About the Journal

GOALS AND PURPOSES

Aims and Scope

Urologiia (Urology) is a scientific peer-reviewed medical journal that aims to publish quality articles highlighting the latest achievements in the field of urology, andrology, nephrology and urologic oncology. In accordance with this goal, we publish timely, practical, and state-of-the-art contributions on clinical research and experience in the relevant field. The Journal encompasses all aspects of basic urological research, etiology, pathogenesis, advanced methods of diagnosis, prevention and treatment of genitourinary system diseases, inflammation of various etiologies, urolithiasis, renal insufficiency, reconstructive surgery, andrology and pediatric urology.
The audience is primarily urologists, andrologists, nephrologists, surgeons, obstetricians, pediatricians, general practitioners, medical researchers.
The Journal is indexed in Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, Pub Med, Biological Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, Excerpta Medica, Index Medicus.
Being an invaluable source of both basic science and clinical research, the Journal "Urologiia" is best known for its contribution to the education of many generations of Russian scientific and medical professionals. Publication in this journal has become an important measure of scientific and practical significance for the vast majority of doctoral and master's dissertations.
Since 2012 the Journal has been published by Bionika Media Publishing House.
Bionika Media Publishing House seeks to comply with the ethical standards at all stages, ensuring that publication process conforms to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals (http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf).

Our Primary Objectives

Publish high-quality research papers that meet international standards of scientific publications;
Further improve the general quality of reviewing and editing of manuscripts submitted for publication;
Provide a widest possible dissemination of the published articles among the global scientific community;
Extend distribution and indexing of scientific publications in key international citation bases.

SECTIONS

Original studies
Reviews
Clinical cases
Lectures
Actual issues of pharmacotherapy and preventive treatment
Pages of history
Anniversary

FREQUENCY OF APPEARANCE

The journal publishes 6 issues per year.

ARCHIVING

Information about all articles published in the journal is stored in the scientific electronic library eLibrary. Advanced search by journal articles is available: by keywords, author, title, section, etc. A link to the full text of the article is indicated on its page in eLibrary.

Full texts of articles are stored on the publisher’s server (access through the Archive of issues section of the journal’s website).

Printed copies of the journal issues are transferred for permanent storage to the Russian Book Chamber – a branch of ITAR-TASS, the Russian state library and other leading libraries of the Russian Federation.

PEER REVIEW

The review of articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal Urologiia is carried out in accordance with the recommendations of:

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE);
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE);
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME, see here and here);
Council of Science Editors (CSE).

Scientific articles submitted to the editorial board undergo mandatory double-blind peer review (the reviewer does not receive information about the authors of the material, the authors of the material do not receive information about the reviewers).

1. Upon receipt of the article by the editorial board, the head of the editorial board within 1 week evaluates its compliance with the requirements of the journal, and also checks the originality of the article in the Antiplagiat system. If these stages are successfully passed, the material moves on to the peer review stage, the head of the editorial board sends it to the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief to determine the reviewers.

2. The editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief determines within 2 weeks whether the article complies with the profile of the journal and sends it for review to at least 2 relevant specialists – doctors (candidates) of medical sciences, who have sufficient experience in scientific work in the scientific direction stated in the article. According to the direction of the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief, the head of the editorial board may decide to select a reviewer to perform an examination of the article.

3. Reviewers may be members of the editorial board or editorial council of the journal or invited experts.

4. All reviewers are familiar with the requirements imposed by the editorial board on published materials and have publications on the topic of the article under review over the past 3 years.

5. The review does not involve specialists working in the same research institution where the work under review was completed.

6. The reviewer works with the article as confidential material, strictly observing the author’s right to non-disclosure of the information contained in the article until publication. The reviewer may involve other experts in the work only with the permission of the editors and also on confidentiality terms.

The reviewer should not keep a copy of the article under review or use the work in his/her work.

See also the section on confidentiality in the ICMJE Recommendations.

7. The review period is 2–4 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.

8. The review should indicate whether the article corresponds to its title, characterize its relevance and scientific level, advantages and disadvantages, and assess the appropriateness of publication.

9. Following the review of the article, the reviewer makes one of the following recommendations (each reviewer’s decision is substantiated):

the article is recommended for publication in its current form;
the article is recommended for publication after correction of the deficiencies noted by the reviewer without additional reviewing;
the article requires revision and subsequent re-reviewing;
the article cannot be published in the journal even after revision.

10. In case of minor comments by the reviewer that require only editorial corrections, with the consent of the author they can be made by the editorial board independently, and the article is accepted for publication without additional corrections by the author.

11. If the reviewer recommends revision of the article, the head of the editorial board sends the text of the review (without the signature and information of the reviewer) to the author for making the appropriate changes to the material. The author is asked to take into account the reviewer’s recommendations or to refute them with arguments (partially or completely). Revision of the article should not take more than 2 months from the moment the letter about the need to make changes is sent to the author.

12. In case of refusal to revise the material, the author must notify the editors in writing about the refusal to publish the article.

13. If the author does not return the revised version of the material after 2 months from the date of sending the review (even if the editors have not received from the author a refusal to revise the article), the editors will remove it from registration. The author is sent a notification about the article being removed from registration due to the expiration of the period allotted for revision.

14. After receiving the revised article, the editorial board act as follows:

if the reviewer recommended the article for publication after correcting the deficiencies noted by him without additional review, then the head of the editorial board and the scientific editor (if necessary) check whether the author has made the appropriate corrections. If the corrections are made correctly, the article is accepted for publication. The need for additional corrections is discussed in the correspondence between the editors and the author;
if the reviewer recommended sending the article for re-reviewing after making corrections, then the article revised by the author is re-sent for review.

15. The editors perform no more than 3 rounds of reviewing for each article. If, after three revisions of the material, the reviewers or the editors still have significant comments, the article is rejected and removed from registration. The author is sent a notification of the article being removed from registration.

16. If the author and reviewers have irreconcilable disagreements regarding the article, the editors have the right to send the material for additional review by another specialist (including at the author’s reasoned request). In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

17. The decision to refuse publication of an article is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended for publication by the editorial board will not be accepted for re-examination. The author whose article was not accepted for publication is sent a reasoned refusal. The editors do not enter into correspondence with the authors regarding the reason for refusing to publish the article.

18. A positive review is not a sufficient ground for publishing an article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief. The editors notify the author in writing of the acceptance of the article for publication.

19. Reviews of articles (as well as correspondence between the editors and the author) are not published in the public domain and are used only in the internal document flow of the editors, as well as when communicating with the author or resolving conflict situations. A copy of the review of the article may be provided to its author upon request. Copies of reviews may be provided to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a corresponding request by the editors.

20. The original reviews are kept by the editors for 5 years.

Responsibilities of the reviewer

In order to contribute to the decision-making process on the advisability of publishing an article and help improve its quality, the reviewer must:

act objectively and timely;
notify the editor if a reviewer does not feel qualified to review an article or does not have enough time to complete the review promptly, and ask to be excluded from the review process for that article;
evaluate the article critically but constructively;
avoid derogatory comments and personal criticism of the authors;
prepare detailed, reasoned comments about the research and the article that can help the authors improve the work;
identify and indicate in the review cases where relevant published works have not been cited in the text of the article or are not listed in the reference list; identify and indicate in the review whether all statements, conclusions, and ideas borrowed from other publications are provided with references to the source;
notify the editor if a significant overlap or similarity between the article submitted for review and any other published materials known to the reviewer is discovered;
notify the editor of any apparent or potential conflict of interests that may affect the perception and interpretation of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational or other relationships between the reviewer and the author). See also the section on disclosing conflicts of interests in ICMJE guidelines.

In operations, the reviewer is guided by Singapore Statement on Research Integrity.

A list of reviewer responsibilities can be found in WAME materials (here and here), and the role and responsibilities of the reviewer can also be found in CSE Recommendations.

Ethical principles for reviewers are presented by COPE.

Indexing Databases

ETHICAL STANDARDS

Publisher LLC “Bionika Media” issues a large number of publications, including medical and pharmaceutical, most of which are published on behalf of scientific communities and other similar organizations. The main task of the publisher is to disseminate accumulated knowledge and the results of performed research work throughout the world. The publisher keeps a neutral position on all issues that are covered in articles published in journals. Published information serves as a basis for further discussions, regardless of the topic, be it religious, gender, environmental, ethical or other controversial topics.

Publication of an article in a scientific peer-reviewed journal performs several functions, one of which is to check and preserve the progress, stages and reliably accurate results of the research. The publication process includes many stages, each of which plays an important role. The author of the publication, journal editor, reviewer, publisher and representative of the society to which the journal belongs (if applicable) are obliged to observe ethical standards at all stages of the publication, starting from the submission of the article and ending with its publication in the journal.

The editors of the journal will carefully and responsibly consider all justified requests regarding the discovered violations in the published materials.

The publisher LLC “Bionika Media” strives to comply with the standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process, closely following the recommendations of international committees and associations that set relevant standards and provide guidelines for best practice in order to meet these requirements:

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE);
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE);
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME);
European Association of Science Editors (EASE).

The editorial board and publisher of the journal:

adhere to the documents on editorial policy developed by the Council of Science Editors (CSE), which describe the responsibilities and rights of editors of peer-reviewed journals;
accept the Core Practices and Principles of Transparency and Best Practices in Scientific Publishing prepared by COPE, as well as the provisions of the Sarajevo Declaration on the Integrity and Visibility of Scientific Publications.

See also the editorial policy of the publishing house LLC “Bionika Media”.

1. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

1.1. Duties of the editor

1.1.1. The editor must act objectively and fairly in the performance of his or her duties, evaluate the intellectual content of manuscripts without discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnicity or geographical origin of the authors.

1.1.2. The editor must ensure that published materials comply with international standards of scientific and publication ethics.

1.1.3. The editor is obliged to ensure the high quality of published materials and their substantive integrity, as well as to publish corrections, clarifications, and apologies when necessary.

1.1.4. The editor is obliged to guarantee that all submitted articles will be objectively assessed in terms of their scientific significance without any commercial influence.

1.1.5. If there is a conflict of interests between the editor and the author of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational, or other relationships between the editor and the author), the editor is obliged to transfer the article to another editor.

1.1.6. The editor is obliged to keep the names and details of the reviewers confidential and not to disclose the names and details of the authors of the articles to the reviewers.

1.1.7. The editor is responsible for disclosing any information about the received manuscript to third parties who don’t belong to the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, and publishers.

1.1.8. The editor must warrant that all complaints and contradictions are considered in accordance with the policy of scientific society. The author must be given an opportunity to respond to any complaints and substantiate any contradictions. All complaints must be considered regardless of when the publication was approved. All documentation somehow related to the complaints must be retained.

1.1.9. The editor has the right to reject a manuscript at the stage preceding the peer review if there is a compelling reason for this: the topic of the article does not correspond to the topic of the journal; the article is of obviously low scientific quality; the article has been previously published in another publication; the submitted materials reveal a fundamental contradiction with the ethical principles adhered to by the journal, etc. For more details, see the Rules for authors.

1.2. Responsibilities of a Reviewer

The purpose of the peer review process is to assist the editors in making editorial decisions and to assist the author in improving the submitted manuscript. In this connection, a reviewer should:

act objectively and in a timely manner;
inform the editors if a reviewer decides, that he / she does not feel qualified to review an article or does not have enough time to complete the review promptly, and request to be excluded from reviewing the relevant article;
evaluate the article critically but constructively;
avoid derogatory comments and personal criticism of the authors;
prepare detailed, reasoned comments about the research and the article that can assist the authors in improving the work;
identify and indicate in the review instances where relevant published work has not been cited in the text of the article or is not listed in the reference list; identify and indicate in the review whether all statements, conclusions, and ideas borrowed from other publications are provided with references;
notify the editorial board if the reviewed article has a significant overlap or similarity with any other published material known to the reviewer;
warn the editorial board if there is an obvious or potential conflict of interest that could affect the perception and interpretation of the article (financial, professional, personal, organizational or other relationships between the reviewer and the author). See also the section on disclosing conflicts of interest in ICMJE Recommendations.

In their work, the reviewer is guided by the Singapore Statement of Research Integrity.

A list of reviewer responsibilities can be found in WAME materials (here and here), and the role and responsibilities of the reviewer can also be found in CSE Recommendations. Ethical principles for reviewers are presented by COPE.

2. AUTHORSHIP OF PUBLICATIONS

In their work, the editors of the journal are guided by the ICMJE criteria for authorship.

ICMJE recommends defining authorship according to 4 criteria:

substantial contribution to the development of the concept or design of the work; or collection, analysis, interpretation of the obtained data;
writing the article or editing it to enhance its scientific significance;
final approval of the version of the work to be published;
agreement to take responsibility and to ensure that all questions related to the accuracy or integrity of all parts of the work are investigated and resolved.

Involvement consisting only of providing funding or selecting material for an article does not justify inclusion in the author’s group. General leadership of a research team is also not considered sufficient for authorship.

The article must contain the contribution of each author to its writing (see Rules for authors).

First Author. The first in the list of co-authors should be the head of the author’s group of the manuscript, who took the greatest part in the process of preparing the text and is familiar with the entire process of performing scientific work. The head of the author’s group should also be the “corresponding author” – for communication with the editors of the journal and readers (after the publication of the article).

Co-authors can be those who made a significant contribution to the preparation of the text of the manuscript and performed research. If the study participants made a significant contribution in a certain direction in the research project, then they should be listed as persons who made a significant contribution to this study.

The author confirms that all participants who made a significant contribution to the study are listed as co-authors and that no co-authors are listed who did not participate in the study.

All persons listed as authors must approve the final version of the article and agree to submit it for publication in the Urologiia journal under the terms of the offer agreement (including the transfer of exclusive rights), duly authorize the author to submit the article for publication and communicate with the editors.

3. BORROWING AND PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism can exist in various forms – from presenting someone else’s work as the author’s own to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else’s work (without indicating the author), claiming one’s own rights to the results of someone else’s research.

The editors classify the following forms of plagiarism:

use (verbatim quotation) of any materials in any volume without indicating the author and the source of borrowing;
use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams and any other forms of graphic presentation of information without indicating the author and the source of borrowing;
use of images, drawings, photographs, tables, graphs, diagrams and any other forms of graphic presentation of information published in scientific and popular publications or other sources, without the consent of the copyright holder;
use without written permission of materials whose authors or copyright holders have not permitted the use of their materials without special consent;
other use of intellectual property that does not belong to the authors in violation of the current legislation.

Plagiarism in all forms is unethical and unacceptable.

When reviewing an article, the editors of the journal check it using the Antiplagiat system. If the editors have reasons for a more detailed check, additional tools may be used to search for plagiarism. Taking into account the variety of forms that plagiarism can take, each case is considered individually. When plagiarism is detected, the editors act in accordance with the COPE rules.

The editors of the Urologiia journal strongly discourage the use of any technical methods that can increase the text score in the Antiplagiat system. Articles with signs of technical modifications aimed at artificially increasing the uniqueness of the text will not be published in the journal, even if revised.

If unauthorized borrowings are detected, as well as if the originality coefficient of the text is low (<85%), the manuscript is rejected for publication.

Reviews and other articles that, for objective reasons, require a greater number of citations are considered by the editors on an individual basis.

Authors of manuscripts must present completely original works. Mentions of the results of other authors’ work must be accompanied by references to the relevant primary sources, which must be included in the list of references. Citations of previously published text must be formatted as direct speech (the text must be enclosed in quotation marks) with a mandatory indication of the original source.

The author must not allow duplication of publications. If individual elements of the manuscript have already been published, the author must refer to the earlier work and indicate the differences between the new work and the previous one.

Plagiarism of ideas and data is identified both as part of the manuscript check upon receipt and scientific review, and after the publication of articles – upon receipt of relevant requests by the editors. If the fact of unauthorized borrowing of data (results of scientific work) or ideas is established, the manuscript (article) will be retracted or rejected for publication.

4. GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE POLICY

Generative artificial intelligence technologies (for example, chatbots or large language models with artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT) cannot under any circumstances be indicated as the author of an article or a co-author who contributed to the preparation of the manuscript. Programs, services, tools based on generative artificial intelligence do not meet the authorship requirements, since they do not bear (and cannot bear) responsibility for the submitted work, cannot declare the presence or absence of a conflict of interests, and also manage copyrights.

Using of chatbots or other programs, services, tools based on artificial intelligence is not prohibited when preparing a manuscript. In some cases, such programs, services, tools can be used to edit text, search for sources of literature, collect and analyze data. Authors should take into account that chatbots often transmit unreliable or false information, which requires additional and ongoing verification of information.

If a program based on artificial intelligence was used in preparing the manuscript, it is necessary to indicate the name and version of the program, the request criteria, and describe in detail the method of its use (in the Material and Methods section). A detailed description of the use of tools, technologies, programs, and services of generative artificial intelligence can also be provided in the cover letter.

The author alone is responsible for the manuscript submitted to the editorial board of the journal, regardless of what programs, services, and tools based on artificial intelligence were used and to what extent. At the same time, the author also bears full responsibility for violating the rules for using the specified programs, services, and tools, as well as for using the results of their work.

When checking manuscripts, the editors use the appropriate module of the Antiplagiat system, which allows detecting text generated by artificial intelligence. The final decision in each specific case is made by the editorial board in interaction with the author of the publication.

The editorial board of the Urolofiia journal and reviewers should not process the manuscript received for review or its part using generative artificial intelligence tools, as this may violate the confidentiality and intellectual property rights of the authors, and if the article contains personal information, then also the rights to data privacy. This requirement also applies to the text of the review itself, since it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and / or authors.

The editorial board of the Urologiia journal shares the position of the international publishing community regarding the use of artificial intelligence in the preparation of scientific articles, set out in the documents:

COPE (Authorship and AI tools);
WAME (Chatbots, Generative AI, and Scholarly Manuscripts);
ICMJE (Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Assisted Technology);
International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM, Generative AI in scholarly communications).

5. PROCEDURE FOR CONSIDERING DEVIATIONS FROM ESTABLISHED ETHICAL STANDARDS

5.1. Identification of deviations from ethical standards

Illegal or unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editors or publisher at any stage of the publication process.

Anyone who informs the editors or publisher of deviations from ethical standards must provide sufficient information and evidence. All statements and requests will be accepted, reviewed and processed.

5.2. Investigation

The decision to undertake an investigation is made by the editor-in-chief, who, if necessary, may seek assistance from the publisher.

It is necessary to collect evidence, while avoiding any accusations.

5.3. Minor ethical deviations

Minor deviations do not require consultation with a large number of experts, but the author must in any case be given an opportunity to respond to any allegations.

5.4. Major ethical deviations

In cases of major deviations, the accused’s employer must be notified. The editor-in-chief, together with the publisher and the scientific society, will decide whether to involve the employer, or an investigation can be performed by reviewing the available data and consulting with a limited number of experts.

5.5. Consequences (in order of increasing deviations; may be used alone or in combination)

Notification of deviations to the author or reviewer.
A formal letter to the author or reviewer notifying him or her of the deviations in order to prevent deviations from ethical standards in future articles.
Publication of a formal warning detailing the deviations.
Publication of the article detailing the deviations.
A formal letter to the author’s supervisor, reviewer, or funding department.
Formal refusal of publication, as well as formal notification to the author’s supervisor, indexing and refereeing agency, and readers of the journal.
Ban on publication of the given author for a certain period.
Transfer of the results of the investigation to higher organizations for further decisions on these rejections.

6. RETRACTION OF ARTICLES

Withdrawal of an already published article (retraction) is an extreme measure and is applied in the event of the discovery of facts that were not known during the review:

detection of facts of violation of the law and defamation;
violation of publication ethics requirements (including detection of plagiarism in an article, concealment of a conflict of interests, the emergence of claims regarding copyright for an article or its individual parts by third parties, detection of the fact of publication of an article in another publication before the date of its publication in the journal);
disclosure of falsifications, false or inaccurate data, especially such data, the use of which may create a risk for health;
disclosure of serious errors (for example, incorrect interpretation of results), which casts doubt on the scientific value of the article).

See also the Rules for withdrawal (retraction) of an article from publication of the Ethics Council of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP).

Mechanism of retracting an article

6.1. Authors, readers, reviewers, editors and publishers may initiate the retraction of an article by submitting a written request to the journal’s editorial board.

6.2. The journal’s conflict resolution committee reviews the received request and initiates an investigation, based on the results of which the published article may be retracted.

6.3. The decision to retract a published article is made by the journal’s conflict resolution committee if there are sufficient facts in favor of retraction. An act on the retraction of the article is drawn up and signed by the editor-in-chief.

6.4. The journal’s editorial board notifies the initiator of the retraction of the article in writing about the results of the review of the request.

6.5. If the journal’s conflict resolution committee decides to retract an article, the journal publishes information that the article has been retracted, indicating its metadata. In this case, the article is not physically removed from the published print run and the issue file on the website. The editors publish a statement on the retraction of the article and post it on the corresponding page of the issue’s contents on the journal’s official website.

6.6. If articles from the journal are indexed by any databases, a letter is sent to these databases stating that the article has been retracted, stating the reasons for the retraction.

7. DATA SHARING STATEMENT

The Urologiia journal adheres to ICMJE recommendations on data sharing policy. All manuscripts reporting the results of clinical trials must provide a data sharing statement in accordance with ICMJE recommendations of July 1, 2018. Authors may refer to the editorial article Data sharing statements for clinical trials: A requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in the Ann Intern Med journal. 2017;167(1):63–65. https://www.doi.org/10.7326/M17-1028.

8. PUBLICATION FEE

Authors are not charged a fee for checking, reviewing, publishing articles, preparing the journal for printing, and any payments (including payment of remuneration to the author) for articles submitted for publication (as well as for the transfer of exclusive rights) are not made.

ADVERTISING POLICY

Advertising articles go through the entire editorial process from registration, checking in the Antiplagiat system and reviewing to acceptance for publication. A possible advantage is the choice of the issue in which the article will be published, if this does not contradict the editorial plan.

All advertising materials must comply with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation, including the Federal law of 13.03.2006 No. 38-FZ “On Advertising”.

The placement of advertising materials does not constitute support or approval by the editorial board or the publishing house of LLC “Bionika Media” of the advertised product, company or service.

Advertisers are fully responsible for all information contained in advertising materials published in the journal, for its accuracy and the absence of violations of the rights and interests of third parties (including copyright, intellectual property rights and personal non-property rights) and current legislation in the materials.

Additional issues (supplements to the journal) are published by decision of the editorial board and the publishing house LLC “Bionika Media” in accordance with the principles of the editorial policy and purposes of the journal. Advertisers do not influence the content of the corresponding additional issue.

See also the editorial policy of the publishing house LLC “Bionika Media”.

DISTRIBUTION

A subscription to the magazine in printed and electronic form is available on the website of the publishing house LLC “Bionika Media”. You can purchase individual articles or issues of the magazine. More details are here.

Subscription is also opened:

per post using “Subscription publications” catalogue (index PR313) and on the Russian Post website;
per post using “Press of Russia” catalogue (index E33021), on the website of the “Kniga-Service” agency and through the “Press of Russia” unified catalogue;
per the “Ural Press” subscription agency (index 43117);
per the Rukont electronic library system.

FOR THE AUTHORS

Dear colleagues!

Editorial staff is interested in publication of full clinical studies results dealing with assessment of drug efficiency and safety. Please fill the form below and put a short abstract of the paper. All fields are required.

Please take into account our rules and make yourself aware of the copyright agreement.

SUBMISSIONS

By sending an article to the editorial board of the journal Urologiia, the authors confirm the fact of familiarization and understanding of all the terms of the offer agreement published on the journal’s website, thereby confirming their conscious full and unconditional consent with them, accepting the agreement in full without reservations and exceptions. Publishing house LLC “Bionika Media” is not responsible for the author’s failure to familiarize himself with the offer agreement, as well as for the author’s failure to fulfill (untimely fulfillment) of the obligations provided for therein.

Materials are sent by filling out an online form on the website of the journal Urologiia or publishing house LLC “Bionika Media”, or sent to the editorial board by e-mail: urology@bionika-media.ru, or transferred by other ways indicated on the websites of the journal Urologiia or publishing house LLC “Bionika Media”.

By sending an article to the editorial board of the journal Urologiia, the authors also give their consent to the processing of personal data (by performing implicit actions, including placing a mark in appropriate box when filling out online form or by sending it to the editorial board by e-mail or by other ways).

The article file must be in Microsoft Word format and have the extension *.doc, *.docx, *.rtf.

For original research, it is advisable to send a letter of recommendation (official referral) from the organization on the basis of which the study was performed (university, research institute, etc.) together with the article. The first page of the letter must contain the signature of the director, certified by a round seal.

When submitting an article to the editors for review, the authors must agree to all of the following points. The article may be returned to the authors if it does not comply with them.

All authors have carefully read the Journal’s Ethical standards and will understand the sanctions for violating them.
The authors guarantee that the article has not been previously published in whole or in part, and is not under consideration or in the process of publication in another publishing issue. If the article has previously been submitted for consideration to other publications but was not accepted for publication, this must be indicated in cover letter, otherwise the editors may misinterpret the results of checking the text for illegal borrowing and reject the article.
The authors guarantee the accuracy of the material presented in the article and its compliance with the requirements of the current legislation of the Russian Federation and are solely responsible for the content of the article. All claims, lawsuits, other demands of third parties, as well as claims/orders of government agencies related to the content of the article, are settled by the authors independently and at their own expense.
The editors check the originality of the article in Antiplagiat Taking into account the variety of forms that plagiarism can take, each case is considered individually. If borrowings are detected, editors act in accordance with the rules of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The authors confirm that:

– all participants who made a significant contribution to the study are listed as co-authors (if the article does not contain information about co-authors, the editors consider the author to be the sole author, and all possible disputes arising in connection with the presence of co-authors and the violation of their rights are resolved by the author independently and at his own expense);

– those who did not participate in the study are not listed as co-authors;

– all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to submit it for publication under the terms of the offer agreement (including in terms of transfer of exclusive rights), duly authorized the author to submit the article for publication and communicate with the editors;

– the article does not contain any violations of copyright or other rights, including intellectual property rights and personal non-property rights, as well as the current legislation of the Russian Federation.

The article complies with all editorial requirements for text formatting (see Rules for authors). Articles submitted in violation of the formatting rules will not be considered.

Submit an article

RULES FOR AUTHORS

When preparing articles, authors should adhere to the following rules, drawn up taking into account the requirements of international associations and organizations:

Recommendations for performing, describing, editing and publishing results of scientific work in medical journals of International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE);
principles and rules of COPE, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), Office of Research Integrity (ORI), Council of Science Editors (CSE), and the European Association of Science Editors (EASE).

Authors must also comply with the guidelines of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers and the requirements of the Higher Attestation Commission under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.

Publications in the journal are accepted in Russian or English.

All submitted materials undergo double-blind peer review and are discussed by the editorial board.

The journal does not guarantee acceptance of the article for publication or short review deadlines.

The authors are not charged for the publication of articles; no payments (including remuneration to the author) are made for articles submitted for publication (or for the transfer of exclusive rights).

1. General requirements for articles

1.1. The file with the text of the article must contain all the information for publication, including illustrations and tables. Illustrations (pictures, photographs, graphs, diagrams, charts, etc.) are also sent as separate files with a resolution of 300 dpi in the formats *.jpeg, *.bmp, *.gif, *.tiff.

1.2. The volume of the original article should not exceed 35 thousand characters with spaces, review articles and lectures – 45 thousand characters with spaces, clinical cases – 25 thousand characters with spaces. The number of characters in the text can be found in Word menu (“Review” – “Statistics”). Еditors reserve the right to shorten articles.

If, in the author’s opinion, the article’s volume exceeding the standards is justified and cannot be reduced, the decision on publication is made at a meeting of the editorial board.

1.3. The text of the article should be typed in Times New Roman, size 12 pt, line spacing 1.5 pt. Subheadings should be typed in capital letters and bold. All repeating spaces and unnecessary line breaks should be removed from the text (automatically via the Word service “Find and Replace”).

1.4. All abbreviations must be expanded upon the first mention (an abbreviation is entered if it is used in the text 3 or more times). If an abbreviation is used in a table or illustration, it must be expanded in a note to the table or illustration, even if the abbreviation has already been expanded in the text of the article. The same rules apply to the article summary as to an independent block (an abbreviation is entered if it is used 3 or more times).

1.5. Authors should use modern Russian-language scientific terminology and not use tracing terms transcribed from foreign words.

2. Article structure

The structure of the article should correspond to the template below (may vary depending on the type of work).

2.1. Title page:

article title (in Russian and English) – informative and short enough. The article title should fully reflect its subject and theme, as well as the main goal (question) set by the author to disclose the topic. Trade names of medicines are not allowed in the title;
initials and surnames of the authors (in Russian and English). Surnames should be indicated after the initials. Authors’ full names in English must be written in accordance with their foreign passport or in the same way as in articles previously published by the authors in foreign journals. Authors who are publishing for the first time and do not have a foreign passport should use the BSI (British Standard Institute) transliteration standard. You can transliterate the text according to the BSI standard on any convenient website, for example here, here or here;
the full official name of the institution where the work was carried out (in Russian and English). After the name of the institution, the name of the city and country in which it is located must be indicated, separated by a comma. If authors from different institutions took part in writing the article, the names of the institutions and the full names of the authors should be correlated by adding digital indexes in highest register after the full names of the corresponding authors and before the names of the institutions (^{1, 2, 3}). To ensure the accuracy of provided information, we recommend that authors check the English spelling of the institution's name on ROR website; you can also use the list of institution names and their official English versions posted on eLibrary

2.2. Summary (annotation, abstract):

all original articles (original research) must be accompanied by structured summaries of up to 2000 characters with spaces (in Russian and English). The summary must include the same sections as the article itself: introduction, purpose of the study, material and methods, results, discussion, conclusion. The abstract should be informative (reflect the main content and conclusions, without general phrases), contain the main provisions set out in the work, present the author’s view on the problem discussed in the article taking into account the analyzed material and the results obtained, allow the reader to understand the uniqueness of the article, how it differs from similar works;
review articles and clinical cases are accompanied by unstructured abstracts of up to 1000 characters with spaces (in Russian and English). The purpose of the work must be indicated. In reviews devoted to the analysis of the results of clinical studies / meta-analyses, methodology of work should also be indicated – from which databases and for what period the analyzed sources were taken.

2.3. Key words (in Russian and English): from 3 to 10 words or phrases that facilitate indexing of the article in information retrieval systems (separated by commas). Key words should correspond to the topic of the article and reflect its subject, terminological area. It is advisable to avoid generalized and polysemantic words, as well as phrases with participial phrases.

To select keywords in English, we recommend using the thesaurus of US National Library of Medicine – Medical Subject Headings (MeSH).

2.4. Information on conflict of interests

All potential and obvious conflicts of interest related to the article should be disclosed. A conflict of interest may be any situation (financial relations, service or work in institutions that have a financial or political interest in the published materials, job responsibilities, etc.) that can influence the author of the article and lead to concealment, distortion of data or change their interpretation. The presence of a conflict of interests in one or more authors is not a reason for refusing to review and publish the article. Concealment of potential and obvious conflicts of interests by the authors identified by the editors may be a reason for refusing to review and publish the article.

If there are no conflicts of interests, it is noted: “The authors declare no conflict of interests.”

2.5. Acknowledgments

The authors may express gratitude to individuals and organizations that contributed to the publication of the article in the journal, but are not its authors.

2.6. Information on the contribution of each author to writing the article

For groups of authors, the contribution of each author to the research and creation of the article is necessary to indicate. The following types of participation may be possible: article concept, research concept and design, writing the text, collecting and processing the material, literature review, material analysis, statistical processing, editing, approval of the final version of the article, etc.

Example:

A.A. Ivanov: concept and design of the research.

B.B. Petrov: collecting and processing the materials.

V.V. Sidorov: analysis of the obtained data, writing the text.

If the authors have made an equal contribution, indicate: “The authors have made an equal contribution at all stages of work and preparation of the article.”

2.7. Funding information

The source of funding for both research work and publication of the article should be indicated: the title of the planned research work carried out on a state assignment, the grant number and the name of the foundation, commercial or state organization, private individual, etc. It is not necessary to indicate the amount of funding.

If there is no source of funding, note: “Source of funding: None.”

2.8. Full information about the authors

For each author, the following is indicated:

full name, patronymic, and surname;
academic degree, academic title;
position;
place of work/study (structural division and full name of the organization (main place of work);
full postal address of the place of work/study (with zip code);
email address (indicated on a separate line);
ORCID [1] identifier (mandatory, provided in the form of an email address on the Internet), Scopus ID, eLibrary SPIN (if available).

Sample formatting of information about the author:

Ivan I. Ivanov, MD, PhD (Medicine), associate professor, professor of the Department of urology, N.N. Burdenko Voronezh State Medical University of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia. Address: 394036, Voronezh, 10 Studencheskaya St.

E-mail: ivan-ivanov@example.ru

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0000-000-00XX. Scopus ID: 565XXXXXXXX. eLibrary SPIN: 5724-XXXX

You should also indicate the author responsible for contacts with the editorial board: full name, email address, mobile phone number (required for operative communication with the author, it will not be posted in the published version of the article or transferred to third parties).

2.9. Text of the article

The structure of original articles should correspond to the generally accepted template and include the following sections:

“Introduction”: it formulates the purpose and need for the study, briefly covers the state of the issue with links to the most significant publications;
“Material and Methods”: quantitative and qualitative characteristics of patients (examined), and all research methods used in the work are indicated. When mentioning equipment and new drugs, the manufacturer and country are specified in brackets.

The section should contain the study design, inclusion/noninclusion criteria and exclusion criteria, information on the ethical review (approval of the study protocol by the ethics committee, with the name of the relevant organization/institution, protocol number and date of the committee meeting) and the availability of written informed consent from patients to participate in the study.

The methods of statistical data processing used in the study should be described in the subsection “Statistical analysis” at the end of the section “Material and methods”;

“Results” they should be presented in a logical sequence in the text, tables and illustrations. The text should not repeat all the data from the tables and illustrations, only the most important ones should be mentioned. Illustrations should not duplicate the data given in the tables. Measurement values should correspond to the International system of units SI;
“Discussion”: new and important aspects of the study results should be emphasized and, if it is possible, compared with the data of other researcher works. It is necessary to indicate the limitations of the presented data (if any). You should not repeat information already given in the Introduction section or details from the Results section. You can include substantiated recommendations in the Discussion;
“Conclusion” (findings).

Articles describing clinical cases should contain the sections “Introduction”, “Description of a clinical case”, “Discussion”, “Conclusion”. It is mandatory to indicate at the end of the article that the patient’s consent for publication has been obtained.

Example

Informed consent

Written voluntary informed consent was obtained from the patient for the publication of photographs, examination and treatment results.

The structure of review articles and lectures should include subheadings, if possible.

The article should contain references to the list of literature, which are given in the text in square brackets in the form of Arabic numerals – sequentially in ascending order of numbering.

2.10. Tables.

The number of tables in an article is no more than 5.

The data in the table should correspond to the numbers in the text, but should not duplicate the information presented in it.

Tables in the form of photographs/pictures are not accepted; information from such tables should be typed by hand.

Tables are placed in the text after the paragraph in which they are referenced (references to tables are given in parentheses in italics: (table 1). Each table must have a title and a serial number (Arabic numerals). Each column of the table must have a short heading (abbreviations are allowed).

All explanations, including the expansion of abbreviations, are placed in a note to the table, even if the abbreviations have already been expanded in the text of the article.

All using symbols must also be expanded in a note indicating used statistical criteria (methods) and the parameters of statistical variability (standard deviation, standard error of the mean, etc.). It is recommended to indicate the statistical reliability/unreliability of differences in the data presented in the table using superscript symbols *, **, †, ††, ‡, ‡‡, etc.

Each table in the text together with the title should be given twice – in Russian and English. First, Russian version of the title and table should be given. Immediately after them, English version of the title and table should be placed, and the title number and the data in the table (but not the text!) must match. When creating an English version of the table and title, transliteration should not be used – a full translation into English must be given. The text of the English version of the table title may not exactly match the text of the Russian version, especially in cases where it is advisable to provide additional explanations of the table content in the title.

2.11. Illustrations.

The number of illustrations in the article is no more than 5.

Illustrations (drawings, photographs, graphs, diagrams, charts, etc.) are sent as separate files with a resolution of 300 dpi in formats *.jpeg, *.bmp, *.gif, *.tiff.

In the text, illustrations are placed after the paragraph in which they are referenced (the reference to the illustrations is given in parentheses in italics: (fig. 1). Each illustration must have a title and a serial number (Arabic numerals). Values of all curves, axes, symbols, arrows and other symbols appearing in the illustration must be given in Russian.

All symbols used must also be explained in the notes, indicating the statistical criteria (methods) used and the parameters of statistical variability (standard deviation, standard error of the mean, etc.). It is recommended to indicate the statistical reliability/unreliability of differences in the data presented in the illustration using superscript symbols *, **, †, ††, ‡, ‡‡, etc.

It is unacceptable to apply any elements over the illustration inserted into the file (arrows, captions) using Microsoft Word, since there is a high risk of losing them at the editing and layout.

All explanations, including the explanation of abbreviations, are placed in a note to the illustration, even if the abbreviations have already been explained in the text of the article.

If the illustration is a diagram or graph, it must also be provided in the form of a hand-typed table, since such illustrations are drawn separately for layout and not copied from the text of the article.

The author must have all the necessary rights to use the provided illustrations legally, without violating the rights and interests of third parties (including intellectual property rights, as well as personal non-property rights). It is prohibited to submit illustrations borrowed from any sources (including the Internet) without written permission of the author/copyright holder (even if their elements are translated from a foreign language into Russian). The exception is images marked as CC BY, which can be published with a link to the author and source (when providing such illustrations, the indication of the marking is mandatory).

If an illustration is borrowed from a foreign publication, it is necessary to translate all the designations on it into Russian and indicate at the end of the illustration title: (adapted from [number of the source cited in the list of references]).

The title of the illustration should be given twice – in Russian and in English. The English version of the title should be placed immediately after the Russian one.

Example:

Рис. 1. Динамика показателей изучаемых процессов

Fig. 1. Dynamics of indicators of studied processes

The author should independently and at his own expense settle all possible claims, lawsuits, any other demands of third parties, including authors and holders of related rights (including directly to the editors) in relation to the illustrations provided to them.

2.12. References:

the list of references should contain up to 50 sources and include works by domestic and foreign authors (primarily in publications included in Scopus and Web of Science) over the past 5 years; inclusion of references to domestic authors is mandatory; references to works from many years ago are not allowed (the only exceptions are rare, highly informative works);
references to works that are not in the list of literature are not allowed, and vice versa;
references to unpublished works are not allowed;
it is not recommended to include dissertations, abstracts and materials published in conference proceedings, congresses, etc. in the list of references;
self-citation should be avoided, except in cases where it seems necessary (for example, if there are no other sources of information, the work was carried out on the basis or in continuation of the cited studies). Self-citation should preferably be limited to 3 references;
each source is printed on a new line under a serial number. The numbering of references to sources in the list of literature should correspond to references in the text of the article (given in square brackets in Arabic numerals). In the list of literature, all works are listed in the order of citation (NOT in alphabetical order);
when mentioning the authors’ surnames in the text, they should be preceded by initials (surnames of foreign authors are given in original transcription);
doi (without a dot at the end), PMID, PMCID, EDN (if available) are indicated for all articles, ISBN is indicated for all books;
bibliographic lists should be given not only in the original language, but also in Latin (References). Transliterated description of the source should be located immediately after the Russian-language title in square brackets ([…]). At the end of the description, an indication of the original language of the publication is placed in parentheses, for example (In Russ.). Sources in References should be formatted in Vancouver For Russian-language sources, the authors’ last name and initials are transliterated. If the Russian-language source is a journal article, the journal title is given both in transliteration and in English translation, and the article title – in English translation (see examples below);
the titles of Russian periodicals must be given in full without abbreviations to ensure citation in international databases;
the titles of foreign periodicals must be given in official abbreviation. To find the correct abbreviated title of the journal, you can use the NLM Catalog or CAS Source Index. If you cannot find the official abbreviated title of the journal, provide its full title;
the authors are responsible for the correctness and accuracy of the data provided in the list of references.

The editors correct only minor mistakes in the formatting of the list of references. If the formatting differs significantly from what is described above, the authors should correct it themselves. Otherwise, the article will not be accepted for consideration.

Examples of formatting sources in the list of references

Book, part of the book

Пирадов М.А., Танашян М.М., Максимова М.Ю. Инсульт: современные технологии диагностики и лечения. М.: МЕДпресс-информ. 2018; 360 с. [Piradov MA, Tanashyan MM, Maksimova MYu. Brain stroke: modern technologies of diagnosis and treatment. Moscow: MEDpress-inform. 2018; 360 pp. (In Russ.)]. ISBN: 978-5-00-030622-2. EDN: YSAJRZ.
Авилов О.В. О смысле и причинах здоровья. В кн.: Психология здоровья и болезни: клинико-психологический подход. Материалы VII Всероссийской конференции с международным участием. Часть I. Курск: КГМУ. 2017: 9–14. [Avilov OV. About meaning and ground of health. In the book: Psychology of health and illness: Clinical and psychological approach. Materials of the VII All-Russian conference with international participation. Part I. Kursk: Kursk State Medical University. 2017: 9–14 (In Russ.)]. EDN: YRFOOU.

Article

Mack T, Vachon T, Boswell G. Right ventricular outflow tract pseudoaneurysm: Two cases. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5(5):336–37.

PMID: 21664895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcct.2011.04.002

Feigin V, Brainin M, Norrving B, Martins S, Sacco RL, Hacke W et al. World Stroke Organization (WSO): Global Stroke Fact Sheet 2022. Int J Stroke. 2022;17(1):18–29.

PMID: 34986727. https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930211065917

Ануфриев П.Л., Танашян М.М., Гулевская Т.С., Евдокименко А.Н. Морфологические маркеры основных патогенетических вариантов ишемических инсультов при церебральном атеросклерозе. Анналы клинической и экспериментальной неврологии. 2018;12(4):16–22. [Anufriev PL, Tanashyan MM, Gulevskaya TS, Evdokimenko AN. Morphological markers of basic pathogenic variants of ischemic strokes in cerebral atherosclerosis. Annaly klinicheskoy i eksperimentalnoy nevrologii = Annals of Clinical and Experimental Neurology. 2018;12(4):16–22 (In Russ.)].

EDN: HKATMT. https://doi.org/10.25692/acen.2018.4.2

Шевченко Ю.Л., Попов Л.В., Гороховатский Ю.И., Волкова Л.В., Зайниддинов Ф.А., Гудымович В.Г. с соавт. Хирургическое лечение больного с ложной и истинной постинфарктной аневризмой левого желудочка, осложненной митральной недостаточностью. Вестник Национального медико-хирургического центра им. Н.И. Пирогова. 2008;3(2):112–115. [Shevchenko YuL, Popov LV, Gorokhovatskiy YuI, Volkova LV, Zayniddinov FA, Gudymovich VG et al. Surgical treatment of a patient with false and true post-infarction left ventricular aneurysm complicated by mitral insufficiency. Vestnik Natsionalnogo mediko-khirurgicheskogo tsentra imeni N.I. Pirogova = Bulletin of Pirogov National Medical & Surgical Center. 2008;3(2):112–115 (In Russ.)]. EDN: JWZAFD.

Internet source

Клинические рекомендации. Падения у пациентов пожилого и старческого возраста. Общероссийская общественная организация «Российская ассоциация геронтологов и гериатров», общественная организация «Российская ассоциация по остеопорозу». Рубрикатор клинических рекомендаций Минздрава России. 2020. ID: 600_2. Доступ: https://cr.minzdrav.gov.ru/preview-cr/600_2 (дата обращения – 21.05.2025). [Clinical guidelines. Falls in elderly and senile patients. Russian Association of Gerontologists and geriatricians, Russian Association for Osteoporosis. Rubricator of clinical guidelines of the Ministry of Healthcare of Russia. 2020. ID: 600_2. URL: https://cr.minzdrav.gov.ru/preview-cr/600_2 (date of access – 21.05.2025) (In Russ.)].
Central Intelligence Agency of the United States of America. The World Factbook Archives. URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20190621041256/https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html (date of access – 21.05.2025).

3. Grounds for refusal to review and publish an article

Final decision concerning the publication of an article submitted by the author is made by the editorial board of the journal solely at its own discretion; the reason for refusal to publish may not be disclosed to the authors. Editors do not enter into correspondence with the authors regarding the reason for refusal to publish an article.

Submitted articles will not be returned.

3.1. Editors may refuse the initial review of an article for the following reasons:

if checking in the Antiplagiat system showed a significant proportion of borrowed text (the total volume of borrowing and citation is more than 30% – excluding self-citation; the volume of self-citation is more than 20%), the work is automatically returned to the author. Editors are not responsible for the calculation methodology included in the Antiplagiat system and evaluates only obtained results;
copyrights have been violated, conflicts of interest are hidden (or publication ethics have been violated in some other way), or another serious legal problem has been identified;
the article does not comply with the text formatting requirements (see Rules for authors);
the list of references or text contains hyperlinks that suggest that the material was copied from the Internet;
the text contains obviously differently formatted fragments (spacing, fonts, font sizes, non-printable characters, etc.), which indicates that it was compiled from parts of other texts;
the list of references is not formatted uniformly, which indicates that its content is secondary;
the list of references contains less than 70% of references to works published in the last 5 years;
the article file has many technical flaws that will require excessive effort to prepare it: incorrect text formatting, extra/missing spaces, errors in punctuation, format of numerical values, phrase agreement, cases, etc.;
typos in the title, subheadings, full names of authors, indicating carelessness and failure to proofread the text before sending;
a large number of errors and typos (>20) in the abstract, inadequate structure/content of the abstract.

Authors are asked to revise the text and correct the comments (no more than 2 significant revisions). They are given 30 days to correct the comments. If the authors do not submit a corrected version within this period, the article will be removed from consideration.

3.2. Editors may refuse to re-examine the article for the following reasons:

the text is not clear and unambiguous regarding the purpose and methods of the study (for original article), there is no clearly stated problem, the relevance and necessity of writing the article are not indicated (for a review);
the text contains false data or knowingly erroneous incorrect statements;
there is clear evidence of the unreliability of the data as a result of serious errors (for example, incorrect calculations or experimental error) or as a result of falsification or fabrication;
the value of the problem posed, the novelty and relevance of the article, their sufficiency for publication are insufficiently substantiated;
the text does not provide the opportunity to highlight the specific question it is devoted to and to see the answer to this question proposed by the authors;
the text is not perceived as scientifically and stylistically complete, logically complete;
the language of the text does not meet the criteria of scientific style;
the language of the text is not grammatically and stylistically verified, the text is tongue-tied, contains a large number of errors and typos.

The reasons for rejection after review depend on the content of the review (see Peer review).

COPYRIGHT

The authors transfer (alienate) to the publisher of the journal (LLC “Bionika Media”) the exclusive right in full to the work created by them under the terms of the offer agreement posted on the website of the journal Urologiia. Provision of any licenses to the author is not provided. At the same time, the rights of authorship are retained by the authors.

PRIVACY

Personal data given by the author when sending an article via online form on the website of the journal Urologiia, publishing house LLC “Bionika Media” or in the article (as well as in the cover letter) will be used exclusively for the purposes specified in the offer agreement and consent to the processing of personal data, and will not be used for any other purposes or provided to other persons and organizations not specified in these documents.

Personal data about the authors specified in the materials of the article (included in the article metadata) sent to the editorial board for review and publication are subject to publication in the public domain. By sending an article to the editors, the author expresses his consent to the publication (posting) of his personal data in the public domain.

The editors of the journal Urologiia and the publishing house LLC “Bionika Media” are guided by current legislation and the Privacy Policy when processing personal data.

The editors and reviewers of the journal maintain confidentiality during the review of the article regarding the text of the article and accompanying materials in accordance with the rules for acceptance and reviewing, the Ethical standards, set out on the journal’s website.

________________________________________

[1] ORCID is a registry of unique identifiers of scientists and a corresponding method for linking research activities with these identifiers. Specifying the ORCID code allows authors to avoid possible losses in citation. If you do not have an ORCID code, you must obtain it by registering on the ORCID website.