Peer Review Process
Procedure and criteria of review
Only previously unpublished papers will be accepted. Your paper must describe new research results and not simply discuss already published data.
The first stage of the review process consists of the editor-in-chief issuing an opinion. This opinion may alternatively be issued by another member of the editorial council. The editor-in-chief or another member of the editorial council will make a preliminary decision to either accept the paper for further review or reject the paper. The author will be notified of the decision as soon as possible. In certain situations, this decision will be made following consultation with a member of the editorial council specializing in a given area of research.
The next stage of the review process involves the drafting of at least two independent reviewers not associated with the author’s parent institution. In the case of papers written in a foreign language, at least one of the reviewers will be affiliated with an institution from outside of the author’s home country. Reviews are conducted using a double-blind review process. This process is based on the rule that the author does not know the identity of the reviewer and vice versa. Each review is issued in written form and ends with an unambiguous recommendation to publish the paper without changes, publish only if certain changes are made or not publish.
Paper is accepted for publication without changes only in case at least 7 out of 13 criteria were evaluated positive and no criterion was evaluated negative. Paper is not eligible for publication which is obligatory in case at least 7 out of 13 criteria were evaluated negative. In other cases the reviewer qualify article to a correction.
In addition to the recommendations made by reviewers, the author may receive additional suggestions from the editor-in-chief, another editor appointed by the editor-in-chief, volume subject editor or statistics editor if the paper contains statistics. Every paper due to be printed is also reviewed by a language editor.
Duties of the reviewers and duties of the authors are presented in: Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement.