Peer-Review

Regulations of peer reviewing manuscripts submitted to the journal
Bulletin of the Perm University. Chemistry

1. This Regulation regulates the procedure for reviewing manuscripts of original articles and scientific reviews submitted to the editorial office of the scientific journal Bulletin of the Perm University. Chemistry  (hereinafter referred to as the "editorial"), as well as requirements for the reviewers of the journal.

2. All submitted materials that correspond to the subject of the journal and are designed in strict accordance with the rules for authors are subject to review. Manuscripts that do not take into account the requirements of the rules for authors are not accepted for consideration.

3. The manuscript received by the editors is reviewed by the editor or section editor for correctness of formatting, compliance with the subject of the journal, and is checked for the amount of borrowing in the Anti-Plagiarism system (or equivalent). If it meets all the requirements, the manuscript is accepted for review, and the author is sent a notification of acceptance of the manuscript for consideration by e-mail or in a personal account on the publication's website.

4. Reviewers can be scientists who have a recognized authority and have published over the past three years on the subject of the reviewed article, as well as having a doctorate or candidate of science degree. Reviewers can also be members of the editorial board and the editorial board of the journal.

5. Reviewers are obliged to follow the adopted "Regulations on the ethical standards of the editorial policy of the Perm State National Research University".

6. The editors use one-sided "blind" review (single-blind - the reviewer knows about the author, the author does not know about the reviewer). The issuing editor sends the article to the reviewer by e-mail or through a personal account on the journal's website.

7. The terms of reviewing in each individual case are determined taking into account the creation of conditions for the most prompt publication of the article, but not more than 14 days from the date of receipt of the reviewer's consent to prepare a review.

8. The review should objectively evaluate the scientific article and contain a comprehensive analysis of its scientific and methodological advantages and disadvantages. Include reasoned assessment: - scientific level of the article; - the relevance of the problem posed in the article, the scientific novelty of the material, originality; scientific and practical significance of the study; - reliability of the results obtained by the author; - Validity of the conclusions drawn. The final part of the review should contain reasoned conclusions about the Manuscript as a whole and a clear recommendation on the advisability of its publication in the Edition, refusal to publish it, or the need for its revision. Based on the results of the review, the reviewer submits one of the following decisions to the editorial board of the journal: - the article is recommended for publication in the journal without modifications; - the article is recommended for publication in the journal after revision without re-reviewing; - the article requires revision and re-reviewing; - the article is not recommended for publication. The received reviews are communicated to the author via e-mail or personal account on the journal's website.

9. Based on the available reviews and recommendations at a meeting of the editorial board of the journal, one of the following decisions is made:
9.1. In case of a positive conclusion of all reviewers, the manuscript of the article is approved for publication.
9.2. In case of disagreement between the reviewers, the final decision on the publication of the manuscript of the article is made by the editor-in-chief.
9.3. If the reviews or recommendations contain significant comments and a conclusion about the need to improve the article, the manuscript of the article is returned to the author to correct the comments, after which it is re-considered at a meeting of the editorial board. The author of the manuscript must make the necessary corrections no later than 2 months after receiving the notification, and return the corrected text and the answer to the reviewer by e-mail or through the personal account on the journal's website.
9.4. If a decision is made to refuse publication of the article, the author is notified by e-mail with the received reviews attached.

10. An article sent to the editorial office after revision is re-reviewed by the same reviewer or by another - appointed at the discretion of the editorial board. Manuscripts, the authors of which have not eliminated the constructive remarks of the reviewer or do not reasonably refute them, are not accepted for publication.

11. If the author does not agree with the comments of the reviewer, he may apply for re-review or withdraw the manuscript, about which he must notify the editors in writing and receive confirmation of the removal of the manuscript from consideration.

12. Original reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years. At the request of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation, reviews must be submitted to the Higher Attestation Commission and/or the Ministry of Education and Science.

Download review form.