Peer-review Process

1. The manuscript of an article submitted for editorial purposes should be consistent with the profile and issues of the Journal, that is, scientific research in the field of chemistry and chemical technology, as well as relevant to the problems in related fields of knowledge.

2. The editorial staff of the journal “Chemistry, Technology of Substances and Their Applications” supports the global standards of transparency in the review process, so this publication practices double “blind” review of the manuscripts.

3. The editor-in-chief of the Journal directs the manuscript of the article for review to at least two experts, one of whom is a member of the editorial board in one of the areas of scientific research of the Journal.

4. By the regulation of double "blind" review of the manuscript of the article, the reviewer evaluates the correspondence of the article and its title to the topic of the Journal, the relevance and scientific level of presentation of the material, its advantages and disadvantages, the validity of the conclusions and proposals made, the relevance of the article's editorial requirements. If there is one negative review, the manuscript is sent to the additional reviewer. If both reviews are negative, then the editorial board rejects the manuscript.

5. The editorial board reserves the right (in agreement with the author) for some reduction of the volume of the material and its literary editing. The editorial board also has the right to refuse to author in the article publication (on the basis of two negative reviews), if it does not correspond to the profile of the Journal or has poor quality of presentation of the material or its design. This is especially true of the improper (lay) design of tables, formulas and figures. If the article is rejected, the journal editorial board sends the author a reasoned refusal in writing form.

6. An review eith conclusion (recommended for publication: unchanged, subject to comments or not recommended) is provided to the author of the article without the reviewer's signature. In the case of the recommendation of the reviewers to revise the manuscript of the article, with certain comments, the author shall send the text of the review without specifying the person of the reviewer.

7. The manuscript of the article, revised by the author after first review, should be sent to the editorial office within the prescribed period, where it should be re-reviewed together with the initial version in the shortest possible time. The manuscript, which was rejected for publication on the basis of its re-review, is not considered by the editorial board.

8. All controversial issues between the reviewers and the author of the manuscript shall be considered at a meeting of the editorial board in the presence of the author or the author authorized by the authors. The decision on the expediency of publishing the article is taken by the editorial board by a majority vote. The final decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

9. After the manuscript of the article is accepted for publication, it is subject to literary editing, editing of the abstract in English, making definitive corrections by the author of the article. The editorial board reserves the right not to accept the manuscript of the article for further consideration if the proofreader has found incorrect editing of the literary edits or the author has made significant changes to the manuscript of the available material, which were not previously reviewed by the reviewers.