Anonymous Review

Procedure for Manuscript Acceptance

The Editor-in-Chief assesses whether a submitted manuscript corresponds in its topic and content to the thematic scope, ethical standards, and technical requirements of the journal.

All manuscripts submitted for publication undergo a plagiarism check. If the result is negative, i.e., if no plagiarism is detected, the manuscript is forwarded to an expert reviewer for evaluation. In cases where plagiarism is detected (including duplicate publication, i.e., re-use of one’s own previously published work or parts thereof exceeding 30%), the manuscript is returned to the author for proper inclusion of bibliographic references to all sources from which texts, ideas, images, diagrams, tables, etc. have been borrowed, as well as for reducing the percentage of re-used text from the author’s own already published research. The author is required to submit the corrected manuscript within two weeks. If the author refuses to make the requested corrections or fails to meet the deadline, the editorial board rejects the manuscript and terminates its review process.

Each manuscript that successfully passes this check is further submitted for double-blind peer review. The editorial board appoints the reviewers of the received materials after ensuring that the accepted manuscripts comply with the technical requirements of the journal. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements are returned to the authors for correction or excluded from the evaluation process if the submission deadline has expired.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for making and announcing the final decision regarding each manuscript. The Editor-in-Chief consults with the members of the editorial board in cases of significant discrepancies between the reviewers’ opinions—e.g., one positive and one negative evaluation. In such cases, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer for assessment.