Peer review

To control the quality of manuscripts the Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board uses anonymous “blind” review process and outside peer reviewers of leading scientists from outside science institutions.

Author is unaware of reviewer’s person. The reviewer receives a manuscript without the author's surname.

If the reviewer is not a specialist in the science area to which the article is related, or can not meet the deadline for review, or for other reasons, he/she must promptly (within 3 days) inform the executive editor about it and return the submitted materials to the editors.

All manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. In the process of working on the article reviewers have no right to: copy materials, exchange articles with other reviewers, use the information received for personal purposes. Reviewers must return the manuscript to the Editorial Office.

Within 14 days reviewers send to the Editor a full and valid review, written in a polite, friendly form with a mandatory conclusion in one of the following forms:

– "Recommended for publication";

– "Declined, with indicating ways in which papers may be suitable for publication;

– "Sent for additional review";

– "Not recommend for publication".

To finalize and eliminate shortcomings, the manuscript is returned to the author. The author is obliged to return the revised article to the editorial office within 14 days, otherwise the article is considered withdrawn.

If the article needs to be finalized, the reviewer should constructively substantiate the deficiencies discovered in it. The editors familiarize the author with the conclusion of the reviewer in written form. In case the author does not agree with the comments of the reviewer, he has the right to express his/her point of view through the editorial board. The communication between the author and the reviewer occurs only through the editorial office and only in written form with strict observance of anonymity.

The Editor-in-Chief, Editors, Editorial Board are the final authority on all editorial decisions on the acceptance of articles for publication, if there is a positive review, or on the refusal, solely on the basis of:

– their relevance and compliance with modern advances in medicine;

– originality;

– clarity of presentation;

– conformity of the content of the article stated in the title topic;

– correspondence of the article to the profile of the journal;

– shortcomings of the article indicated by the reviewer and respectively, changes and corrections that must be made by the author;

– design according to the rules for authors.

The conclusion of the Editorial Board about the possibility of publishing article in the journal:

– "Recommended for publication";

– "Recommended for publication taking into account correction of revealed shortcomings";

– "Not recommended for publication".

The originals of author's manuscripts and reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal "Urologiya" (Urology) for 5 years.

The author of the article sent has the right to withdraw it by written application at any stage of its processing, but before the approval by the Editorial Board for inclusion the article in the next issue of the journal.