Peer-review
Peer review is a process that ensures the sufficient quality of the published papers. All papers submitted to the editorial office first undergo an initial assessment by a peer reviewer to ensure that they are consistent with the journal´s aims and focus. The review process is independent and anonymous (double-blind peer review). All papers that have passed the initial assessment are subject to peer review. Each paper is reviewed by two independent reviewers, experts in the subject in question. In addition, the reviewers are not personally or professionally related to the author(s) and are not from the same department. The reviewers are selected by the Editor-in-Chief and the Associate Editor. Reviewers are asked to follow the ethical recommendations of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).
The author of the submitted manuscript always gets the feedback sent by the editorial office, according to which the author's paper is:
- Published without editing.
- Published after incorporating the reviewers' comments ("minor revision").
- Not published in the given form, a complete revision ("major revision") and a new review is proposed and possible. After the revision, both reviewers are asked to provide a new review; in case of refusal, another reviewer is selected.
- Rejected.
In case of a contradictory opinion of the two reviewers:
- The Associate Editor, in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief, will approach a third reviewer to make the final decision in the review process.
- The Editorial Board will make the final conclusion of the review process - using a scoring scale of 0-100% and provide a verbal comment if necessary.
The Editorial Board does not guarantee the manuscript will be accepted for publication, nor does it guarantee a prompt review.
