About the journal

The manuscript reviewing procedure

1. Each article is reviewed by the editorial team and checked whether the editing requirements were followed. The manuscripts formatted in accordance with the requirements published in the Journal and on the Journal’s website are accepted for review (https://www.lvrach.ru/).
2. The received manuscript is registered and assigned an identification number.
3. After registration, the copy of the manuscript is sent to the reviewers (without the name of the author/s).
4. Scientific review is accomplished by the members of the Editorial Board, scientific committee of the Journal, and external reviewers who are experts in the subject area, work in area of research relevant to the topic of the article, and have publications on the topic of the article published in the 3 years. The scientific review of the manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief are accomplished by external reviewers.
5. Experts working at the same University Department of the or research institute where the work on the manuscript was performed are not involved in reviewing.
6. Review is accomplished confidentially: the reviewers do not know the names of the authors, and the authors do not know the names of the reviewers. The editorial team sends the review to the author/s of the manuscript without the reviewer’s information, including name, position and place of work. The copy of the review is sent to the author/s.
7. Review of the manuscript  is performed by experts within 4 weeks from the date of its submission from the Chief Editor. This period is controlled by the Editorial Board and can be extended at the request of the reviewer.
8. To perform the complete and objective review of the article, the Editorial Board has developed a memo to the reviewers containing a list of issues the reviewer should follow to evaluate the article. Based on this assessment, the reviewer makes his final decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript: a) the manuscript is recommended for publication in its original form; b) the manuscript is recommended for publication after technical revision; c) the manuscript is recommended for publication after the changes suggested by the reviewer with following re-submission to the repeated review to the same reviewer; d) the publication of the manuscript is rejected.
9. If follow-up revision of the article is needed, a copy of the review (without indicating the information on the reviewer) is emailed to the author/s: the author/s should make all necessary corrections in the final version of the manuscript according to the reviewer's comments and to return corrected text or to argue persuasively that a part of the manuscript should remain intact.
10. The date of submission to the Editorial Board is the date of returning of revised manuscript. Revision of the manuscript should not take more than 2 months from the date when authors were notified of conditional acceptance pending satisfactory revision. The manuscript sent by the authors to the editorial staff after the follow-up revision should be submitted to the second peer review to the same reviewer.
11. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the authors of the article have the right to submit a reasoned response to the editors of the journal. The manuscript can be sent for a subsequent reviewing to another expert or for approval by the Editorial Board.
12.  If there is disagreement between authors and reviewer, the Editorial Board has the right to forward the manuscript to another reviewer. In conflict situations, the final decision is made by the Chief Editor.
13. Text of a negative review is also sent to the authors by e-mail.
14. Positive review does not guarantee publication of the article. The final decision on publication is made by the Editorial Board based on the scientific significance and the novelty of the material under consideration and its relevance to the journal’s subject area. In conflict situations, a decision made by the Chief Editor is the final level of review. The decision of Editorial Board is recorded in the minutes of the meeting of the Editorial Board.
15. Authors have the right to appeal against a journal editorial decision (available here)
16. The final decision on the appropriateness of publication after reviewing is made by the Editorial Board and the Chief Editor. The decision of the edit Editorial Board and the Chief Editor on the appropriateness of the publication of the manuscript is considered final and brought to the attention of the author. 
17. Original reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years.