All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of this journal must undergo a double-blind review procedure, where neither the reviewers nor the authors are aware of each other's identity. Each manuscript is sent for assessment to two reviewers.

Articles are reviewed by members of the editorial board, the editorial office and also by experts, leading experts in the relevant field, who were invited for this purpose. The determination of a suitable reviewer for the assessment of an article is made by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, scientific editor and editorial director. The review takes up to 3-4 weeks, however, at the request of the reviewer, this period can be extended.

In case of a conflict of interest that may affect the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials, the reviewer has the right to refuse to carry out the review. After analyzing the manuscript, the reviewer formulates recommendations for further actions with the article, providing justification for each of his decisions:

• the article is recommended for publication in this form;
• the article is recommended for publication after correcting the shortcomings noted by the reviewer;
• the article needs additional review by another specialist;
• the article cannot be published in the journal.

If the review contains suggestions for improving and finalizing the article, the editorial board of the journal sends the author the content of the review with a proposal to take these recommendations into account when preparing a new version of the article or to reject them (partially or completely). Authors are given up to two months to make changes to the article after receiving an electronic notification of the need for revision. After that, the revised article is sent for re-review.

If the authors decide not to make changes to the materials, they must notify the editorial board of their refusal to publish the article in writing or orally. If the authors do not submit an edited version of the article within three months after sending the review, even if they do not give a notification of refusal from revision, the editorial board considers the article unclaimed and removes it from consideration. In the case of such circumstances, the authors receive a notification that their manuscript has been de-registered due to the expiration of the deadline provided for revision.

In case of unresolved disagreements between the author and the reviewers regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send it for additional review. In case of conflict situations, the final decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.

At the meeting of the editorial board, a decision is made on whether the manuscript will be published, taking into account the recommendations of the reviewers. If the article is not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board, it will not be considered for reconsideration. A message about the refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail. After the decision on the admission of an article to publication is made by the editorial board of the journal, the author is notified about it and receives information about the publication dates.

A positive review does not guarantee the automatic publication of the article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. The editorial board of the journal retains the original reviews for five years.

Each article that receives a positive conclusion is assigned a DOI, a digital object identifier for unique and permanent online identification of the journal's content and links on the Internet.