Journal Policies

Focus and Scope

The journal "Ukrainian Journal of Military Medicine" is a scientific and practical publication of UMMA ( on medicine and pharmacy), which aims to promote the development of basic and clinical research in the field of military medicine, as well as the exchange of scientific and practical experience.

The journal publishes original research, analytical reviews on modern medical problems, up-to-date international consensus on diagnosis and treatment, new concepts / technologies of diagnosis and treatment, clinical cases.

Tasks of the publication:

Publication of high quality scientific and practical materials in the field of military medicine and pharmacy;

Sharing of research results of domestic specialists in the field of military medicine/

Section Policies

  1. Problem article
  2. Organization of military health care
  3. Military preventive medicine
  4. Military pharmacy
  5. Original research
  6. Current aspects of diagnosis and treatment
  7. History of military medicine
  8. Official section

Peer Review Process

In order to ensure the proper quality of publications, all articles submitted to the journal are subject to peer review.

Before submitting a manuscript to a reviewer, who should be an expert in the field covered in the article, the editorial team checks the article for compliance with formal (technical) criteria. In particular, at this stage the following are checked:

  • correspondence of the topic of the article with the journal subjects and the scope of the journal section the article is submitted to;
  • compliance of the layout of the article with the requirements set by the editorial board;
  • adherence of the authors to the rules regulating the use of references and citation;

compliance of the article with the requirements of Art. 3 of the Law of Ukraine "On Print Media (Press) in Ukraine" (concerning the non-acceptance of abuse of print media freedom).

In addition, with the use of software detection tools, the submitted article is checked for plagiarism / self-plagiarism and originality (uniqueness).

The article is rejected by the editorial team if it does not meet the journal subjects, the requirements of Art. 3 of the Law of Ukraine “On Print Media in Ukraine”, or contains explicit plagiarism. In other cases of flaws, the article is returned to the author (s) for revision.

Usually, copy editing of an article with minor grammatical and stylistic errors is made in the publishing house of the journal after the article is accepted for publication. However, if a significant number of such errors are found in the submission, the article is returned for revision as well.

If the article meets the formal criteria for its acceptance by the editorial team, it is sent to a peer reviewer, who is selected by the editor-in-chief.

The reviewer writes his/her review in a standardized form prepared by the editorial board. To ensure impartial and independent evaluation and to avoid conflicts of interest the authors' names are not mentioned on the form. The reviewer evaluates the scientific level of the article according to established quality criteria and submits his comments on the identified shortcomings together with conclusions and recommendations to the editor-in-chief.

Quality criteria for articles include:

  • current interest of the issue the article is devoted to;
  • correct choice of the research method;
  • novelty of the obtained results;
  • credibility (sufficient confirmation) of the facts stated in the article;
  • absence of data fabrication and falsification;
  • validity of the authors’ statements and conclusions;
  • correspondence of the structure and content of the article with academic writing;
  • absence of technical errors.

The specific lists of article quality criteria take into account the specialization of the journal section to which a manuscript is submitted.

Based on the review received, the editor-in-chief makes one of the following decisions:

  • accept the article for publication;
  • return the article for revision;
  • reject submission.

The decision of the editor-in-chief is fixed by his signature on the review form. After that, the author's information is noted on it and the review is sent to the archive. If it is decided to publish the article, after approval of the issue the number and the year of the issue are marked on the review.

If the article is returned for revision, the review cycle is repeated with special attention paid to the identified flaws.

At any review cycle, the editor-in-chief may decide to involve additional reviewers for article evaluation.

To ensure the integrity of the blind peer review, the author guidelines prescribe to remove authors’ names from their submission. When submitting an article through the journal site, the information about the authors should be entered in the appropriate fields of the submission form. If the article is sent by e-mail, this information must be placed in a separate file.

Open Access Policy

Open-access Statement: This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Full-text access to scientific articles of the journal is presented on the official website in the Archives


  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) (submission)
  • Google Scholar (submission)

Publication ethics and Malpractice statement

UMMA as the  publisher of “Ukrainian Journal of Military Medicine”  provides support of Elsevier statement of publishing ethics ( .

UMMA agrees that monitoring publishing ethics is a major aspect of the editorial and peer-review process, and as such lies within the area of responsibility of the editor-in-chief, or scientific editor, of each journal.

UMMA has accepted the guidelines worked out by Elsevier to support editors, reviewers and authors in keeping to ethical principles. Also UMMA  is working closely with other publishers to set standards for best practices on ethical matters. These guidelines are based on existing Elsevier policies.

Duties of the Editor of the “Ukrainian Journal of Military Medicine”

Publication decisions

The editor of the “Ukrainian Journal of Military Medicine”  is responsible for deciding what articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor must be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements otherwise libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism will be a force. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

The editor of the “Ukrainian Journal of Military Medicine” evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


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

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions  connnected  with the papers.

Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations.

Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

The editor of the “Ukrainian Journal of Military Medicine” should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society).

Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method.

UMMA shares the view of Elsevier that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.


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


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

Standards of Objectivity

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

Acknowledgement of Sources

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

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions  connnected with the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient details and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

Data Access and Retention

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

Originality and Plagiarism

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

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

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

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

In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of Sources

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

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. When there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

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

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

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

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

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

Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage which is possible.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Plagiarism detection

The peer-review process is at the heart of the success of scientific publishing. As part of our commitment to the protection and enhancement of the peer-review process, UMMA has an obligation to assist the scientific community in all aspects of publishing ethics, especially in cases of (suspected) duplicate submission or plagiarism. For all submitted materials, the level of uniqueness of the author's text is determined by the appropriate software: Advego Plagiatus. Manuscripts in which plagiarism or text borrowing were found without referencess to the original source are rejected by the editorial board.