Peer-review process

All manuscripts submitted to the editorial office undergo a mandatory peer review process to ensure high scientific quality, objectivity of evaluation, and compliance with international standards of academic integrity.

At the initial stage, each manuscript is subject to an internal editorial assessment. The editors evaluate:

• the relevance of the manuscript to the journal’s scope;
• compliance with submission and formatting requirements;
• the scientific level and overall quality of the content;
• the absence of plagiarism.

All manuscripts that successfully pass the initial screening are sent for double-blind peer review. The identities of authors and reviewers are mutually anonymous.

Reviewers assess:

- scientific novelty;
- relevance of the topic
- validity and soundness of the results;
- clarity and quality of presentation;
- compliance with ethical standards.

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editorial office makes one of the following decisions:

- accept the manuscript for publication;
- accept with minor or major revisions;
- request resubmission for further review;
- reject the manuscript.

The final decision on publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief (or the Editorial Board) based on the reviewers’ recommendations.

If necessary, authors receive reviewers’ comments and are required to submit a revised version of the manuscript along with a detailed response to the comments. The revised manuscript may be subject to an additional round of peer review.

The date of acceptance is defined as the date when the final editorial decision is made following positive peer review reports.

The editorial office ensures the confidentiality of all submitted materials. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the principles of objectivity, impartiality, and academic integrity.