Here is the fully edited and professional English version of the section “Responsibilities of Editors, Reviewers, Technical Experts, and Publisher”, harmonized with COPE and ICMJE standards — ideal for placement on the USMYJ website:

Responsibilities of Editors, Reviewers, Technical Experts, and Publisher

Publication Ethics, Policy, and Statement on Misconduct

The Ukrainian Scientific Medical Youth Journal (USMYJ) and its publisher —
O.O. Bohomolets National Medical University — adhere to the following international ethical standards:

• COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
• COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers
• ICMJE Recommendations (Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals)

The journal upholds the highest standards of academic integrity, editorial transparency, and fairness in decision-making, ensuring full compliance with international norms of publication ethics.
Authors, reviewers, technical experts, and editors are expected to act responsibly, professionally, and ethically throughout all stages of the editorial and publication process.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editors collectively bear responsibility for the scientific quality, editorial content, and integrity of the journal.

Integrity and Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are based solely on the scholarly merit of submissions — including their significance, originality, methodological soundness, and clarity — regardless of authors’ nationality, gender, religion, political views, or institutional affiliation.
The Editor-in-Chief maintains full authority over the journal’s editorial content and publication schedule.

Confidentiality and Impartiality
Editors and editorial staff must keep all submitted materials strictly confidential. Manuscripts may be shared only with corresponding authors, reviewers, technical experts, and the publisher when necessary.

Conflict of Interest
Editors must not use unpublished data or insights from submitted manuscripts in their own research without written consent from the authors.
In cases of potential conflict of interest (collaboration, competition, or affiliation), the editor must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript, assigning it to another member of the editorial board.

Decision-Making and Publication Responsibility
All manuscripts undergo double-blind peer review by at least two independent experts.
The editorial board considers reviewer feedback and determines the scientific value of the work before making a final decision on publication, revision, or rejection.
The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

Response to Misconduct
In suspected cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, or ethical violations, the editorial team, in cooperation with the publisher, conducts a formal investigation.
If misconduct is confirmed, an erratum, correction, expression of concern, or retraction is published in accordance with COPE procedures.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are essential contributors to maintaining the scientific quality, credibility, and reliability of the journal’s publications.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists editors in making informed publication decisions and provides constructive feedback to help authors improve their work.
Reviewing is considered an ethical obligation of all scholars who participate in the advancement of science.

Timeliness and Competence
Reviewers should accept invitations only when they have sufficient expertise to evaluate the manuscript. If they are unable to complete the review within the given timeframe, they must promptly notify the editors.

Confidentiality and Professional Conduct
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shared or discussed with others without authorization from the Editor-in-Chief.
Even if a reviewer declines to review, they must not use any part of the manuscript for personal benefit.

Objectivity and Constructive Criticism
Reviews must be fair, balanced, and clearly reasoned.
Personal criticism of authors is unacceptable.
Comments should be expressed respectfully and supported by relevant arguments and references.

Source Verification and Academic Integrity
Reviewers should identify relevant works that have not been cited and report any suspected plagiarism, duplicate submission, or overlap with other published materials.

Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest (financial, professional, or personal) and withdraw from the review if such conflicts exist.
Use of unpublished information from a reviewed manuscript in a reviewer’s own work is strictly prohibited.

Responsibilities of Technical Experts (TMVAS NMU)

Technical experts — members of the Technical Department of the Language and Manuscript Editing Association (TMVAS) at O.O. Bohomolets National Medical University — play a crucial role in ensuring that all manuscripts meet the journal’s technical, linguistic, and ethical standards before the peer-review stage.

Their responsibilities include:

• Structural assessment of the manuscript (IMRAD format, title page, abstract, keywords, references, figures, and tables);
• Ensuring linguistic accuracy and stylistic consistency in both Ukrainian and English versions;
• Verifying formatting compliance of tables, figures, and bibliographic references with journal guidelines;
• Checking terminological consistency in accordance with international medical nomenclatures and scientific standards;
• Confirming the presence of ethical statements (ethics committee approval, informed patient consent, adherence to bioethical norms);
• Verifying affiliations, ORCID IDs, and contact details for all authors;
• Aligning the manuscript layout with the journal’s publication template to facilitate further editorial processing.

Technical experts do not alter the scientific content of manuscripts but may report any inconsistencies, errors, or ethical concerns to the editorial board.
Their work ensures uniformity of style, professional presentation, and high editorial quality, reinforcing the journal’s reputation as a reliable and internationally compliant academic publication.

Responsibilities of the Publisher

Addressing Misconduct and Ethical Violations
In cases of proven or suspected academic misconduct — including plagiarism, data manipulation, or fraudulent publication — the publisher works closely with the editors to investigate and take appropriate corrective action. This may include issuing corrections, clarifications, or retractions in line with COPE standards.

Accessibility and Archiving
The publisher ensures long-term preservation and open access to the journal’s content through institutional repositories and digital archives, including the Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine and other academic databases.
USMYJ follows LOCKSS / CLOCKSS principles to guarantee secure digital preservation and permanent accessibility.

Transparency of the Review Process
All peer reviews are stored in the journal’s internal archive. Upon request, the editorial office may provide anonymized examples of review templates or verification of the review process.
The journal’s editorial and publishing policies guarantee fairness, transparency, and adherence to international ethical principles at every stage of publication.