Review Procedure

Each manuscript is subject to a review process. All submitted manuscripts are checked to determine whether they meet the journal's profile, ethical policy, and are properly prepared. Manuscripts that are not properly prepared will be rejected or returned to the authors for revision and resubmission. Manuscripts accepted for publication are sent for review. By submitting a manuscript to the editorial office, authors agree to the review process.

To ensure the objectivity of manuscript evaluation, the editorial board adheres to a ‘double-blind review’ policy: reviewers do not know the authors' personal details, and authors do not know the reviewers' personal details. Submitted manuscripts are sent to two external experts working in the relevant field.

Ukrainian and foreign doctors of science who specialise in the same scientific field as the authors of the article are involved in external review. On behalf of the editorial board, a letter is sent to such a scientist with a request for review. Upon receipt of consent, an anonymous article and a standard review form are attached. Reviewers cannot be affiliated with the same institution as the author and cannot have a conflict of interest.

During the review process, the article and its title are assessed for relevance to the journal's subject matter, topicality and scientific level, strengths and weaknesses, and compliance with the editorial requirements. At the end, a conclusion is made about the advisability of publication. The review is provided to the author of the article without identifying the reviewers.

If the reviewer recommends that the article be corrected or revised, the editorial board sends the text of the review to the author for appropriate changes to be made. The author whose article has not been accepted for publication is sent a reasoned refusal upon request. Revisions do not guarantee acceptance of the article, and if the reviewers consider the changes unsatisfactory, the article will be rejected.

The editor-in-chief analyses the reviewers' reviews and, based on them, makes the final decision on publication, taking into account all recommendations, arguments and compliance with the journal's requirements. The editor-in-chief does not participate in decisions regarding articles of which he or she is the author. The final decision on these articles is made by the deputy editor-in-chief.

Typical expert assessment timeframe: 1-2 weeks
Average time to first decision: 3-4 weeks.