Reports

REVIEW PROCESS

     Articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal, subject to compliance with the formal requirements, are checked through the plagiarism check system and then sent to secret reviewers.
     If the author (s) of the article has a conflict of interest with another scientist, then this author (s) prepare and attach together with the article a cover letter with a request not to send the specified article to a certain scientist (columnist), indicating the presence of a conflict of interest.
Next, a "two-way secret" review is carried out by scientists (at least two) with an academic degree of candidate of Science, Doctor of Science, Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) and scientific specialization on the topic of the reviewed article.

     The original of the secretly reviewed article is sent to reviewers via the electronic platform of the journal without specifying information about the authors. Reviewers should give a specific, objective and reasonable assessment of the article's compliance with the main scientific criteria, as well as the quality of its significance.

     After receiving the reviewers 'opinion (if there are any comments), the editor-in-chief sends it to the author for correspondence to respond to the conclusion, make appropriate changes and re-send the manuscript to the electronic platform, without specifying the reviewers' data . The author (s) can make changes to the article and send it back to the editorial board.
After re-submitting the article by the author (s) with the elimination of all comments, the scientific editor re-sends the materials for review to the reviewer (s).

     An article with positive reviews from two reviewers and the executive editor is submitted for publication in accordance with the procedure for accepting them for publication. Articles approved by the editorial board are then sent to the responsible editors, after which the article passed a comprehensive review is sent to the publisher.

     If one of the reviewers gave a positive and the other – a negative conclusion, the scientific editor sends it to the third reviewer, who is a specialist on the topic of the manuscript, or a member of the editorial board. If a third reviewer or a member of the editorial board gives a positive review, the final decision on the acceptance / rejection of the article for publication is made by the scientific editor of the journal.

     If both reviews are negative, the article is removed from publication in the journal.
The editorial board does not use for its own purposes the materials of articles that were not accepted by the editorial board based on the results of mutual evaluation. The editor or the executive secretary notifies the author of the refusal to publish the correspondence and sends him the reviews of the reviewers.

     Reviews of articles are stored on the electronic platform of the journal in electronic format for three years.

     The term of review of the article is appointed by the responsible editor, and the term of review of the manuscript by reviewers should not exceed two months from the date of sending the material to reviewers.