Reviewing
The journal uses a double-blind peer-review process (see a figure on the left) according to
Before beginning the review process, getting acquainted with some of the best global practices in scientific expertise is recommended. Please also read the COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
The Editorial Board examines copies of the articles received by the editors at the beginning to determine their correspondence to the journal’s aims and scope and appoint the reviewer. The reviewers are leading scientists worldwide on the profile related to the content of the articles.
For the edition of the article, a mandatory condition is the presence of 2 motivated positive reviews from appointed reviewers, which are examined and approved by the Editorial Board. If reviews are negative, the Editorial Board examines the motivated conclusion, which either confirms the declining publication of the article or sends the copy to another specialist for repeated independent review. In case of positive and negative reviews, the Editorial Board sends the copy and received reviews to the committee containing the profile specialists to prepare a conclusion, after which a final decision is taken. If the review contains essential objections and proposals to improve and correct the copy, it is sent to the authors.
The revised version of the article is returned to the reviewer to make a decision and prepare a motivated conclusion about the possibility of publishing the paper. The decision about the publication of a corrected article or about sending it to an additional review is taken by the Editorial Board. In case the paper is declined, the editors send the author a detailed explanation of the decline.
The paper approved for publication is sent to editing and computer shaping. The final version of the article is being agreed with the author(s) to confirm it or correct inaccuracies. Essential changes in the content at this stage are not allowed.
Revisions
If revisions of the original manuscript are required, authors will have 4 weeks (from receipt of the reviewers’ comments) to revise and re-submit their paper. To submit the revised article, you should send a text file containing the revised text with highlighted changes and a response to the reviewers’ comments in an MS Word file.
Final version after acceptance
To submit the final version, you should upload the article text formatted according to
separate image files of each figure. The preferred formats for pictures are JPEG/TIFF. Convert your vector graphics into raster format and send the original and raster images separately.
We will check all the figures and bibliography requirements and let typesetting start only when met. The precise preparation of your final version speeds up the publication of your paper.
Proofs in PDF format will be available online after the notification is sent to the corresponding author via e-mail. The proofs should be returned within 72 hours of receipt. Corrections should be restricted to minor corrections (like typesetting errors, etc.). Extensive or important changes on page proofs, including changes to the list of authors, authors’ affiliation, or major changes to the title, are subject to editorial review. Please upload and scan the corrected pages of the proofs and send us via e-mail: [email protected].
