Peer Review

Key principles of peer review

  1. The review policy is designed to comply with the best practices and ethical standards set out by the COPE and ICMJE guidelines
  2. DOUBLE BLIND peer review is used (reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, including their affiliations, and the authors do not know the reviewers). Blinding is performed by the executive secretary
  3. Double-blind peer review is also applied for the manuscripts submitted by of the editorial board members.
  4. Authors may propose reviewers themselves. However, the final decision on the choice of a particular reviewer is made by editor-in-chief.
  5. Reviewing is carried out by the editorial board members and invited reviewers (leading experts in the relevant scientific area in Russia and other countries).
  6. Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review if there seem to be any conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials.
  7. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least 3 reviewers.
  8. Reviewing is performed free of charge.
  9. Peer review is designed to establish the manuscripts meeting the stated goals and objectives, as well as the subject area of ​​the journal. Manuscripts will be checked for scientific novelty and clinical significance, absence of plagiarism, correctness of statistical analysis, clarity and comprehensibility of presentation, as well as compliance with all ethical standards in the field of biomedical research. Other goals include supporting transparency, reproducibility, and data sharing (including proper registration of clinical trials).
  10. Peer-reviewing is performed according to the internal forms and checklists for reviewers and members of the editorial board, requiring a detailed reasoned presentation, the necessary information about the terms and conditions of reviewing, confidentiality and personal data protection (including GDPR), etc.
  11. As part of the author’s disagreement procedure with the decision of the editorial board, the author has the right to raise a reasoned and stated claim (once in relation to one manuscript). The editorial board is obliged to consider it no later than 3 weeks and to make a final decision that is final and not a subject to revision.
  12. The Publisher and the Founders do their best for constant retraining of the editorial board, as well as holding open seminars for potential authors on biomedical ethics, best world practices and recommendations. The journal is a member of the RASEP (Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers affiliated with the European Association of Science Editors), which, at the request of the Journal, audits it for compliance with international and national standards of publication ethics and best world practices.

For more information on the ethical policy and practice regarding malpractices in the field of peer review, as well as relationships with the editorial board and reviewers, see the relevant section

Key dates and other indicators

  • Acceptance/Rejection rate of manuscripts: 58/42% (including 24% rejection at the initial stage of screening before the appointment of peer reviewers)
  • Initial manuscript screening period: no more than 10 days
  • Period from receipt of the manuscript to acceptance for publication: at least 62 days
  • Shelf life of reviews: 5 years

Editorial Flowchart