Reviewing

All submitted manuscripts are checked for their correspondence to the scope and formal requirements of the journal. The journal conducts one-sided blind peer review of all manuscripts (reviewers remain anonymous to the authors). The average period for providing reviews to the author is two months from the date the article is received by the editors.

At least two independent experts are selected by the editors amongst those having scientific authority in the relevant area. In case the two reviews contradict each other, a third reviewer is invited. If the author(s) of the article and the reviewers have irresolvable contradictions regarding the manuscript, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief of the journal who considers the reviewers’ opinions.

When choosing a reviewer, the editors are guided by the expertise of the reviewer and the absence of professional relationships between the author and the reviewer.

When submitting an article for reviewing, the author may list persons who he may have a conflict of interest with due to competition or cooperation. The editors will take this information into account.

Reviewers are guided by the principles formulated by the Committee on Publication Ethics. Based on these principles the "Editorial Ethics" was developed. Peer review is confidential. Confidentiality is broken only in cases of plagiarism or falsification.

The review covers the following aspects: the relevance of the article to the scope of the journal; topicality of the article; correspondence of the manuscript title and abstract to its content; the list of references; the review of the latest developments in the field; conclusion. In addition to providing comments for the author, the reviewers have the following options to express their informed opinion on the article: 

to accept the article;
to accept after technical corrections without second round of review;
to accept after technical corrections with second round of review;
to accept after major corrections with second round of review;
to reject the article.

In case the reviewer recommends making alterations to the article, the recommendations are sent to the author. The revised article should be accompanied by reasoned responses to reviewers’ comments. It is the author’s right to defend his/her position before the editorial board and the reviewers.

As a rule, the article revision should not take more than two months from the moment the editors of the journal send an email to the author informing him/her about the need for changes. The revised article may be sent for another round of review. If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must notify the editors of the journal about it in writing. If the authors do not return the revised text to the editorial office of the journal within two months from the date the review was sent to them, the editorial office has the right to remove the article from the register. In such case the author is notified that the manuscript has been removed from register due to the expiration of the period allotted for revision. A positive review is a necessary but not sufficient condition for publication. The editor-in-chief makes the final decision taking into account the opinion of the journal editorial board. If the article is not recommended for publication, it will not be allowed for re-submission.

Review Form

Referees aassess the following:

• whether the article falls within the scope of the journal;
• whether its length falls within the recommended length;
• whether the title is well-grounded and corresponds to the aims and results of the research;
• whether the abstract summarizes the article content;
• whether the article is characterized by itstopicality and novelty;
• whether the article is well-structured and its parts are relevant;
• whether the article provides comprehensive and quality review of the researches on the topic and the Reference list is full;
• whether the conclusions are complete and quality;
• whether the article contains enough tables, drawings, etc. of proper quality.

The referees also give their recommendations and make conclusions on the article.