Reviewing Process
General regulations.
All articles submitted to the journal's editors undergo the review procedure, and it is carried out according to the double-blind principle, when the identities of reviewers and authors are not revealed. The task of reviewing is to facilitate the strict selection of author's manuscripts for publication and to make specific recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article, determination of its compliance with the journal's requirements, and involves a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the article's materials. The level of compliance with the requirements for preparing an article for publication in a scientific journal is taken into account separately.
Manuscript review is confidential. By submitting a manuscript for review, authors entrust editors with the results of their scientific work and creative efforts, on which their reputation and career may depend. Disclosure of confidential details of manuscript review violates the rights of the author. The editors do not share information about the manuscript (including information about its receipt, content, review process, critical comments of the reviewers, and the final conclusion) to anyone other than the authors and the reviewers themselves.
Peer-review process
- The author submits an article to the editors, which must meet the requirements of the magazine's policy and the rules for preparing articles for publication. Manuscripts that do not meet the accepted requirements are not registered with an indication of the date of receipt, title, P.I.B. author/s, places of work of the author/s. and are not allowed for further consideration, which is reported to the authors.
- Reviewers are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief of the magazine. According to the decision of the Editor-in-Chief of the journal (under certain circumstances), the appointment of reviewers may be entrusted to a member of the editorial board. In some cases, the issue of selecting reviewers is decided at a meeting of the editorial board. To review articles, reviewers can be both members of the editorial board of a scientific journal and third-party highly qualified specialists who have deep professional knowledge and work experience in a specific scientific direction, as a rule, doctors of science, professors.
- After receiving the article, the reviewer evaluates the possibility of reviewing materials based on the appropriateness of the author's own qualifications in the field of research and the absence of any conflict of interest. If there are any competing interests, the reviewer may refuse to review and notify the editorial board. The latter should decide on the appointment of another reviewer.
- Peer review is conducted confidentially according to the principles of peer review (double blind, when neither the author nor the reviewer knows about each other). Interaction between the author and the reviewers takes place through the responsible editor of the journal.
- After the final analysis of the article, the reviewer fills out a standard form (Review Form), which contains final recommendations. The editorial office notifies the author of the results of the review by e-mail.
- If the reviewer indicates the need to make certain corrections to the article, the article is sent to the author with a proposal to take the comments into account when preparing an updated version of the article or to refute them with arguments. To the revised article, the author adds a letter that contains answers to all comments and explains all the changes that were made to the article. The corrected version is re-submitted to the reviewer to make a decision and prepare a reasoned opinion about the possibility of publication. The date of acceptance of the article for publication is considered the date of receipt by the editorial office of a positive opinion of the reviewer (or decision of the editorial board) regarding the expediency and possibility of publishing the article.
- In case of receiving a positive decision about the possibility of publication, the article enters the regular content of the journal for publication in the nearest issue of the journal). The final decision on the composition of printed articles is recorded in the protocol of the meeting of the academic council.
- An article approved for publication is submitted to the technical editor. Minor stylistic or formal corrections that do not affect the content of the article are made by the technical editor without agreement with the author.
- Responsibility for copyright infringement and non-compliance with existing standards in the materials of the article rests with the author of the article. The author and the reviewer are responsible for the reliability of the given facts and data, the validity of the conclusions and recommendations, and the scientific and practical level of the article.
Rights and responsibilities of the reviewer:
The reviewers provide a written review of the manuscript, at the end of which, based on the analysis of the readiness of the material, a conclusion is given about the possibility of publishing the article.
If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after revision taking into account comments or does not recommend the article for publication, the reasons for such a decision should be indicated in the review.
The reviewer must consider the submitted article within the deadline agreed with the editor-in-chief and send a reasoned refusal to review or a review to the editorial office (by e-mail).
The reviewers evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of the article, its practical value and scientific significance. In addition, the reviewers determine the compliance of the article with the principles of ethics in scientific publications and provide recommendations for eliminating cases of their violation.
The reviewers inform that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and belong to those information that are not subject to disclosure.
Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the article submitted for review or have the obligation to use knowledge about the content of the article before its publication.
Reviewing takes place on the basis of confidentiality, when information about the article (receipt terms, content, stages and features of review, comments of reviewers and the final decision on publication) is not communicated to anyone except the authors and reviewers.
Rights and obligations of the author:
The author of the reviewed work is given the opportunity to familiarize himself with the text of the review, in particular if he does not agree with the conclusions of the reviewer.
In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to submit a reasoned answer to the editors of the journal. The article may be sent for re-review or for approval by the editorial board.
Articles sent to the authors for correction must be returned to the editorial office no later than 1 week after receipt. If the article is returned at a later date, the date of its receipt for printing changes accordingly.
