Peer-review process

Articles are subject to obligatory anonymous review. The sequence of reviewing the articles is as follows:

  1. The editorial board registers the article provided that it meets the requirements published in the journal.
  2. The editor-in-chief defines the scientific value of the work and assigns reviewers - independent experts as among the members of the editorial board, who have a scientific specialization in the profile of the article, as well as external experts.
  3. The review period is two weeks.
  4. For the purpose of maximum full and objective review of the article, the editorial staff has developed a questionnaire for the reviewer.
  5. The reviewer makes one of the following conclusions:
  • I recommend the article for publication in the author's version
  • I recommend posting the article after refinement and taking into account the mentioned shortcomings
  • Reject publication of the work, indicating the reason.
  1. The editorial board sends the article without the passport data (the author (s) and information about him (them) and the institution (the author) does not provide the reviewer. Correspondence between the reviewer and the author is carried out through the editorial office.  The chief editor reviews the proposals by the reviewer and makes the appropriate decision.

Articles sent to authors after reviewing the corrections must be returned to the editorial office no later than 10 days after receipt.  In case of exceeding this period, the manuscript will be re-registered as being re-entered, with the corresponding change in the date of its publication.

 The work reworked by the author is re-reviewed.

  1. For the Editor-in-Chief, the reviewer's conclusion is not final. The editor can send the work for additional review to another reviewer.  In the case of a negative review double review is applied.  The final decision on the publication of the article is taken by the editorial board of the magazine.
  2. When the author does not agree with the review, he may send a motivated response to the editorial office and then the editorial board decides on the expediency of referring to another reviewer for re-review. In conflict or non-standard situations, the Chief Editor makes a decision on his own.

 In case of non-publication, the materials are not returned to the authors and are not re-examined.

  1. In the case of a positive review, the Chief Editor passes the article to the editorial with the clause "To print" and the article passes the following stages: stylistic and spelling editing, technical editing and design in the layout for transfer to the publishing house.
  2. The members of the scientific-espionage council of the State Expert Center of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine and the Academic Council of the National Pharmaceutical University finally approve the contents of the journal number at the regular sessions.
  3. Original articles and reviews are stored in the editorial office for three years.