Procedure for peer review

Guide for Article Reviewing

1.1 The decision regarding the article publication is determined by a journal editorial board on the basis of the reviews containing expert estimates, taking into account presented material compliance, topical orientation, scientific importance and relevance.

1.2 The editorial office organizes "double blind" (anonymous) reviewing of the submitted manuscripts. For carrying out reviewing of manuscripts as reviewers can be attracted both members of editorial board of the Innovative Medicine of Kuban journal, and the highly skilled scientists and specialists of other organizations and institutions of the country having profound professional knowledge and experience in the concrete scientific field, as a rule, these are doctors of science, professors.

1.3 Reviewers are notified that all manuscripts sent them are a private property of authors and relate to the data which are not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the articles for their necessity. Reviewing is carried out utterly confidentially. Violation of confidentiality is possible only in case of the reviewer’s statement about unauthenticity or falsification of the materials presented in the article. Processing period of the article should not exceed 1 month from the date of its submission.

1.4 The editorial office sends to the authors of submitted materials copies of reviews or motivated refusal and, as well, undertakes to send to copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation when the receipt in the editorial office is prompted.

Article Reviewing Results:

а) rejected;

In case of refusal to publish an article the author will be forwarded a motivated refusal. Following materials are not allowed for publication: articles which are not submitted according to the requirements; when authors refuse to perform technical completion of their articles; if authors do not carry out constructive remarks of the reviewer or their disapproval is not well-reasoned.

In case of disagreement with the opinion with the reviewer, the author has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the journal editorial board. According to the solution of the editorial board article can be directed to a subsequent reviewing for another expert. A justified refusal will be sent to the author certified by the editor-in-chief or his deputy if there are two negative article reviews.

b) Sent for renewal;

The article accepted to the publication, but requiring some additional completion is sent to the authors with remarks of the reviewer and editor. Authors should make all necessary corrections in a final version of the manuscript and return the corrected manuscript. After completion the article is subsequently reviewed by the same reviewer who has made critical remarks, and the editorial office makes the decision on a possible publication. Articles sent to authors for correction have to be returned no later than in 7 calendar days after receiving. Articles returned in later terms will be published later.

c) accepted for publication;

Positive review is not sufficient for the article publication. The final decision on article adoption and its publishing in one of the issues is accepted at the meeting of the journal editorial board. Originals of reviews are being stored in the editorial board for five years from the date of their publication.