Editorial process

All manuscripts submitted for publication are strictly reviewed for their originality, methodology, importance, quality, ethical nature and suitability for the journal. The UKRAINIAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY AND PEDIATRICS uses a common standard scheme for the evaluation process. The editor-in-chief has full authority over the editorial and scientific content of the journal and the timing of publication of the content.

The whole editorial process consists of the successive steps.  Immediately after submission, technical review is carried out by editorial staff (editor-in-chief, associate editors or editorial board member) to assess suitability of the manuscript to the journal: topicality and importance of the subject, the clarity of presentation, and relevance to the audience of the journal in question. Submissions that fully do not conform to the requirements of the publication will be rejected. In cases where only minor revisions are recommended, the author is usually requested to revise the paper. Authors whose articles are accepted will be notified accordingly and the article will undergo further processing.  Technical reviews are typically processed in a few days after submission.
Any submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editor(s) and editorial staff are obliged not to disclose any information about a submitted paper to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. The journal operates a rigorous peer-review process. Review is performed on a double-blind basis – the identities of peer reviewers and authors are kept confidential. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor-In-Chief.

The reviewing process is double-blind for the journal. At least two review reports are collected for each submitted article. Proposals for the selection of reviewers can be made by editor-in chief, deputy editor-in-chief or editorial staff during initial review of the article. In the evaluation process, there participate qualified independent reviews as well as members of the editorial board who are experts in the field of the submitted article. Journal database contains the list of reviewers including members of editorial board.
To assist academic editors, editorial staff of the journal handle all communication with reviewers, authors, and the external editors. Reviewers are given three – four weeks to write their review. For the review of a revised manuscript, reviewers are asked to provide their report within one week. In both cases, extensions can be granted on request.
The peer review is followed by a final acceptance/rejection decision by the Editor-in-Chief, or another academic editor approved by the Editor-in-Chief. When making an editorial decision the Editor-in-Chief or academic editor checks the suitability of selected reviewers, adequacy of reviewer comments and author response, overall scientific quality of the paper. The editor can select the follows: accept, reject, ask author for revision of the paper, ask for an additional reviewer. If there is any suspicion that a paper may contain plagiarism, the editorial office will check using plagiarism detection software to screen the manuscript. Peer reviewers complete a referee report form to provide general comments to the editor and specific comments to the author. Editors-in-Chief are free to disagree with their views. If they do so, they should justify their decision, for the benefit of the authors.
The publication process after submission may take 4 to 6 months. However, all accepted manuscripts are assigned with a DOI number following their acceptance. The journal performs thorough editorial processing of all manuscripts, including language, copy editing and conversion to PDF or XML.

The journal «UKRAINIAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY AND PEDIATRICS» is a member of International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE http://icmje.org/) and follows its procedures for dealing with potentially unethical behaviour by authors, reviewers or editors.