Review procedure

• Submitted online manuscripts are first read by the Editor to access their suitability for the journal, i.e. whether the content falls within the scope of the journal. If this criterion is not met, a manuscript is rejected and returned to the author with appropriate notification.
• The submitting author should also attach the autor's declaration.
• If the manuscript passes the initial checklist stage, it will be assigned for double-blind review. It is sent out to two reviewers outside the institutions of the authors' affiliation who are subject-matter experts with at least a rank of associate professor.
• Journal's criteria for manuscript assessment are published on the journal website (Review form).
• To assess a manuscript the reviewers utilize the checklist and formulate some detailed comments to the author. Next, the reviewers return the reviews (via the online submission system) to the editor with a clear statement as to: a) reject, b) revise and resubmit (then new review is required), c) accept with major revision, d) accept with minor revision, e) accept without revision.
• After receiving two reviews, they are sent to the author. If the decision is for revision, the author must respond to each comment made by the reviewers and Editor, and resubmit.
• The resubmitted version of manuscript (after major or minor revision) is re-read by the Editor who makes a final decision on whether to accept or send it again to revision. If the manuscript is accepted, it will be checked once again by the editorial office before it is forwarded to the production department for processing and publication.
• The editorial office reserves the right to introduce stylistic corrections.
• The list of reviewers is published once a year in a paper version of journal and on the journal website.

The review

List of Reviewers