice.

When describing the results of original clinical and clinical-experimental studies, the standards of the international EQUATOR initiative should be followed (https://www.equator-network.org/):

- for clinical studies - CONSORT standard (http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-2010);

- for diagnostic studies - STARD standard (http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/stard/);

- for observational studies - STROBE standard (http://www.strobe-statement.org/);

– for genetic testing-STREGA standard (http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/strobe-strega/);

- for systematic reviews and meta-analyses - PRISMA standard (http://www.prisma-statement.org/);

- for public health studies - GATHER standard (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)30388-9/fulltext).

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

REVIEW -

In addition to systematic reviews and meta-analyses performed in accordance with the PRISMA standard, Parodontologiya accepts for publication narrative literature reviews. This type of review article usually prepared when writing a Dr. Sci. (Med.)/PhD thesis should not represent a chapter from the thesis. A narrative review of the literature should meet the requirements of an independent academic research study conducted on an actual topic, aimed at resolving a clearly formulated research question, defining the boundaries of knowledge in a chosen field of science, definition of contradictions in the works of predecessors, a critical analysis of published works, but not a list of conclusions from them.

In this regard, the mandatory requirements for a narrative literature review are the formulation of the study aim, description of methodology for searching for and selecting reliable and up-to-date sources of literature, a structured presentation of the research study results (thematic sections with titles) and their discussion (can be a separate section of the manuscript or go through all its thematic sections). The literature review should have practical relevance for the readers' evaluation of the current state of the problem and for planning their own research studies in this field.

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

CASE REPORT -

Articles describing a medical problem based on one or more clinical cases and with academic, clinical and/or educational significance are accepted in this category. To prepare a case report or a series of clinical cases, please adhere to the CARE standard (https://www.care-statement.org/checklist).

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

RPA LECTORIUM -

This section contains information and educational materials of the Russian Periodontal Association (RPA), reports on the proceedings of Russian and international congresses, conferences and symposia dedicated to dentistry and periodontology, programs of professional retraining and announcements about their time and venue, as well as translated materials of the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP), of which the RPA is a member.

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

REVIEW

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

REVIEW

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

RESEARCH

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

CASE REPORT

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

REVIEW

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

RESEARCH

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Periodicity

4 times a year

Open Access Policy

"Parodontologiya" («Periodontology (Russia)»)  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.

Section Policies

 RESEARCH -
All research in the field of periodontology and implantology

REVIEWS - Systematic reviews and scoping reviews in  periodontology and implantology
CLINICAL CASES -
in  periodontology and implantology

Archiving

• Russian State Library (RSL)
• National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
• Scientific Electronic Library (elibrary.ru)

Peer-Review

Recommendations for Reviewers

Reviewer's responsibility

By agreeing to review manuscripts for Parodontologiya, the Reviewer agrees to abide by the journal's policies in evaluating the manuscript, preparing the review, and in terms of reviewer behavior and ethical requirements.

The Reviewer should strive to ensure the high quality of the material published in Parodontologiya, as should the Editor, and should therefore review a manuscript only if he or she has sufficient experience in the field under review and sufficient time to thoroughly and comprehensively review the article.

The Reviewer is obliged to inform the editor of any conflict of interest (personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious) if any. In case of doubts, the situation should be discussed with the editor. 

The Reviewer is obliged to refuse to review if:

• he/she is a supervisor or subordinate of the author of the manuscript, as well as a holder of joint grants;
• does not plan to prepare a review, but only wants to familiarize with the text of the article;
• prepares his/her own article on a similar topic for publication;
• reviews an article on a similar topic

The Reviewer is obliged to inform the editor about his/her intention to review the article and to complete the work within the deadline specified by the editor. If it is impossible to review the paper for a number of reasons, it is advisable to recommend another reviewer to the editor.

The Reviewer may not use his/her status for personal purposes and impose references to his/her work on the authors.

All materials received from the editor of the journal are strictly confidential. The reviewer should not transfer the materials to third parties and involve other experts in reviewing the manuscript without the consent of the Editor of the journal Parodontologiya.

Recommendations for Reviewers

For the Reviewer's convenience, the editorial board of Parodontologiya suggests using the Quick Review Form - it reflects the questions that the editor needs answers to in order to make a decision about the article.

The Editorial Board asks the reviewer to pay more attention to the comments section to help authors improve current and future papers.

Content and structure of the review

NEICON guidelines were used to create the section. The Editorial Board of Parodontologiya received NEICON authorization to use the guidelines in the review policy of the journal.

10 criteria by which a manuscript should be evaluated:

•   originality; 
•   logical rigor;
•   statistical rigor; 
•   clarity and conciseness of writing style;
•   theoretical significance; 
•   reliable results; 
•   relevance to current areas of research; 
•   reproducibility of results; 
•   coverage of the literature; 
•   application of results. 

In addition to the rapid review form, the editorial board of Parodontologiya recommends that reviewers adhere to the following review structure.

Comments for the Editor 

Conflict of Interest - describes an actual or potential conflict of interest related to the content of the manuscript or its authors that could lead to a biased conclusion. 

Confidential Comments - this section is for comments that will not be shared with the authors. It includes the reviewer's final judgment on the fate of the manuscript, the reviewer's assumptions, expressions of doubt about possible ethical violations, and recommendations and accompanying comments (e.g., the reviewer may advise the editor to request additional information from the author). Anticipated decision - usually a brief conclusion about the fate of the manuscript (accept for publication, accept for publication after minor revision, accept for publication after major revision, reject, reject and invite the author to resubmit the article for consideration). 

Comments for authors

Introduction - this section describes the main findings and the value of the article to readers. Main comments - this section describes the relevance to the aims and objectives of the journal, the level of validity and ethical behavior. 

Special comments - the reviewer provides an evaluation of the sections of the article (abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion) or comments on specific pages, paragraphs, or lines. 

Recommendations to the author - the reviewer makes recommendations to the author to improve the quality of the manuscript and possibly future research. 

Concluding comment - a brief description of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript without any additional recommendations.

Criteria for manuscript evaluation

Relevance to the subject area

 No time should be spent reviewing an irrelevant manuscript, regardless of its quality. It should first be determined whether the manuscript is relevant to the subject area of the scholarly journal and the interests of its audience. 

Relevance

 Does the paper meet all the necessary requirements in terms of research design, scientific methods, structure and content, and depth of analysis, does it not deviate from the principles of unbiased scientific research, and are the results of the study reproducible? Is the study sample properly designed? Is it analyzed in sufficient detail to generalize the results of the study? 

Novelty

Does the research conducted bring something new to the relevant subject area? 

Ethicality

 Does the research meet the requirements of originality, has it been approved by an expert panel (if provided), is it impartial in terms of conflict of interest? Regardless of the perceived significance of the manuscript, it cannot be accepted for publication if it is redundant, plagiarized, or violates the basic ethical principles of scientific research: legitimacy, usefulness, and respect for human subjects.

Evaluation of manuscript elements

The Editorial Board of Parodontologiya suggests using the following questions to expedite the peer review process and provide the most complete information about the article to the Editor and Author.

Title 

Does the title accurately match the content of the manuscript? Will the title catch the readers' attention? 

Abstract

 Is the content of the manuscript adequately summarized in the abstract (abstract is structured, description of objectives, methods, results, and significance are presented)?

Are there discrepancies between the abstract and sections of the manuscript? Can the abstract be understood without reading the manuscript?

Introduction

Is the introduction concise? Is the purpose of the study and the objective clearly defined? Does the author justify the relevance and significance of the study based on the literature review? If yes, does this part meet the length requirements? Does the author provide definitions of terms that appear in the manuscript? If the manuscript is submitted to the “Original Research” section, does it have a clearly stated hypothesis?

Literature review

How holistic is the literature review? 

Methods 

Would another researcher be able to replicate the results of the study using the proposed methods, or are the methods unclear? 

Do the authors justify their choices when describing the research methods (e.g., choice of visualization methods, analytical tools, or statistical methods)? 

If the authors state a hypothesis, have they developed methods that allow reasonable testing of the hypothesis? 

How is the study design presented? 

How does the analysis of the data help in accomplishing the objective? 

Results 

Are the results clearly explained? Does the order in which the results are presented match the order in which the methods are described? Are the results justified and expected or unexpected? Are there results that are not preceded by an appropriate description in the methods section? How accurate is the presentation of the results? 

Discussion

Is the discussion concise? If not, how can it be shortened?

 If a hypothesis was stated, do the authors report whether it was confirmed or refuted? If the hypothesis was not confirmed, do the authors report whether the research question was answered? Are the authors' conclusions consistent with the results obtained in the study? If unexpected results are obtained, do the authors analyze them appropriately? What is the potential contribution of the study to the field and to global science?

Conclusion

Do the authors note limitations of the study? Are there additional limitations that should be noted? What are the authors' views on these limitations? What are the authors' views on the direction of future research? 

List of references 

Does the reference list follow the format of the journal? Are there any bibliographic errors in the reference list? Are the references to the articles in the reference list in the body of the paper correct? Are there important works that are not mentioned but should be noted? Are there more references in the article than necessary? Are the cited references up to date? 

Tables

 If there are tables in the article, do they correctly describe the results? Should one or more tables be added to the article? Is the data presented in tables appropriately handled and make the information easier to understand rather than more complicated?

 Figures

 Are tables and figures an appropriate choice for the task at hand? Can the results be illustrated in other ways? Do figures and graphs reliably show important results? Do the figures and graphs need to be modified to present the results more accurately and clearly? Do figure and graph captions allow the information to be understood without referring to the manuscript itself?

 Conflict of interest disclosure 

Are funding and conflict of interest disclosures clearly stated?

Reviewer's final decision

The Editorial Board of Periodontology suggests using the following rationale for the reviewer's final decision.

Accept the article for publication 

The reviewer realizes that the article is ready for publication in the current submission. The article is reasonable, ethical, significant for the scientific community and complements already published work, the writing style is clear and concise. 

Accept after minor revision

There are non-critical comments to the article that need to be corrected. This may be poor style of the article, lack of clarity of presentation, insufficiently elaborated structure of the article, errors in references, duplication of information in figures and tables and in the text of the article. After making changes and re-evaluation, the article can be accepted for publication. 

Accept after significant revision and repeated review of the article

 The article has serious flaws and errors affecting the reliability of the results obtained: problems with ethics, research design, gaps in the description of research methods, poorly presented results or their incorrect interpretation, insufficiently complete description of the limitations of the study, contradictory (or refuted by the author's own statements) conclusions, lack of references to important studies, unclear tables and figures that require serious revision. After re-evaluation, the article may be accepted, rejected, or sent for additional review. This decision often requires the collection of additional data from the author. 

Reject 

The paper does not meet the aims and objectives of the journal, has one or more irreparable flaws or serious ethical problems: consent for publication was not obtained where required, the research methods are unethical, the methodology is discredited or flawed (e.g., ignoring a process that seriously affects the results). In such a decision, the author should not submit a corrected paper for review without a specific request. The reviewer should provide detailed comments arguing their decision, as they may help the author to significantly improve the paper.

Reject and invite the author to resubmit the article for reconsideration

The topic or research question posed is interesting, but the author uses incorrect or insufficiently reliable methods, hence the data obtained are not reliable either. This decision is also possible when the article requires multiple revisions or when it is not possible to obtain the requested additional information from the author. Authors are encouraged to conduct the study with the recommended changes again and submit new results for consideration.

Review editing

The Editorial Board of Parodontologiya expects reviews to be written in a friendly tone and in accordance with the rules of the Russian language. Personal attacks, insulting the author, and unsubstantiated criticism of any aspect of the study, language and style of the manuscript, etc. are prohibited.

The Editorial Board of Parodontologiya  tries to pass the reviews to the authors in their original form, but in some cases it may be necessary to change the text of the review without losing its meaning (for example, when combining the comments of several experts on the same issue or in case of confidential comments in the section of the review, which is intended for the author).

The editorial board of Parodontologiya  has the right to send the review for revision to the expert in case of a large number of errors or unacceptable tone of the review.

Indexation

The journal is included in the following information systems and library catalogs:

• Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI)
• Google Scholar
• NLM Catalog
• The European Library
• Ulrich’s Periodical Directory
• Russian State Library
• Russian scientific medical journals
• Higher Attestation Commission (HAC)
• Database of All-Union Institute of Scientific and Technical Information (VINITI) of RAS

Editorial Ethics

Principles on informed consent

The journal Parodontologiya shares COPE's view that publication ethics includes not only ensuring the integrity and reliability of published research, but also ethical behavior with respect to research subjects. This category includes vulnerable populations, laboratory animals, human subjects (in the case of relevant research), confidential data, and business/marketing practices.

The journal Parodontologiya requires that informed consent/consent to publish be submitted for any research in which a person or group is identifiable. This consent form is also required when deceased individuals are mentioned in the study. Consent is required when publishing a clinical case, photographs, x-rays, etc. Authors must submit a statement to the Editorial Board of Parodontologiya reporting that informed consent has been obtained from the patient or his/her representative. The published article will include information about obtaining such consent

The journal Parodontologiya  relies on the principles of the World Medical Association's (WMA) policy statement - the Declaration of Helsinki - a statement of Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects) and endeavours to ensure compliance with ethical and data collection standards for research involving human subjects. Before beginning research, the researchers should familiarise themselves with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration on informed consent and carry out the research in strict accordance with those principles as set forth below (Articles 25-32 of the Helsinki Declaration are given):

25. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although, it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he/she freely agrees.

26. In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study.  The potential subject must be informed of his right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw his consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as the methods used to deliver the information.

After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject's freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing.  If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, verbal consent must be formally documented and witnessed.

All medical subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.

27. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study, the physician must be particularly cautious when the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations, the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
28. For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from his legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails minimal risk and burden.

 When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject's dissent should be respected.

30. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative.
31. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient's decision to withdraw from the study should never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
32. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptions where consent would be impossible or impractical to obtain for such research. In such situations, the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee.

Human Rights Policy

When presenting the results of experimental research involving human subjects, the authors should indicate whether the procedures performed adhered to the ethical standards prescribed in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the study was conducted without adherence to the principles of the Declaration, the authors should justify the chosen approach to the study and guarantee that the ethics committee of the organisation in which the study was conducted approved the chosen approach.

Dealing with confidential data

The right to privacy of individuals or organizations involved in the research is of paramount importance and should not be violated without their informed consent. The authors must take all necessary precautions to protect information about study participants. If necessary, the authors must take measures to minimize any potential physical and psychological harm to research participants.

Animal Rights Statement

Authors must indicate compliance with institutional and national standards for the use of laboratory animals when conducting an experimental study on animals (CONSENSUS AUTHOR GUIDELINES FOR ANIMAL USE)

The Editorial Board of Parodontologiya recommends the use of ARRIVE standards to provide more accurate and correct information about studies involving animals. The use of these standards will improve the quality and reliability of published articles and allow other researchers to reproduce the results.

Founder

City Periodontal Center "PAKS" Ltd. (Saint-Petersburg, Russia)

Publisher

Russian Periodontal Association (RPA) (Moscow, Russia)

Article Processing Charge (APC)

The article processing charge is a fee levied on authors for making their work available in open access. This fee can be paid either by the author themselves or by the institution where the author is employed. An open-access journal charges this fee to cover the costs associated with the publication process, including administration, peer review, and editing in both Russian and English, as well as
posting the final version of the article in the "Accepted for Publication" section, and ultimately publishing it in the journal's issue.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

This section is based on WAME guidelines

Conflicts of interest are conditions in which people have conflicting or competing interests that can influence editorial decision making as well as the interpretation of data in an article. Conflicts of interest can be potential or perceived, as well as actual conflicts of interest. Personal, political, financial, scientific, or religious factors may affect objectivity.

Conflicts of interest can cover the following areas:

• Financial: this conflict arises when a participant in the publication process has received or expects to receive money (or other financial benefits such as patents or stock), gifts, or favors that may affect the work associated with a particular publication. Examples: research payments, consulting and public speaking fees, etc.
• Personal relationships: this conflict arises in the case of personal relationships with family, friends, competitors, former colleagues.
• Political and religious beliefs: adherence to one religion, political party can influence the outcome of an article analyzing these issues.
• Institutional affiliation: this conflict arises when one of the participants in the publication process is directly related to the organization that is interested in the publication.

The Editorial Board of Parodontologiya may ask the authors additional questions or request more information if needed.

Conflict of interest may concern authors, reviewers and editors. The following policy statements have been prepared based on ICMJE guidelines.

Responsibilities of authors in disclosing conflicts of interest

When authors submit a manuscript of any type or format, they have an obligation to disclose all relationships and activities that may influence or be considered to influence their work. The author must notify the editor of any actual or potential conflicts of interest by including a conflict of interest disclosure in the appropriate section of the article. If there is no conflict of interest, the author must also disclose it. Example wording is “The author declares that there is no conflict of interest”.

Reviewers' responsibilities in disclosing conflicts of interest

Reviewers must inform the editors of any conflict of interest that may affect their opinion of the manuscript, and they must recuse themselves from reviewing if there is reason for bias. Reviewers should not use information about a peer-reviewed paper to their advantage before it is published.  

Editors' responsibilities when disclosing conflicts of interest

Editors who make final decisions on manuscripts should recuse themselves from editorial decisions if they have a conflict of interest or a relationship that could create potential conflicts related to the articles under consideration. Other editorial staff members involved in editorial decisions should inform editors of their current interest (as they may influence editorial decisions), and recuse themselves from decisions when conflicts of interest exist. Editorial staff members should not use the information obtained during the work with manuscripts for personal purposes. Editors should regularly publish reports on potential conflicts of interest related to their own and the journal staff's activities. Guest editors should follow the same procedures. 

Articles by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, the Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the journal, members of the Editorial Board and the Editorial Board of Parodontologiya should clearly indicate a connection to the Parodontologiya  journal.

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is found in an unpublished article, the Editorial Board of Parodontologiya  acts in accordance with COPE guidelines.

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is identified in a published article, the Editorial Board of Parodontologiya acts in accordance with the COPE guidelines.

Plagiarism detection

Parodontologiya journal uses 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 Deposition Policy

The editorial board of the Parodontologiya  allows authors to post the manuscript as a preprint before submission for review and to archive independently their articles in disciplinary and institutional repositories.

Preprints

The editorial board of the Parodontologiya encourages uploading preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as 'a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.' 

A preprint publication shall not be considered duplicate publication nor shall it influence the editor's decision to publish it in the Parodontologiya 

The author must notify the editorial board of the Parodontologiya  about the posted preprint at submission of the manuscript for review, furnishing a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and the dissemination terms and conditions.

It is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published manuscript in the preprint record. The link must contain the DOI and the URL of the article published on the journal's website. The original preprint should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint should not be replaced with the text of the published article.

Do not delete the preprint text.

Manuscripts Accepted for Publication

The editorial board of the Parodontologiya  allows manuscripts that have been reviewed and are accepted for publication to be archived independently.

 This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:

-   personal website or blog;

-   institutional repository;

-   disciplinary repository;

-   direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.

The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information about the planned publication.

Example: The ARTICLE TITLE has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in 2021 (3) of the Parodontologiya 

Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.

Final Versions of Manuscripts

The editorial board of the Parodontologiya  allows manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and ready for publication (proofread and typeset) to be archived independently.

 This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:

-   personal website or blog;

-   institutional repository;

-   disciplinary repository;

-   direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.

 Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.

Data sharing policy

Authors are encouraged to make the research data that support their publications available but are not required to do so. The decision to publish will not be affected by whether or not authors share their research data.

Definition of research data

This policy applies to the research data that would be required to verify the results of research reported in articles published in the journal Parodontologiya  . Research data include data produced by the authors (“primary data”) and data from other sources that are analysed by authors in their study (“secondary data”). Research data includes any recorded factual material that are used to produce the results in digital and non-digital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio, documents, video, maps, raw and/or processed data.

Definition of exceptions

The data that is not a subject to public disclosure may be delivered as follows: deposited in science data repositories with limited access or preliminary anonymised. An author can also publicly deliver metadata only and/or description of the method of access to the data under requests from other scholars.

Data repositories

The preferred mechanism for sharing research data is via data repositories. Please see or https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/ for help finding research data repositories.

Data citation

The Editorial Board of the Journal  Parodontologiya   welcomes access to data under Creative Commons Licenses. Editorial Board of the Journal  Parodontologiya   does not insist on the obligatory use of Creative Commons in case when the data is deposited in the repositories of the third party. The Publisher of the Journal  Parodontologiya   does not assert any copyrights for the data submitted by the author together with the article.  

Questions regarding the observation of that policy shall be sent to the executive secretary of the Journal  Parodontologiya .

Post-publication discussions and revisions to published articles

Advertising Policy in the Journal

This secion was based on Recommendations on Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals WAME.

Many scientific journals receive income from advertising or reprints, which is almost always associated with the emergence of a potential conflict of interest. Editorial decisions does not depend on the cost of advertising or reprints. The functions of the editor and advertising manager in the journal is separated. Advertisers and investors do not have control over editor’s decisions, regardless of advertising conditions or other agreements.

Reprints are published only in the form in which they were originally published in the journal (including subsequent corrections), therefore, they do not have additions or changes.

The content of special additional issues (if any) is governed only by editorial decisions; sponsors or advertisers do not influence the content of such a release.

Restrictions on the volume of advertising materials in the journal is described and included in the journal policy. If articles in additional issues pass an expert assessment that is different from the standard procedure adopted in the journal, this is reflected on the journal’s website.

The journal has an official advertising policy, it is accessible to all participants in the publishing process. Briefly: all advertisements must uniquely identify the advertiser and the product or service offered. In drug advertising, the full name of each active ingredient is indicated.

Commercial advertising is not placed next to any editorial or article that discusses the advertised product and does not contain links to the issue of the jornal in which it is posted.

Advertising content is different from editorial and other materials so that the difference between them is obvious.

Advertising is not bedeceiving or misleading. Advertising does not exaggerate the real characteristics
product being advertised. Advertising does not contain offensive considerations of a religious, racial, religious nature.

Advertised products focus on medical practice, medical education or medical care.

The journal has the right to refuse to place any advertising message for any reason. The decision to publish an advertisement is be made only with the participation of the editor and the editorial board of the journal.

Price per copy

Open price (article 27 of the Media Law of the Russian Federation)

CrossMark Policy

CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content. By applying the CrossMark logo, journal "Parodontologiya " is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.

Clicking the CrossMark logo on a document will tell you its current status and may also give you additional publication-record information about the document.