Peer-review process

1. The editorial board determines whether the article meets the journal’s profile and requirements for articles.

2. The executive secretary appoints the reviewer and sends him the article. Peer review is a double-blind peer review, neither the authors nor the reviewers do not know each other. The average review period is four weeks and can be extended at the request of the reviewer. All reviewers in their work rely on the principles formulated by the Committee on the Ethics of Scientific Publications (Committee on Publication Ethics).

3. After writing the review, the author gets the opportunity to read it. If the review contains recommendations for refinement, the author is invited to prepare a new version of the article or to reasonably refute the recommendations. The revised article is resubmitted for review.

4. In the event of intractable contradictions between the author of the article and the reviewer, the editorial board has the right to send the article to another reviewer. The final decision in conflict situations is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

5. In the case of a negative review, the editorial board has the right (at the reasonable request of the author) to send the article to another reviewer. An article that has received two negative reviews is not accepted for resubmission.

6. The positive review is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for publication in a journal. The final decision is made by the editorial board.

7. After making a decision on the publication of the article, the executive secretary informs the author and let him know the issue of the journal in which the article will be published.

8. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 5 years.