info@echronicle.com.ua
Peer Review Process
Peer review (expert assessment) of manuscripts is carried out to ensure a high scientific and theoretical level of “European Chronicle” and the selection of the most valuable and relevant scientific articles.
1. “European Chronicle” adheres to double blind (anonymous) peer review:
-
the reviewers does not know the personal data of the authors;
-
the authors do not know the personal data of the reviewers.
2. Scientific articles submitted to the editorial board are verified for plagiarism and compliance with the requirements set out in the section For authors.
3. The primary examination of a scientific article is carried out by the Editor-in-Chief or their deputy. Submissions must match the topic of the journal.
4. Аnonymous article is sent by email:
- to a member of the editorial board responsible for the subject area of the article;
- to an external reviewers.
External reviewing involves Ukrainian and foreign doctors of sciences who are specialized in the same scientific field as the authors of the article. On behalf of the editorial board, a letter is sent to such a scientist with a request for peer review. Anonymous article and a standard review form are attached to the letter. The reviewers cannot be affiliated with the same institution as the author and cannot be in a conflict of interest.
5. In the process of reviewing scientific articles, reviewers cover the following issues:
- correspondence of the content of the article to the subject stated in the title;
- relevance and originality of the scientific problem considered in the article;
- substantiation of the practical significance of the study;
- value for a wide scope of readers.
6. After peer review of the article, the reviewers can:
- recommend the article for publication;
- recommend the article for publication after minor revision;
- recommend the article for publication after major revision;
- recommend against the publication of the article.
7. Reviews signed by a reviewers with a regular or electronic signature are stored in the editorial office for 3 years from the date of publication of the issue of the journal in which the reviewed article is published.
8. The decision of the editorial board is sent to the authors. Articles subject to revision are sent along with the text of the review without identifying the reviewers. The corrected version of the article is sent for a second review, during which the reviewers may ask for additional corrections. Revisions do not guarantee acceptance of the article, and if the reviewers find the changes unsatisfactory, the article will be rejected.
9. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of articles. He does not participate in the decision-making process for articles authored by himself, his family members or colleagues, as well as for materials related to products or services in which he has a personal interest. All such materials are subject to the standard procedures of the journal with independent peer review, which does not involve the editor or his research team.
