Each publication is evaluated by the editor-in-chief and if the basic requirements are fulfilled the text is sent to review. Each publication is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. At least one of the reviewers is affiliated with an institution, which is different than the author’s country. The double-blind review process is applied, where neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other’s identities.

Stages of  review:

  1. The author submits the manuscript to the journal. In the beginning, the manuscript is sent to the editor-in-chief or his deputy, who determines the compliance of the article with the priority areas, ethical standards, checks for plagiarism using Crossref Similarity Check (iThenticate) and analyzes the quality of scientific research. Manuscripts that do not meet the subject and standards of the journal, as well as low scientific quality are rejected without submission for review. The author receives a message that the manuscript has been rejected.
  2. A manuscript that meets all the requirements of the journal is submitted for review to two reviewers. The selection of reviewers for each article is determined by their level of expertise, reputation, specific recommendations, and previous experience. The author receives a message that the manuscript has been submitted for review.
  3. The reviewer undertakes to follow the publication ethics of the journal and provide a review. The decision to publish the submitted manuscript is made on the basis of expert opinions of reviewers and finally approved by the editorial board.
  4. The article that has received two positive reviews is included in the publication plan of the journal with the status "accepted". The author receives a notification of acceptance of the publication for printing.
  5. If both reviews are positive but contain comments and comments of reviewers, the authors receive notification of approval for publication subject to revision and anonymous comments of reviewers. Authors should take into account the recommendations of reviewers and correct errors.
  6. If the article receives one positive and the other negative review, and the editorial board considers the results of the study significant, such an article is returned to the authors with comments for revision.
  7. If the authors strongly disagree with the opinion of the reviewers and refuse to make changes to the text of the article, such an article receives the status of "rejected".
  8. If an article receives two negative reviews, it is not accepted for publication. The author is notified that the article has been rejected without the right to resubmit.
  9. All editorial changes are sent for approval and approval by the authors. The final version of the article agrees with the authors. After approval, the original article acquires the status of "article in press".