Peer Review

The editor-in-chief of the journal has the right to determine the theme of the respective issue, its content and the date of publication of the materials.

Acceptance and evaluation of manuscripts by the editorial board is based on their scientific merit, taking into account the scientific profile of the journal and without regard to the institutional, religious or ethnic affiliation of the authors. 

The editors respect the confidentiality of the manuscripts and do not provide information about them without the written consent of the authors; they suggest corrections taking into account the interests of the authors.

Each manuscript is evaluated anonymously by two reviewers who are specialists in the relevant field. Decisions to publish or reject manuscripts are based on the evaluations of the reviewers and on compliance with legal standards regarding copyright and plagiarism.

Information about the author's material/manuscript obtained during the review and editing process is confidential and its use for personal gain is subject to sanctions. The editors declare their decision not to participate in the review of author material where a conflict of interest is identified that arises from competition, collaboration, or any other type of relationship with the authors and/or institutions associated with the manuscript.

In the event of possible breaches of publication ethics and complaints, claims, disagreements regarding a manuscript or a published text, the editorial board is obliged to respond and take the necessary measures or sanctions in the form of publishing corrections, clarifications, retraction of the material, apology, consultation with competent institutions, etc.

The journal has a regulated mechanism according to which authors have the right to appeal against editorial decisions. In such cases, a third anonymous reviewer is selected and his review is discussed at a meeting of the Editorial board.