The Editorial Board of the journal “Bulletin of SNAU. The series: Veterinary Medicine” strictly follows all guidelines and recommendations issued by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

There are the key principles of publication ethics that editors, reviewers and authors of the Journal “Bulletin of SNAU. The series: Veterinary Medicine” should follow.

Editorial responsibilities:

1. All editors are responsible for maintaining of the published material quality, freedom of expression and academic honesty. Editors should try to constantly improve their journal, keep faithful to the principles of scientific honesty, and prevent commercial interests from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
2. Editors should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. All editors must act in a balanced, objective and rightly while performing their duties without discrimination on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnic or geographical origin of the authors.
3. In case of interest conflict or dishonest behavior, complaints of non-compliance with ethical standards, editors should act in accordance with established procedures and policies of the scientific community. They are obliged to allow authors to reasonably respond to any complaints or comments. The editors must keep all documentation related to similar complaints and comments.
4. Editorial policies can evolve, override and change as necessary to maintain standards of scientific ethics.

Responsibilities of reviewers:

1. Reviewers should contribute to the decision-making process for publishing materials and contribute to improving the scientific quality of the journal.
2. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of any information provided by the editor or author. It is forbidden to save or copy manuscripts, to discuss materials with third parties who are not authorized by this edition.
3. Reviewers should warn the editors about cases of plagiarism, submission of materials repeatedly, etc.
4. Reviews should be carried out objectively. The reviewer must clearly, properly express his views and prevent personal complaints from the author.
5. Reviewers should refuse to review in case of the possible interest conflict or the non-compliance of the submitted materials with their scientific interests.

Responsibilities of the authors:

1. The authors must ensure that the submitted materials are original, based on author's research, and the article is not under consideration in other editions. They are responsible for the truthfulness of the data provided in the article and / or in the enclosed documents.
2. Plagiarism in any manifestation (full copying of the other authors work or partial borrowing of others' works without mention of authorship) is unacceptable and unethical. The authors are responsible for the presence of plagiarism in the materials provided. They are obliged to provide references to the materials of other authors and to parts of the own articles, those have been already published in other editions.
3. Authors should report the absence or any possible interest conflicts that may affect to the authors or lead to concealment or alteration of data.
4. The author must report significant inaccuracies or errors that were discovered during the process of reviewing of the article or even after its publication.
5. The authors should promptly elaborate comments on the submitted materials, fully contribute to a faster consideration of the article in the editorial board.