Procedure for review of articles
According to the established procedure, all research articles received by the editors of scientific journal "Health Risk Analysis" are subject to mandatory dual review. Articles can also be accompanied by a specialist's review on the profile of the article, that does not cancel the procedure of expert review organized by the editors in the following order.
The review process
- The Executive Secretary of the editorial board determines the compliance of the article with the profile of the journal, the requirements for execution, evaluates completeness of the provided review, and submits the article to the first review to the deputy chief editor who reviews the scientific context of the article. Further, if necessary, the article is sent for review to one of the members of the Editorial Board or external reviewer - a specialist, doctor or a PhD having the scientific disciplines closest to the topic, the most competent specialists on the material subject. All reviewers are acknowledged experts on the subject of the peer-reviewed material and have for the last 3 years the publications of the peer-reviewed articles on the subject. The editors reserve the right to choose the reviewer.
- When agreeing to the request of the editors to review the article, the reviewer receives materials for evaluation acting in accordance with the recommendations listed below.
- Terms of review in each case are determined by the executive secretary of the journal taking into account the creation of conditions for the most rapid publication of the article.
Review submitted with the article (if any) and a review of a member of the Editorial Board or external reviewer highlights the following issues:
а) whether the content of the article complies with the stated title of the topic;
b) how the article meets modern advances in the theory and practice of health care and medical sciences;
c) the intelligibility of article material for readers, in terms of language, style and arrangement of the material, clarity of tables, charts, figures, and formulas;
d) the appropriateness of article publishing taking into account the novelty of article materials;
e) the extent to which the presentation of article material meets the modern requirements in the methodology of medical sciences and health care, as well as the extent to which conclusions of the study are applicable to domestic and international practice;
f) which disadvantages, corrections and additions are proposed to be introduced by the authors;
g) is it recommended to publish the article in the journal in view of correction of deficiencies noted by the reviewer or not.
- All reviews, both the submitted by the author and performed by order of the executive secretary of the editorial board are certified in the manner prescribed in the institution where the reviewer works.
- Review is conducted confidentially, the author does not know the name of the reviewer and the reviewer does not know the name of the author. Author of the reviewed article has the opportunity to take a look at the reviewers' comments. The editorial staff is undertaking the sending the copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation when obtaining a relevant inquiry.
- If the review has recommendations for the correction and rework of article, the executive secretary of the journal "Analysis of health risk" sends the reviewer's comments to to the author with the proposal to consider them when preparing a new version of an article or come up with arguments to (partially or completely) refute them. The article modified (revised) by the author is sent for re-review.
- An article not recommended for publication by the reviewer is not accepted for re-examination. Text of the negative conclusion is sent to the author by e-mail, fax or regular mail.
- The presence of positive reviews is not a sufficient basis for the publication of the article. The final decision on the appropriateness of the publication is made by the Editorial Board of the scientific journal "Health Risk Analysis".
- After the adoption of the decision by the editorial board on the admission of an article for publication, the author is informed by e-mail indicating the terms of publication.
- The original reviews are housed in editorial office within 5 years.
Editors encourage reviewers involved in the assessment of articles offered for publication in our journal to adhere to the principles set forth in the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) or the Collection of Russian translations of COPE recommendations for ethics of scientific publications), as well as a List of requirements and conditions for the publication of articles and other materials.