Review Policies

Peer review Policy 

Each manuscript is reviewed by two independent reviewers (Double anonymous peer review). Reviews are based on the so-called double-blind review policy. Editors ask the Authors to identify at least two (2) reviewers, which does not mean, however, their automatic choice. The manuscript is qualified for printing after obtaining two (2) positive reviews. In case of one (1) negative review, the Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the manuscript.

  1. At least two (2) independent experts not affiliated with the department are chosen to review each submitted article.
  2. Authors may suggest potential reviewers with institutional emails or identifiers (ORCID, Scopus ID). The Editor-in-Chief may accept or decline suggested reviewers at their discretion.
  3. Authors may request the exclusion of individuals as peer reviewers, but they should explain the reasons in their cover letter on submission. Authors should not exclude too many individuals as this may hinder the peer review process. Please note that the editor may choose to invite excluded peer reviewers.
  4. Intentionally falsifying information, for example, suggesting reviewers with a false name or email address, will result in the rejection of the manuscript and may lead to further investigation in line with our misconduct policy.
  5. The recommended model of reviewing is a double-blind process, in which author(s) and reviewers do not know the identity of one another.
  6. If a double-blind process is inapplicable, the reviewer is obliged to sign a declaration confirming the lack of conflict of interest. Conflict of interest is understood as:
  • Conflicts include personal, financial, or professional relationships that may bias the review.
  • Professional subordination,
  • Direct scientific cooperation two (2) years before the preparation of the review.
  1. The review must be delivered in a written form and end with an unambiguous conclusion on whether the article should be published or rejected.
  2. The journal publicly describes its peer review process on the website.
  3. The names of the reviewers of the particular publications/issues are not revealed. Once a year the journal makes the list of collaborating reviewers public.

Manuscripts must comply with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors http://www.icmje.org/, i.e., Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/.