General Provisions

All the articles received by the Editorial Board of journal, pass the review process. The objective of the review is to facilitate strict selection of copyright manuscripts for publication and providing specific recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of scientific article content, determination of its compliance with the requirements of the magazine and involves a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of article materials. Only articles, that are scientifically valuable and contribute to solving of urgent problems of pharmacology, drug toxicology and pharmacy, are accepted for publication. The degree of compliance with the rules for article preparation is taken into account separately (see the Requirements for the articles’ execution).

The main purpose of the peer-review procedure is to eliminate cases of inappropriate research practices, ensuring coordination and compliance with the balance of interests of authors, readers, editorial board, reviewers and institutions in which the study was carried out. Number and type of manuscripts submitted for review, the number of reviewers, the procedure of peer review and reviewers’ comments consideration can be variable.

Manuscript peer review process is confidential. The disclosure of confidential details of manuscript review violates the rights of the author. Editors do not share manuscript information (including information on its receipt, content, review process, criticisms of reviewers and final conclusion), to anyone but the authors and reviewers themselves.

Peer review process

The author submits to the journal an article, which meets the requirements of journal policy and the rules for preparing articles for publication. The article is assigned an individual registration number and the date, when the article was received by the journal editorial office (priority date). Manuscripts, that do not meet accepted requirements, are not registered and not allowed for further consideration, what their authors are notified about.
The executive secretary conducts a preliminary assessment of the articles received by the journal. The Editor-in-Chief appoints the reviewers.
All manuscripts received by the editor are sent according to the profile of the study to one, and if necessary, to two reviewers. At discretion of the Editor-in- Chief of the magazine (under certain circumstances) appointment of reviewers may be assigned to a member of the editorial board. In some cases, the reviewers selection issue is decided at a meeting of the editorial board.
Reviewers of articles can be both members of the editorial board of a scientific journal, and third-party highly qualified specialists, who have deep professional knowledge and experience in a specific scientific field, as a rule, doctors of sciences, professors.
After receiving the article for consideration (within 4 days) based on the correspondence of one's own qualification to the direction of the author’s research and the absence of any conflict of interest. In case of any competing interest reviewer can refuse to review and inform the editorial board about it. The latter should decide on the appointment of another reviewer.
The reviewer, as a rule, within 14 days concludes on possibility of article publishing. Review terms may vary in each separate case, taking into account the creation of conditions for the most objective assessment of the quality of the provided materials, but should not exceed 1 calendar month.
Reviewing is conducted confidentially on the basis of double-blind reviewing (double “blind” peer review, when neither the author nor the reviewer knows about each other). The interaction between the author and the reviewer occurs through the executive secretary of the journal. At the request of the reviewer and in agreement with the working group of the editorial board, the interaction of the author and reviewer can occur in open mode (such a decision is made only if open interaction would improve the style and logic of the research material presentation).
For all articles submitted for review the level of uniqueness of the author's text is determined, using the due software, thus showing the uniqueness level, sources and proportion of text matching( «eTXTАнтиплагиат», «Advego Plagiatus»).
After the final analysis of the article, the reviewer fills out the standard form (Review Form), which contains the final recommendations. The editorial board informs the author on review results by e-mail.
If the reviewer indicates the need to make certain adjustments to the article, the article is sent to the author with the proposal to take into account the comments, when preparing the updated version of the article, or to provide argued refute in their regards. To the revised article, the author adds a letter containing answers to all comments and explains all the changes that were made to the article. The revised version is resubmitted to the reviewer to make a decision and prepare a reasoned opinion on the possibility of publication.
In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer the author of the article has the right to provide a reasoned response to the editorial board of the journal. In this case, the article is considered at a meeting of the working group of the editorial board. The editorial board may submit an article for additional or new review to another specialist. Editorial board reserves the right to reject articles in case of insolvency or unwillingness of the author to take into account the wishes and comments of reviewers. At the request of the reviewer, the editorial board may submit the article to another reviewer with the obligatory compliance with the principles of double-blind reviewing.
The final decision on the possibility and expediency of publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief (or, on his behalf, a member of the editorial board), and if necessary at a meeting of the editorial board as a whole. After making a decision on admission of an article to publication, the executive secretary informs the author about this and indicates the expected date of publication.
In the case of a positive decision on the possibility of publication article passes to the editorial portfolio of the magazine for its publication in order of priority and relevance (in some cases, by decision of the Editor-in-Chief, the article may be published in the next issue of the journal).
Final decision concerning the list of the printed articles recorded by the minutes of the meeting of the scientific council of the Institute, on purpose of what the corresponding mark is made on the second page of journal’s cover.
Approved for publication article is provided to the technical editor. Minor stylistic or formal corrections, which are not affecting the content of the article, can be done by the technical editor without agreement with the author. If necessary or at the request of the author manuscripts in the form of an article layout are returned to the author for approval.

Responsibility for copyright infringement and non-compliance with existing standards in the materials of the article makes responsibility of the article’s author. Responsibility for the accuracy of the facts and data, validity of conclusions and provided recommendations, for scientific and practical level of the article is carried by the author.

Rights and obligations of the reviewer

Reviewers provide a written review on the possibility of publishing an article.

If the reviewer recommends the article for publication after rework based on comments or does not recommend an article for publication – it must be reflected in his review.

The reviewer should scrutinize the submitted article within the time agreed with the executive secretary, and send to the editorial office (by e-mail) motivated refusal to review or review itself.

Reviewers evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of an article, its practical and scientific value. Moreover, reviewers determine the compliance of the article with ethical principles in scientific publications and provide recommendations to eliminate cases of their violation.

Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them are the intellectual property of the authors and relate to information that is not subject to disclosure.

Reviewers are not allowed to copy the article submitted for review or use knowledge on the content of the article before its publication.

Reviewing is based on confidentiality, when article information (terms of receipt, content, stages and features of the review, comments of reviewers and the final decision regarding publication) is not communicated to anyone other than authors and reviewers.

Rights and obligations of the author

The author of the peer-reviewed work is given the opportunity to read the review text, especially if he does not agree with the conclusions of the reviewer.

In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer the author of the article has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the editorial board of the journal. The article may be sent for re-review or for approval by the editorial board.

Articles, which are sent to authors for correction, must be sent back to the publisher no later than 2 weeks after receipt. If the article is returned at a later date, its publishing could be delayed behind schedule term.

The author is informed by the executive secretary on the printing deadlines within one month from the date of receipt of a positive opinion about the possibility of article publishing.