Upon receiving a submitted manuscript, the editor makes the evaluation to make a decision either to decline or admit it to review. In the latter case, abstract of the manuscript is mailed to potential reviewers who are experts in the respective field(s). When agreed, the reviewer receives the manuscript and the reviewer’s form alongside with the instruction. Standard timeframe for reviewing is 30 days.
The review should answer the following questions:
1) Does the paper correspond to the scope of the journal
2) Is the scientific and methodological quality of the paper of sufficient level
3) Is the text clear and comprehensive and the scientific style is respected
4) Are the guides for authors adhered
5) Is the content and format of the illustrative material of sufficient quality
Basing upon the expert evaluation, the reviewer makes a recommendation as to reject, accept or revise the manuscript.
When necessary, the Editorial Office retains the right to request raw data and other additional materials concernining the manuscript under consideration. This can be done at any stage of reviewing and editorial processing to check if the calculations are valid, the conclusions are adequate, etc.
Basing upon the reviews obtained, the editor makes a decision whether to reject, accept or revise the paper. In the latter case, the authors are expected to resubmit the improved manuscript alongside with the response to reviewers’ comments, indicating each correction made according to the comments and explaining each case when the suggested correction was not made. In a case when the editor finds the review unsatisfactory, another expert is to be found for reviewing. Only corrected and edited (according to editors/reviewers’ comments, if present) manuscripts are being accepted. After the manuscript is accepted, a copyright transfer agreement (see guides for authors) is signed by the corresponding author on behalf of all co-authors.