Complaints and Appeals Procedure

In handling complaints and appeals, the Editorial Board adheres to the standards of academic integrity, as well as the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Possible Grounds for Complaints

  1. Ethical Misconduct by Authors. Plagiarism; self-plagiarism; data fabrication or falsification; guest authorship (including individuals who did not participate in the study); ghost authorship (excluding individuals who made a significant contribution); and undisclosed conflicts of interest.
  2. Violations of Ethical Principles by the Editorial Office or Reviewers. Breach of the double-blind peer review process; breach of confidentiality; reviewer bias; making substantial changes to the text without the author's consent; and unexplained delays in the manuscript review process. Authors also have the right to appeal an editorial decision to reject a manuscript if they believe the decision was based on flawed judgment or bias.
  3. Technical Errors. Inaccuracies in published data that affect the interpretation of results; errors in attributing authorship or institutional affiliation.

 

Procedure for Submitting and Handling Complaints

  1. Submission of Complaints. Complaints must be submitted in electronic form to the editorial office at oncology_kiev@ukr.net. The submission must be reasoned and include a reference to the specific article, a detailed statement of the issue, and supporting documentation.
  2. Initial Review. The Managing Editor acknowledges receipt of the complaint and verifies the authenticity and validity of the issues raised.
  3. Investigation Process. The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board who do not have a conflict of interest with any of the parties involved shall form a committee to review the complaint. If necessary, external independent experts may be consulted. The committee formally requests the individual against whom the complaint is filed to provide an explanation within 14 days. All communications between the participants in the review process are strictly confidential.
  4. Decisions and Outcomes. Based on the results of the investigation, the Editorial Board may take one of the following actions:

Rejection of the complaint: If no violations are found or the evidence is insufficient.

Issuance of a Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum): If a minor error is found that does not alter the overall scientific conclusion of the article.

Retraction of the article: In cases of confirmed plagiarism, data falsification, or gross violations of publication ethics.

Appeals Procedure

  1. If the applicant or the author disagrees with the Commission's decision, they have the right to file an appeal within 30 days.
  2. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or a specially appointed commission consisting of editorial board members who have not previously participated in the consideration of the complaint.
  3. Based on the results of the review, the commission may either dismiss the appeal (upholding the previous decision) or appoint a new commission for a secondary review of the complaint.