GUIDELINES FOR AUTHORS

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements will not be considered by the journal's editors. All articles received by the editor are subject to careful review. The journal practices double-blind reviewing, in which the reviewer does not know the name of the author, and the authors do not know the name of the reviewer. In addition to the specialty reviewer, a manuscript containing statistical data is also sent to a statistics reviewer. If reviewers have questions, the article is returned to the authors for revision. The editors have the right to request the original database on the basis of which calculations were made in cases where questions arise about the quality of statistical processing. The editors also reserve the right to make editorial changes to the text that do not distort the meaning of the article.

Manuscripts should be sent to the editor electronically in MS Word format as an attachment to an email.

The electronic version of the article is prepared in Microsoft Word. The text of the article is printed in Times New Roman font size 12 points with a line spacing of 1.0. Portrait orientation with 2.5 cm margins on all sides and mandatory page numbering starting from the title page. Tables and figures (illustrations, graphs, photographs), as well as captions for them, are sent in the same file as the main text and are placed in the text, as well as on separate pages at the end of the article. The total number of tables and figures in original articles should usually not exceed 5. The approximate location of illustrative material in the text is indicated in the margins on the right side. The length of the manuscript of the original article should be 2000-3000 words, not including a summary, acknowledgments, bibliography, tables and figures. A literature review can be up to 5,000 words. The reference list for original articles should include 20-30 references. For reviews, the number of references can reach up to 100 but not below 50. Manuscripts of original articles must have the following sections: “Abstract”, “Introduction”, “Methods”, “Results”, “Discussion”, “References”.

Requirements for the content of the article
The title of the work should be as short as possible (no more than 180 characters), but informative and accurately reflect its content. Names in the form of interrogative sentences, as well as names whose meaning can be read ambiguously, should be avoided. It is not recommended to use abbreviations (abbreviations) in the title of the article. The text may use standard abbreviations (abbreviations). The full term in place of which an abbreviation is introduced must precede the first use of the abbreviation in the text.

Front page
The title page contains the following information:
1. Title of the article (in bold)
2. Last names and initials of each author
3. Full address of the author responsible for correspondence with the editors, including telephone and email address
4. Full name of all organizations to which the authors belong. Each author is associated with his or her organization using an uppercase digit as shown below:
Environmental research in health care
Grzhibovsky A.M.1-3, Ivanov S.V. 4
1. National Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
2. International School of Public Health, Northern State Medical University, Arkhangelsk, Russia
3. International Kazakh-Turkish University named after. HA. Yasawi, Turkestan, Kazakhstan
4. Northwestern State Medical University named after. I.I. Mechnikov, St. Petersburg, Russia

Second page
The second page should contain an abstract and keywords in three languages (Russian, Kazakh and English). The abstract is a brief, but at the same time the most informative content of a scientific publication. Its volume should be no more than 300 words. It summarizes the background and objectives of the study, the main methods including the type of study, sampling and main analytical methods, the main results with their numerical expression and levels of statistical significance and the main conclusions. New and important aspects of the study are noted. The abstract is the only part of the article that is available in electronic format for a wide range of readers, so it is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that the abstract accurately corresponds to the content of the entire work. The abstract should be structured and contain the following sections: “Introduction”, “Purpose of the study”, “Methods”, “Results”, “Conclusions”. An abstract for new research methods or data processing, descriptions of individual clinical cases or observations should prompt the reader to refer to the full text of the article. The editors reserve the right to correct the translation. When compiling an English version of a resume with a title, it is recommended to use the help of a professional translator to avoid misunderstandings. The subtitle “Key Words” is placed under the abstract, and after it from 3 to 6 key words reflecting the problems studied during the study. For keywords, it is advisable to use terms from the list of medical subject headings (MeSH, Medical Subject Headings) used in Index Medicus (www.pubmed.com).

Introduction
The section clearly states the prerequisites for the research: the essence of the problem and its significance are indicated. Authors should familiarize the reader with the problem being studied, briefly describe what is known on this topic, mention work carried out by other authors, identify the shortcomings of previous studies, if any, i.e., convincingly prove to the reader the need for research. You should not cite all the works published on this topic; it is enough to mention the most significant of them, only those that are directly related to the topic. It is recommended to refer not only to domestic, but also foreign studies on the topic under study.
At the end of the section, the purpose of the study is stated. The tasks set to achieve the goal are also listed here. The goal is formulated in such a way that the reader has a complete understanding of what is planned to be studied, from which individuals and using what method. Data, results, or conclusions that will be presented later in the paper should not be included in this section.

Methods
The section should include only those methods that were intended to be used at the planning stage of the project according to the original study protocol. Additional methods, the need for which arose during the study, should be presented in the “Discussion of results” section. The section should be written in such detail that the reader can not only independently evaluate the methodological pros and cons of this study, but, if desired, reproduce it. It is recommended that the section provide a clear description of the following points (it is not necessary to separate them into separate subsections): type of study; method of selecting study participants; measurement technique; methods of data presentation and processing; ethical principles.

1. Type of study
This subsection clearly identifies the type of study being conducted (literature review, observational, experimental, etc.). When conducting an observational study, it should be specified whether it is descriptive or analytical. Analytical ones determine the type of study: cross-sectional, case-control, cohort, ecological, etc. It is recommended to indicate the year and month of the study, especially when studying characteristics that are characterized by seasonal variability. Literature reviews should clearly state inclusion and exclusion criteria for publications.

2. Method of selecting study participants
This subsection clearly states how patients or laboratory animals were selected for observations and experiments. Criteria for inclusion and exclusion of potential participants in the study are outlined. It is recommended to indicate the population from which the study participants are selected and to which the results obtained will be extrapolated. When using a variable such as race or ethnicity in a study, you should explain how the variable was measured and what the implications of using the variable are. Observational studies should specify the sampling method (simple random, stratified, systematic, cluster, multistage, etc.) and justify including this number of participants in the study. In experimental studies, the presence or absence of a randomization procedure for study participants should be indicated. A description of the randomization procedure must be provided. In addition, it should be indicated whether a masking procedure was performed. Calculations of the minimum required sample size for testing statistical hypotheses or retrospective calculations of statistical power for basic calculations are encouraged.

3. Measurement technique
All procedures for measuring certain parameters, collecting data, conducting therapeutic or diagnostic interventions must be described in such detail that the study can be reproduced according to the description provided. If necessary, you can make a link to a detailed description of the method used. If the researcher uses his own modification of a previously described method or proposes a new one, then a brief description of the modification used or the proposed method, as well as an argument against the use of generally accepted methods, must be provided. The names of drugs (both commercial and international), chemical substances, doses and methods of administration of the drug used in this study are indicated. The devices, instruments, medications, etc. used are accompanied by a link to the manufacturer.

4. Methods of presenting and processing data
This subsection is often the main reason for refusal to publish works of Kazakh scientists abroad. The data processing methods used must be described in such detail that a reader with access to the original data can verify the results obtained. The editors of the journal may, in doubtful cases, request initial data from the authors of the article to verify the results presented. This subsection should define all statistical terms, symbols, and abbreviations used in the work. For example, M is the arithmetic mean, SD is the standard deviation, m is the standard error of the arithmetic mean, Me is the median, Mo is the mode, etc. If the study tests statistical hypotheses, then the critical level of significance adopted by the authors should be indicated. Hypotheses must be formulated clearly and described in language that the reader can understand. The editors of the journal do not recommend relying solely on the use of the achieved level of significance when testing statistical hypotheses, since the p value does not reflect the completeness of the information. It is recommended that results be presented with appropriate measures of error and uncertainty (confidence intervals). When describing statistical methods, references to manuals and reference books must be provided with the obligatory indication of pages. In addition to statistical procedures for testing hypotheses, it is recommended to calculate effect sizes for the most important comparisons. It is recommended to present not only a point estimate, but also an interval estimate of the parameters being studied. If more than one statistical test is used in a study, all of them should be mentioned and an indication should be given in which situation which test was used. A vague description of statistical data processing such as “variation-statistical processing was carried out using generally accepted parametric and non-parametric statistical methods using the Statistica application package” is uninformative and unacceptable. Works with such wording will be immediately sent for revision without further review, which will significantly increase the time from submission of the manuscript to the editor to publication. The use of certain data processing methods must be clearly justified. For example, when using parametric criteria, you should describe the criteria by which the distribution verification procedure was carried out. It is necessary to indicate how compliance with the conditions for using methods for which these conditions are necessary was verified. Each of the applied criteria must be designated in such a way as to exclude variant readings. For example, if the comparison of sample means was carried out using the Student's test, then it should be indicated which of the Student's tests (for independent samples or for paired observations) was used in the work. It is not enough to say that correlation analysis was used; it is necessary to indicate which of the correlation coefficients was calculated. When using multivariate data processing methods, it is specified how variables were selected for inclusion in the models and which categories were used as comparison categories. If a rare data processing method is used, it is necessary to indicate why this particular method was chosen, provide a link to the literature source, and briefly describe the method used. If a statistical software package is used for data processing, its name and version should be indicated. There is no need to report on which computer the data was processed, due to the lack of practical value of this information.

5. Ethical principles
If the article describes human experiments, it must be stated whether the procedure was in accordance with the standards of the ethical committee responsible for that aspect of the work or with the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki and its subsequent revisions. It is unacceptable to mention the names and initials of patients, or the numbers of medical records, especially if the article is accompanied by illustrations or photographs. When using laboratory animals in research, it is necessary to indicate the type and number of animals, the methods used to anesthetize them and kill them in accordance with the rules adopted by the institution, the recommendations of the national research council, or current legislation.

Results
This section is intended to present the main results of the study only. The results obtained in this study are not compared with the results of similar studies by other authors and are not discussed.
The results should be presented in text, tables and figures in a logical sequence based on the order of the goals and objectives of the study. It is not recommended to duplicate results presented in tables or figures in the text, and vice versa. Only important observations relevant to the objectives of the study are described, highlighted and summarized. General characteristics of the sample or study groups should be presented in a table indicating the main characteristics being studied. It is necessary to indicate not only average values, but also measures of dispersion or confidence intervals for average values and proportions.
Average values should not be given more accurately than one decimal place compared to the original data. When describing proportions, it is necessary to indicate the absolute number of observations, especially with small samples. Percentages are given to two decimal places only if the percentage is less than 1%. If the proportion is between 1 and 10%, then one decimal place is sufficient. The use of 95% confidence intervals for both means and proportions is encouraged.
The achieved level of significance (p) for each statistical test used should be reported to three decimal places. The editors strongly recommend avoiding statements such as p < 0.05 or p> 0.05 (the exception is the situation when p < 0.001). Instead of p < 0.05; p> 0.05 or “differences are not significant”, the absolute value of p should be indicated with an accuracy of thousandths (for example, p = 0.032). In addition to the achieved level of significance, it is recommended to provide the actual values of the criteria and the number of degrees of freedom. For example, the Pearson chi-square test with two degrees of freedom is: χ2 = 29.2, d. f. = 2, p < 0.001. The editors strongly recommend avoiding the use of the term “reliability” when testing statistical hypotheses. If statistically significant differences are detected, one should not say that “the differences are reliable.” It would be more correct to say “the differences are statistically significant.” It should always be remembered that the finding of statistically significant differences does not necessarily imply clinically important differences, cause-and-effect relationships, or the validity of the results.
Units of measurement are given in accordance with the International System of Units SI.
Tables allow you to briefly and clearly present the available data in all the necessary detail. Summarizing the results in the form of tables allows you to significantly reduce the volume of text. Tables are numbered sequentially with Arabic numerals in the order of their first mention in the text. Each table should have a title that allows the reader to understand what data is presented in it without reading the text of the article. The sidebar and columns of the table should also be titled. If abbreviations are used, they are explained in the subtabular note. All explanations are given there. For footnotes, it is recommended to use uppercase Arabic numerals (1). Tables should not be cumbersome or include information not related to the goals and objectives of the study.
All graphics, illustrations and photographs must be submitted electronically with a view to printing in black and white. Photos must be high contrast in JPEG format. Graphs, diagrams and drawings can be presented in Excel or JPEG formats. If photographs of people are used, these people must not be recognizable or such photographs must be accompanied by written permission for their publication. All illustrations must have headings and be understandable without referring to the text of the article. The captions under the figures provide a description of all symbols. All illustrations are numbered sequentially in Arabic numerals in the order they are mentioned in the text. When using illustrations from other sources, the source of information must be cited. It is not recommended to present more than 5 illustrations and tables in one article.

The discussion of the results
In articles describing original research, this section begins with a brief (no more than 2-3 sentences) presentation of the main results of the study. The main results are those that correspond to the goals and objectives of the study. You should not focus on secondary results just because statistically significant differences were identified when testing statistical hypotheses. This section should not repeat material that has already been described in the Introduction and Methods sections. It is necessary to highlight new and important aspects of the study and, no less important, to try to explain the reasons for obtaining such results. Any limitations of the study should be critically described, especially if they are likely to have a significant impact on the results obtained or their interpretation. Additionally, the strengths of the study, or how it is better than others on the topic, should be noted. A discussion of the strengths and limitations of the study is an important part of the section and is intended to assist the reader in interpreting the results. We must always remember that it is better to draw the reader’s attention to the existing shortcomings of the study (there are no ideal studies), rather than these shortcomings being noted by reviewers or readers. This section describes how the results obtained in this study compare with the results of similar studies conducted by other authors. Instead of simply mentioning previous studies, an attempt should be made to explain why the results obtained are different or the same as those obtained by other authors. The possibilities of applying the results obtained, as well as limitations in their application, if any, are discussed. It is recommended to identify directions for further research that logically follow from the results of this study. New hypotheses can be formulated, but only when it is justified, and it is clearly stated that these are only hypotheses. In some cases, this section may provide practical recommendations for using research results in practice. Conclusions must be drawn based on the objectives of the study, avoiding unfounded statements and conclusions that do not follow from the observations or calculations presented. For example, you should not draw conclusions about the economic feasibility of using a new method of treating patients with disease X if the article does not provide a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis.