Procedure for withdrawing published articles

1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

1.1. This Procedure defines the grounds, process, and rules for retracting articles published in the scientific journal.

1.2. The purpose of retraction is to correct the scientific record, ensure academic integrity, and prevent the dissemination of unreliable or improperly obtained scientific information.

1.3. Retraction is carried out in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) international standards and the journal’s internal editorial policies.

2. GROUNDS FOR ARTICLE RETRACTION

An article may be retracted if one or more of the following facts are established.

2.1. Violations of Academic Integrity

  • confirmed plagiarism (texts, data, ideas, illustrations);

  • self-plagiarism that misleads readers regarding the novelty of the results;

  • fabrication or falsification of data;

  • manipulation of images, graphs, or tables.

2.2. Ethical Violations

  • lack of informed consent (for studies involving human participants);

  • absence of ethical committee approvals;

  • incorrect authorship attribution (gift authorship, ghost authorship).

2.3. Serious Scientific Errors

  • critical methodological flaws that undermine the article’s conclusions;

  • inconsistency between described methods and actual data obtained;

  • significant miscalculations casting doubt on the reliability of the publication.

2.4. Copyright Violations

  • use of protected materials without permission;

  • republication of previously published work without informing the editorial office.

2.5. Violations of the Submission Process

  • simultaneous submission of the same article to multiple journals;

  • significant concealment of conflicts of interest.

3. INITIATION OF THE RETRACTION PROCEDURE

3.1. Retraction may be initiated by:

  • the author(s) of the article;

  • the editorial office or Editor-in-Chief;

  • a reviewer;

  • readers or external experts;

  • academic institutions, scientific committees, or the author’s employer.

3.2. Any inquiry regarding suspected violations is reviewed confidentially by the editorial office.

4. REVIEW PROCEDURE

4.1. Initial Assessment

The editorial office registers the inquiry, conducts a preliminary analysis, and determines whether the case requires a full investigation.

4.2. Collection of Information

The editorial office may:

  • request explanations from the authors;

  • consult reviewers or external experts;

  • conduct a repeated plagiarism check or data analysis;

  • obtain confirmation from the institution where the research was conducted.

Authors must respond within 14 calendar days.

4.3. Decision-Making

A decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or the editorial board based on the results of the review. Possible outcomes include:

  • corrigendum – if errors do not affect the main conclusions;

  • editorial note – if clarifications are needed;

  • expression of concern – if violations are likely but evidence is insufficient;

  • retraction – if violations are confirmed;

  • withdrawal – for articles accepted but not yet published.

5. RETRACTION PROCEDURE

5.1. Publication of the Retraction Notice

A Retraction Notice is published on the journal’s website and in the electronic archive. It must include:

  • article title, authors, and publication details;

  • clear marking “RETRACTED”;

  • reason for retraction;

  • information on who initiated the process;

  • signature of the responsible editor.

The notice must be public, open-access, and free.

5.2. Notification of Databases

The journal informs:

  • indexing databases (DOAJ, CrossRef, Google Scholar, Scopus, WoS, etc.);

  • library services;

  • archives where the article is stored.

An updated DOI with RETRACTED status is submitted to CrossRef.

5.3. Preservation of the Original Article

The original article:

  • is not deleted;

  • is marked with a watermark or note “RETRACTED”;

  • remains accessible with an explanation of the retraction reasons.

6. AUTHORS’ RIGHTS

6.1. Authors may:

  • provide explanations;

  • submit objections or additional materials;

  • appeal the decision within 30 days.

6.2. Appeals are reviewed by independent editors or external experts.

7. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE EDITORIAL OFFICE

The editorial office ensures:

  • objectivity and impartiality of the review;

  • confidentiality during the investigation;

  • compliance with COPE ethical standards;

  • no sanctions against authors without sufficient evidence;

  • transparency during publication of the decision.

8. FINAL PROVISIONS

8.1. This Procedure enters into force upon approval and is mandatory for all participants in the editorial process.

8.2. The journal reserves the right to amend the Procedure in line with updated COPE recommendations and legislation.

8.3. In case of disputes, the final interpretation is made by the editorial board.

8.4. If specific provisions become outdated or contradict legislation, they will be updated without invalidating the entire document.