Reviewing procedures

All the articles published in the journal are subjected to a two-stage expert evaluation:

1st stage: Evaluation by the expert council of the journal.

2 nd stage: Works that received a positive evaluation and recommendation for publication in a scientific journal at the first stage get a double-sided (anonymous) review. The reviewer does not know the personal data of the author (s) and the author (s) do not know the personal data of the reviewer.

The chief editor (deputy chief editor) determines for the article submitted for publication a reviewer from the member of the editorial board of the journal. If necessary, additional external specialists are involved.

All the reviewers are well-known specialists with sufficient experience in their scientific field.

After an expert evaluation of a scientific article the reviewer can:
- recommend the article for publication;
- recommend the article for publication after its revision by the author, taking into account expressed comments and wishes;
- not to recommend the article for publication.

If the reviewer recommends an article for publication after its revision, taking into account the comments, or does not recommend an article for publication, in the review the reason for such a decision is indicated.

For sequencing and standardization of the review processes, the Editorial Board of the journal developed and approved:
- guidance on conducting expert evaluation;
- form of review.
Scientific articles can be sent for additional review. Reasons for re-review may include:
- the insufficient qualification declared by the expert in matters that are considered in the scientific article;
- insufficiently high level of the primary expert conclusion;
- sharp discussion of the provisions expressed in the scientific article.

The reviewer sends the framed review to the editorial office by e-mail in the form of a scan copy.

In case of refusal to publish an article, the authors get a motivated refusal with copies of the reviews (nameless, not to disclose the information about the reviewer).