http://en.indexcopernicus.com
Open Academic Journals Index
Scientific Indexing Services
Google Scholar
CiteFactor
International Institute of Organized Research
ARI
http://elibrary.ru/title_about.asp?id=33677
gallery/crossref
gallery/doi
gallery/logo-head
gallery/logo-name
gallery/header-logo
http://www.ease.org.uk/
https://ori.hhs.gov/
http://www.wame.org/
https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/
https://publicationethics.org/
gallery/icmje

Добро пожаловать на портал "Здоровье и образование в XXI веке"

Чтоб стать участником проекта и получать самые свежие новости просим подписаться

Каждому подписчику скидка 1000 руб. на публикацию

Rules for peer-reviewing procedure

 

  1. A double-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of the journal. This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.

  2. Members of the editorial board and leading global experts in corresponding areas of sciences, invited as independent readers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief, or science editor choose readers for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 2-4 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.

  3. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations: 
  • to accept the paper in its present state;
  • to invited the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;

  • that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;

  • to reject the manuscript outright.

  • If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 3 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.

  • 4. We politely request that the editor be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.

  • 5. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.

  • 6. The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.

  • 7. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.

  • 8. Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.

  • 9. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited permanently (not less than 5 years).

  • 10. Manuscript reviews are not published. Reviews can be sent to the Ministry of Education and Sciense of Russian Federation in case of query.

 

A double-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of the journal. This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.

  1. Members of the editorial board and leading global experts in corresponding areas of sciences, invited as independent readers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief or science editor choose readers for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 2-4 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
  2. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
    • to accept the paper in its present state;
    • to invited the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;
    • that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;
    • to reject the manuscript outright.
  3. If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 3 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
  4. We politely request that the editor be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
  5. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
  6. The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
  7. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
  8. Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.
  9. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited permanently (not less than 5 years).
  10. Manuscript reviews are not published. Reviews can be sent to the Ministry of Education and Sciense of Russian Federation in case of query.