ICMJE's for the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors).
All manuscripts submitted to Oftalmologicheskii Zhurnal that are selected for peer review are sent to at least one, but usually two or more, independent reviewers, selected by the editors. Authors are welcome to suggest suitable independent reviewers but the editor's decision on the choice of referees is final. Moreover, the reviewer's identity is kept anonymous from the authors.
Editors avoid selecting external peer reviewers with obvious potential conflicts of interest. Authors can provide editors with names of persons they feel shouldn’t be asked to review a manuscript because of potential conflict of interests with explanation their concerns. Since single-blind peer review is used, the reviewers can see the author's details. So, they must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript. They should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work, before its publication, to further their own interests.
Editors make clear to their reviewers that manuscripts sent for review are the private property of the authors and therein information mustn’t be disclosed. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the manuscript for their files. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work, before its publication, to further their own interests.
Manuscripts are reviewed with due respect for confidentiality. In submitting their manuscripts for review, authors entrust editors with the results of their scientific work and creative effort, on which their reputation and career may depend. Authors’ rights may be violated by disclosure of the confidential details during review of their manuscript. Editors do not disclose information about manuscripts (including their receipt, content, status in the reviewing process, criticism by reviewers, or ultimate fate) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. Violation of confidentiality is possible only if there is a claim of the unreliability or falsity of evidence, in all other cases, the confidentiality must not be violated. Reviewer’s comments are not published or otherwise publicized without permission of the reviewer, author, and editor.
When a manuscript is rejected, delete copies of it are deleted from our editorial system.
When a manuscript is published, the journal keeps copies of the original submission, reviews, revisions, and correspondence for at least three years to help answer future questions about the work should they arise.
Editorial decisions are based on the relevance of a manuscript to the journal and on the manuscript’s originality, quality, and contribution to evidence about important questions. Those decisions are not influenced by commercial interests, personal relationships or agendas.
The process of review
1. All manuscripts sent to the editorial office of “Oftalmologicheskii Zhurnal” are peer reviewed (single - blind peer review).
at least one, but usually two or more, independent reviewers, selected by the editors.
must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript.
The choice of peer-reviewers is based on many factors including expertise, prior publications in the same topic area, reputation, and our own experience of collaboration with each reviewer. So, the previous performance of the reviewer, including quality and timeliness, is considered. Authors can suggest potential reviewers for their articles; however, the decision is of the Editorial Board. Selected reviewers are provided with the manuscript’s abstract and requested to accept or decline the invitation to review within 3 days of the request. The full paper is accessible after the reviewer accepts the invitation. If a reviewer cannot complete the review for any reason, including a conflict of interest, or lack of time, the reviewer informs the Editorial Board within 3 days and if possible suggests other qualified reviewers.
Writing the review
The reviewers are offered to answer the following questions to provide an assessment of the various aspects of a manuscript:
- Is the submission original?
- Does the paper fit the scope of the journal?
- Would the paper be of interest to the readership of the journal?
- Does the paper help to expand or further research in this subject area?
- Does it significantly build on (the author’s) previous work?
- Do you feel that the significance and potential impact of a paper is high or low?
- Does the manuscript have flaws which should prohibit its publication? If so, please provide details.
- Is the paper complete? Is there an abstract or summary of the work undertaken as well as a concluding section?
- Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?
- Is the abstract clear, accessible, and in the correct form?
- Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction?
- Is the methodology presented in the manuscript and any analysis provided both accurate and properly conducted? Is the reporting of data and methodology sufficiently detailed and transparent to enable reproducing the results?
- Are the statistical methods appropriate?
- Do you find that the conclusions and data interpretation are robust, valid and reliable?
- Is all of the discussion relevant?
- Are all relevant accompanying data, citations, or statistics given by the author?
- Does this manuscript reference previous literature appropriately? If not, what references should be included or excluded?
- Should it be added experiments or data that could help strengthening the work in a revision?