Procedure for reviewing articles

The journal's editorial team has adopted international standards for double-blind peer-review to maintain objectivity of recommendations. Consequently, the reviewers' identities remain undisclosed to authors and other reviewers.

The chief editor assigns the reviewers (experts in the respective research areas) from a pool of prominent specialists depending on the article's scope of research. All reviewers are expected to adhere to ethical standards for academic papers, maintaining objectivity and impartiality.

In case of article rejection by reviewers, the authors receive notifications outlining the rejection reasons (notifications are displayed in the user account on the website). The review process typically spans a period of up to four weeks.

The review evaluates the article's pertinence, the accuracy of research findings, the level of innovation, as well as its scientific and practical relevance thereof. It also identifies any notable shortcomings or material deficiencies, if any.

The editorial team subsequently makes one of the following determinations based on the review outcomes:

Acceptance of the article for publication.

Acceptance of the article for publication following the author’s revisions, either in the current or a subsequent journal issue (depending on the extent of revisions required).

Rejection for publication.

Should any reviewer’s objections necessitate revisions to the article, it will be returned to the author for further refinement. After refinement, the article will be re-sent to reviewers. There is no any additional phase review. Articles rejected by reviewers will not be accepted for re-consideration.