Reviewing

Reviewing

• Review is the document of expert evaluation by the Editorial board to determine the quality of scientific study (Application 1. Review form).
• All the manuscripts corresponding to the format and topic of the journal submitted to the Editorial office are reviewed.
• Specialists in the field of the reviewed materials, who have published papers in the field of the considered paper during the last three years, are involved as the reviewers.
• Author or co-author of the reviewed paper as well as the employee of the company where the author of the paper works (do the masters, postgraduate studies, doctoral studies) can not be a reviewer.
• All articles are peer reviewed(a reviewer has no information on the authors; the author does not know the surname of the reviewer).
• Special attention in the review should be paid to the following issues:
  – general analysis of the scientific quality, terminology, structure of the article, topicality;

– scientific and practical novelty and significance of the material, scientific presentation, correspondence of the methods, techniques, recommendations and results of the research used by the author to the current achievements in science and practice;

– quality of material preparation, language and style of the paper, correspondence to the specified requirements for material presentation,  volume of the publication and its elements (text, tables, illustrations, references),  inconsistencies and errors made by the author.

The reviewer can recommend the author and the editorial board to improve the paper.

Comments and requests of the reviewer must be nonbiased and fundamental for improving scientific and methodical levels of the manuscript.

The final part of the review must include the substantiated conclusions about the paper in general and clear recommendation on rationale of its publication.

• After paper analysis the reviewer makes the decision:
  а) to recommend the manuscript for publication without updating or with it; b) to set additional reviewing; с) reject (in the case of negative evaluation of the manuscript in general the reviewer must substantiate strongly his/her conclusions).

The review is sent to the editorial office and its conclusions are written in electronic version.

• The editorial board send the reviewing results to the authors of the manuscript submitted.
• If the authors of the article disagree with the comments of the reviewer they can send a reasoned statement to the Editorial office.
• The manuscript updated according to the comments of the reviewer may be sent to rereviewing as determined by the Editorial board.