The procedure for reviewing manuscripts received by the editors of the scientific and practical peer-reviewed journal “Medical Academic Journal”

  1. All manuscripts submitted must be peer-reviewed. Reviews of submissions are filed and stored by the Editorial Office for 5 years.
  2. Deputy Editor-in-Chief and/or Executive Secretary evaluates a submission for its conformance to journal’s requirements and then refers the manuscript to a specialist who has a candidate or doctor degree in the corresponding scientific discipline.
  3. A reviewer may be chosen among the members of the Editorial or Advisory Board of the journal or recruited from outside if such candidate is experienced in the respective discipline and has relevant publications during the neared three years.
  4. Reviewers are informed by Executive Secretary that the manuscripts presented to them are the intellectual property of their authors and thus are confidential. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of papers under review. Confidentiality may be broken only in the cases of falsified data.
  5. The terms of reviewing are agreed with the reviewer; however, they must not exceed three weeks.
  6. Upon a positive review, the submission is presented to Editorial Board for making decision about its publication.
  7. Where a review has observations requiring authors’ involvement, the manuscript is returned to its authors for revision.
  8. The time available for revision must not be longer than three weeks.
  9. A revised manuscript is presented to the original reviewers who makes a decision about the possibility to publish it.
  10. Upon the positive verdict, the submission is presented to Editorial Board for making decision about its publication.
  11. Upon the negative verdict, the submission is referred to another reviewer.
  12.  Upon two negative verdicts, the authors are informed about the motives for the rejection of their manuscript.
  13. Where the second verdict is positive, the question whether the manuscript is publishable is decided by the Editorial Board.
  14. Articles which are received by the editorial office are reviewed by the double-blind method. The author has the right to indicate undesirable and desirable reviewers (provided that the author and the reviewer have no common grant projects and publications over the previous five years).
  15. Reviewers are notified that all the manuscripts which are sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and all the manuscripts relate to information which hasn’t be disclosed. The reviewer can communicate with the author only by the reviewer’s decision.