Aim and Scope

The aim of the journal is to inform optometrists and ophthalmologists about international and domestic scientific advances in such areas as:

• correction of refractive disorders;
• contact vision correction;
• diagnostics and treatment of diseases of the anterior and posterior segment of the eye;
• paediatric ophthalmology

Journal tasks: to acquaint the target audience of the journal with the research vectors in the above directions, to expand the professional outlook of ophthalmologists and optometrists, to form critical thinking of specialists, to support young scientists and to increase the publication activity of optometrists.

Section Policies

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

REVIEWS

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

TECHNOLOGIES

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

WORKSHOP

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

LITERARE GUIDE

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

Quarterly

Archiving

• Russian State Library (RSL)
• National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

Peer-Review

The review policy was established by the Editor-in-Chief, Myagkov A.V.

The Editorial Board of "The EYE GLAZ" journal adheres to the recommendations oprovided by COPE when handling manuscripts, engaging with reviewers, and organizing the review process.

Type of review

All manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Board of "The EYE GLAZ" journal undergo a mandatory single-blind peer review. This means that the reviewers' identities are concealed from the authors, and all communication is conducted through the Editor of "The EYE GLAZ" journal.

Review timeline

The review process at "The EYE GLAZ" journal typically spans 1 to 3 months. Within this timeframe, the Editorial Board allows for the initial consideration of the manuscript, selection of reviewers, review preparation time, author's revision period, subsequent re-reviewing, and the involvement of additional experts if required.

Progress of the review

The decision to appoint a reviewer for "The EYE GLAZ" journal is made by the Editor-in-Chief. Each article is assigned to two experts. The Editor of "The EYE GLAZ" journal may convey one of the following decisions to the author regarding the manuscript that was accepted by the reviewer:

Accept for publication

If accepted, the manuscript will be included in one of the regular issues of the journal and forwarded to the editor for further processing. The author will receive notification regarding the publication schedule.

Accept for publication after minor revisions

In this case, the author will be provided one week to address the changes specified by the reviewer. Once the deficiencies have been rectified or if there is a justified refusal to make changes, the manuscript will be accepted for publication.

Revise and resubmit

In this case, the author will be provided with a two-week window to address the revisions suggested by the reviewer. The manuscript will then undergo a second review. Within 30 days, the author will be informed of the final decision regarding the acceptance of the manuscript.

Revise and resubmit

In this case, the author will be provided with a two-week window to address the revisions suggested by the reviewer. The manuscript will then undergo a second review. Within 30 days, the author will be informed of the final decision regarding the acceptance of the manuscript.

Reject

If the decision is to reject the manuscript, the author will receive a detailed explanation for the rejection. The rejection does not preclude future submissions by the author to "The EYE GLAZ" journal. However, serious violations by the author may prompt the Editor-in-Chief to consider placing the author on a blacklist, prohibiting consideration of further submissions.

The journal "The EYE GLAZ" Editorial Board allows for three rounds of review. Following the initial decision for revision, the author has two opportunities to incorporate the reviewer's suggestions into the article or decline them with appropriate justifications. If, after the third round of review, the reviewer still provides comments, the journal editor will advise the author to consider submitting the article to another journal or to resubmit the revised version within six months.

If the author decides not to revise the article, they are required to inform the Editorial Board of the journal. Subsequently, the work on the article will be ceased.

During the review process of a manuscript, conflicts may arise between the author and the reviewer. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief of "The EYE GLAZ" reserves the right to appoint a new reviewer for the manuscript and may involve members of the Editorial Board for mediation and dispute resolution.

"The EYE GLAZ" journal permits the publication of articles authored by the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor, Executive Editor and members of the Editorial Board. However, there must be no misuse of their official positions. Manuscripts submitted by journal employees undergo a single-blind peer-review conducted solely by external experts. External experts are exclusively engaged in resolving conflicts and contentious situations. In the event of a conflict regarding the fate of the Editor-in-Chief's manuscript, the final decision concerning the potential publication of the article rests with the members of the Editorial Board.

When articles authored by members of the Editorial Board, the Editor-in-Chief, or their Deputy are published, the "Conflict of Interest" section explicitly discloses information about the authors' affiliation with the journal.

The EYE GLAZ journal's Editorial Office maintains copies of reviews for a minimum of 5 years.

Composition of reviewers

External experts possessing recent experience in the relevant subject area and having published on the topic of the reviewed manuscript within the last 3 years are engaged in reviewing all incoming manuscripts.

In scenarios where the article's subject matter is highly specialized and/or the author discloses a potential conflict of interest concerning external specialist reviewers, members of the Editorial Board may participate in the review process.

Principles of reviewer selection and Editorial team's actions to ensure high-quality expertise

The Editorial Board of "The EYE GLAZ" journal consistently endeavors to attract established experts in the fields of refractive disorders, contact vision correction, and pathology of the anterior and posterior segments of the eye for collaboration on the journal. Additionally, they aim to regularly rotate reviewers.

Reviewers are invited to collaborate with the journal based on recommendations from the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, members of the Editorial Board, and sometimes even the authors.

The journal's responsible editor actively monitors publications related to the journal's subject matter in databases like Scopus, Web of Science, and RINC. Invitations for collaboration are extended to authors of these publications.

In instances where the quality of the review does not meet the Editorial team's standards, cooperation with the reviewer is terminated.

Mechanism for engaging reviewers in journal work

The Editorial Board of "The EYE GLAZ" journal views the review process as a pivotal procedure and highly values the expertise and time contributed by the reviewers.

Reviewers for "The EYE GLAZ" journal are entitled to certain privileges, including priority publication of their own work and the translation of accepted article texts into English.

Privacy measures

The Editorial Board of "The EYE GLAZ" journal maintains strict confidentiality regarding the personal data of both reviewers and authors.

Any manuscript under consideration by the Editorial Board of "The EYE GLAZ" journal is treated with utmost confidentiality. The board expects reviewers to refrain from disclosing or discussing manuscript content with third parties without explicit consent from the editor.

Reviewer's responsibility

When agreeing to review manuscripts for "The EYE GLAZ" journal, the reviewer commits to adhering to the journal's policies in evaluating the manuscript, composing the review, and conducting themselves ethically.

The reviewer should endeavor to uphold the high quality of materials published in "The EYE GLAZ" journal, akin to the responsibilities of the Editor. Hence, they should only undertake a review if they possess ample experience in the relevant field and have sufficient time for a comprehensive evaluation of the article.

It is the duty of the reviewer to disclose any conflicts of interest (personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious) to the Editor-in-Chief, if such conflicts exist. In cases of uncertainty, the reviewer should engage in discussion with the Editor-in-Chief regarding the situation.

The reviewer is obligated to decline reviewing if:

• They hold a supervisory or subordinate relationship with the manuscript's author, or if they are joint grant holders.
• Their intention is not to prepare a review but merely to familiarize themselves with the article's content.
• They are in the process of preparing their own article for publication on a similar topic.
• They are reviewing an article covering a closely related subject matter.

Reviewer's duties

The reviewer must inform the Editor-in-Chief of their intention to review an article and adhere to the specified timeframe for completing the review. If unable to conduct the review for any reason, suggesting an alternate expert to the Editor-in-Chief is appropriate.

The reviewer is prohibited from utilizing their status for personal purposes or imposing references to their own works on the authors.

All materials received from the Editor-in-Chief are strictly confidential. The reviewer is obliged not to disclose these materials to third parties or involve additional specialists in the review process without explicit consent from the Editor-in-Chief.

Reviewer's final decision

The Editorial Board of "The EYE GLAZ" journal recommends using the following justifications for the reviewer's final decision.

Accept the article for publication.

The reviewer acknowledges that the article is prepared for publication in its current form. It is well-founded, ethically sound, holds significance within the scientific community, and contributes to previously published works. Additionally, the writing style is clear and concise.

Accept after minor revisions.

Some non-critical remarks are noted in the article that require attention. These may include issues with writing style, lack of clarity, insufficiently developed article structure, errors in references, or duplication of information among figures, tables, and text. Upon addressing these concerns and subsequent reassessment, the article can be accepted for publication.

Accept after substantial revision and further review.

The article contains significant flaws and errors that impact the reliability of the results obtained. These issues could involve ethical concerns, problems with research design, gaps in research method descriptions, inadequately presented or misinterpreted results, insufficiently detailed descriptions of research limitations, contradictory or self-refuted conclusions, lack of reference to crucial studies, and tables or figures needing substantial revision. After re-evaluation, the article may be accepted, rejected, or necessitate additional expertise. Such a decision often requires gathering additional data from the author.

Reject.

The work fails to meet the journal's objectives and goals due to one or more irreparable flaws or serious ethical concerns. These may include instances where necessary publication consent was not obtained, unethical research methods were utilized, or the methodology is flawed or discredited (e.g., disregarding a significant process affecting results). In cases of rejection, the author should not resubmit the corrected document without specific request. Detailed comments justifying the decision can significantly assist the author in improving the work.

Indexation

Articles in "The EYE GLAZ" are indexed by several systems:

• Russian Index for Science Citation (RISC) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
• Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
• Scopus

Publishing Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal "The EYE GLAZ" are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org,  and requirements for peer-reviewed medical journals ((http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf), elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications) 

1. Introduction

1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: "The EYE GLAZ"

1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned "The EYE GLAZ"  is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the "The EYE GLAZ" journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of "The EYE GLAZ" 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.

2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. 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.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) 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 connected to the papers.

2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor 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.

3. Duties of Reviewers

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

3.2.Promptness – 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 of "The EYE GLAZ" and excuse himself from the review process.

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

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

3.5.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.

3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1.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.

3.6.2. 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 connected to the papers.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1.Reporting standards

4.1.1. 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 detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

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

4.2.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.

4.3.Originality and Plagiarism

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

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

4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

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

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, 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. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

4.5.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 privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

4.6.Authorship of the Paper

4.6.1. 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. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

4.6.2. 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.

4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

4.7.1. 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.

4.7.2. 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.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. 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.

4.8.2. 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 possible stage.

4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of "The EYE GLAZ" journal and cooperate with Publisher 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.

5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)

5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of "The EYE GLAZ" in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

5.2. The publisher should support "The EYE GLAZ" journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.

The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/). 

Founder

• Autonomous non-profit organization "Academy of Medical Optics and Optometry"

Author fees

Publication in "The EYE GLAZ" is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

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 connected to the papers.

Plagiarism detection

"The EYE GLAZ" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

Advertisement placement and article reprints

The advertising policy of "The EYE ГЛАЗ" journal is based on the recommendations of the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals and the Russian Federation Law "On Advertising."

"The EYE ГЛАЗ" journal generates revenue from advertising and reprints, therefore an advertising policy has been approved, the main principles of which are formulated below:

1. Editorial decisions are independent of the cost of advertising or the production of reprints. Advertisers and sponsors have no influence on editorial decisions and editorial boards, regardless of the advertising conditions or other agreements.
2. The roles of the editor and the advertising manager in the journal should be separate.
3. Reprints should be published in the same form in which they were originally published in the journal (including subsequent corrections), therefore no additions or modifications should be made.
4. The content of special supplementary issues of the journal should be regulated solely by the editor's decisions, and sponsors or advertisers should not have any influence on the content of such issues.
5. The limit for advertising materials in the journal is not more than 10% of the total volume of the journal.
6. The journal has an official advertising policy, which is available to all participants in the editorial and publishing process.
7. All advertising announcements must clearly identify the advertiser and the product or service being offered. In the case of advertising of medicinal products, the full name of each active ingredient must be indicated.
8. Commercial advertising should not be placed next to any editorial article or article discussing the advertised product, and it should not contain references to the issue of the journal in which it is placed.
9. The advertising content should be distinguishable from editorial and other materials, so that the difference between them is apparent.
10. Advertising must not deceive or mislead. Advertising must not exaggerate the actual characteristics of the promoted product. Advertising must not contain offensive considerations of a religious and/or racial nature.
11. The advertised products should be oriented towards medical practice, medical education, or the provision of medical assistance.
12. The journal's editorial board has the right to reject any advertising that, in the opinion of the board, is incompatible with the journal's mission or does not correspond to the objectives of the journal/website or the publishing company, and to halt the publication process of any previously approved advertising.

Marketing

As part of scientific and practical events (conferences, symposia), participants are provided with a free copy of the journal.

The publisher does not send requests to potential authors to submit manuscripts.

CrossMark Policy

CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content. By applying the CrossMark logo, journal "The EYE GLAZ" is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.

Clicking the CrossMark logo on a document will tell you its current status and may also give you additional publication-record information about the document.