Current issue

read more
Submit article


Guiding principles of the peer review processes

  1. The peer review policy is designed to be consistent with the best practices and ethical standards set out in recommendation of COPE, and ICMJE.

  2. All types of manuscripts and materials, including supplements (irregular issues) as well as accompanying materials (e.g. "raw data files") are reviewed.

  3. Double-blind peer review is used (reviewers do not know the identity of authors, including their affiliations, and authors do not know the reviewers).

  4. Blinding of the manuscript is done by the Managing Editor.

  5. Single-blind peer review is applied for manuscripts submitted by Editorial Board members (reviewers do not know the authors ' identity, including their affiliations).

  6.  Authors can suggest their own reviewers. However, the final decision on the choice of the particular reviewer is made by the Editor-in-Chief, Deputy Editor-in-Chief or Managing Editor.  

  7. Peer-review is carried out by members of the Editorial Board and Editorial Council, as well as invited reviewers – leading experts in the relevant branch (medicine) in Russia and other countries.

  8. Each reviewer has the right to withdraw from the review if there is a clear conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials.

  9. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least 2 reviewers. 

  10. Peer review is free of charge.

  11. The purpose of reviewing is to determine the compliance of manuscripts with the stated aims and scope and the subject area of the Journal. Manuscripts are reviewed for scientific novelty and clinical relevance, absence of plagiarism, clarity and comprehensibility, as well as compliance with all ethical standards in the field of biomedical research. Other objectives include supporting transparency, reproducibility and data sharing (including proper registration of clinical trials).

  12. The review is conducted in accordance with the internal form and the reviewer's checklist, which require a detailed reasoned statement, necessary information about the terms and conditions of scientific review, the confidentiality regime and the protection of personal data (including GDPR []) etc.

  13. As part of the procedure of the author's disagreement with the decision of the Editorial Board, the author has the right to submit a written reasoned complaint (once per manuscript). The Editorial Board is obliged to consider it no later than 3 weeks and make a final decision, which is not subject to revision.

  14. A publisher and Journal owners make every effort to provide ongoing retraining for the Editorial Board, as well as open seminars for potential authors on biomedical ethics, international best practices and guidelines. The journal is a member of ANRI (Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers, affiliated to the European Association of Science Editors), where, on a quarterly basis, it conducts retraining of its staff at its Academy.

Additional information about editorial policies of the Journal: Editorial Policy (

Key indicators and timelines:

  • Percentage of acceptance/rejection rate of manuscripts: 28%/72%;

  • Term of initial review (screening) of the manuscript: no more than 10 days;

  • Duration of the first round рецензированияof review: no more than 4 weeks;

  • Deadline after which the manuscript is rejected if authors do not return the revised version: after 90 days;

  • Deadline after which a manuscript is rejected if the authors do not return a revised version even if there is no information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the article: after 90 days;

  • Average time from manuscript submission to acceptance for printing: 78 days;

  • Retention period of the original manuscript, reviews and correspondence with authors: 5 years.