Peer Review Procedure, Including the Type of Review, Reviewer Selection Criteria, Timelines, Documentation, and Decision-Making Process
Manuscripts submitted to the electronic journal Ukrainian Journal of Occupational Health undergo a peer review process while ensuring reviewer anonymity.
The reviewer evaluation form includes the following criteria:
- the existence of any conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author (e.g., supervisor–student, employer–employee, co-author relationships, or other circumstances that may affect objectivity);
- originality of the manuscript (the reviewer is provided with a technical similarity report);
- whether the title corresponds to the content of the article;
- whether the abstract adequately reflects the content of the article;
- whether the relevance of the topic is sufficiently justified;
- whether the relationship between the stated problem and important scientific or practical issues is adequately substantiated;
- whether the objectives of the article correspond to the problem under consideration;
- whether the conclusions are based on theoretical analysis and/or experimental results;
- whether changes to the length of the manuscript are required;
- whether the scientific results are sufficiently substantiated;
- whether the conclusions correspond to the content of the article;
- whether the discussion of future research prospects is presented in an appropriate scientific style;
- linguistic and grammatical quality of the manuscript.
Submitted manuscripts are reviewed within three weeks.
For studies involving human participants, animals, or personal data, authors must provide approval from an ethics committee or another authorized body in accordance with the legislation of Ukraine. Authors are required to submit the study protocol, obtain written informed consent from all participants, and comply with the requirements of the Law of Ukraine “On Personal Data Protection” No. 2297-VI of June 1, 2010. Compliance with ethical standards is monitored during the peer review process.
Type of Peer Review
The Journal applies a double-blind peer review process:
- reviewers do not have access to the identities of the authors;
- authors do not have access to the identities of the reviewers.
Reviewer Selection Criteria
- possession of a PhD or Doctor of Sciences degree;
- publication record in the subject area of the manuscript under review;
- publications indexed in Scopus and/or Web of Science;
- absence of conflicts of interest with the author(s);
- no more than one reviewer from the author’s institution;
- involvement of international reviewers whenever possible;
- reviewers must not have co-authored publications with the author(s) during the previous three years.
Peer Review Procedure
Stage 1. Initial Editorial Screening (up to 7 days)
- assessment of compliance with the Journal’s scope;
- plagiarism screening using iThenticate or Unicheck;
- verification of compliance with formatting requirements.
Editorial decision:
- send for peer review; or
- reject.
Stage 2. Reviewer Assignment (2–3 days)
- selection of two independent reviewers;
- invitation of reviewers;
- provision of an anonymized version of the manuscript.
Stage 3. Peer Review (1–2 weeks)
Reviewers evaluate:
- relevance and scientific novelty of the topic;
- consistency between title and content;
- quality of the literature review;
- appropriateness of the methodology;
- reliability of results;
- validity of conclusions;
- quality of presentation and language.
Stage 4. Editorial Board Decision
Possible reviewer recommendations:
- Accept;
- Accept with Minor Revisions (without additional review);
- Accept with Major Revisions (with additional review);
- Reject and Resubmit;
- Reject.
If reviewers’ opinions differ substantially, a third reviewer may be appointed or the Editorial Board may make the final determination.
Stage 5. Author Revision (up to 7 days)
- authors receive anonymized reviewer comments;
- authors prepare a revised version of the manuscript;
- authors submit a detailed point-by-point response to reviewer comments.
Stage 6. Final Decision
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on the reviewers’ recommendations.
Documentation and Record Keeping
The peer review process includes the preservation of correspondence, review statuses, and archived review reports. These records are maintained in communication with authors and on the relevant editorial platforms.
Documentation Requirements
- reviews are completed using the Journal’s standard review form;
- all reviews are archived by the Editorial Office for three years;
- reviews may be provided to the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine or other authorized bodies upon request.
Appeals
Authors may appeal a rejection decision within 10 days of notification. Appeals are reviewed by an independent member of the Editorial Board.
Post-Acceptance Processing
After a manuscript has been accepted for publication, it undergoes literary editing, English-language abstract editing, and final author corrections. The Editorial Office reserves the right to discontinue further processing of a manuscript if the proofreader determines that editorial corrections have not been properly implemented or if substantial changes have been introduced that were not previously evaluated by reviewers.
Reviewers reserve the right to recommend rejection of manuscripts that do not comply with the Journal’s requirements or thematic scope. Manuscripts not recommended for publication are not accepted for repeated consideration. A positive review alone does not guarantee publication.
Publication Ethics
The Editorial Board considers publication ethics an essential component of editorial work and is committed to maintaining ethical standards in accordance with the Code of Academic Integrity.
The Editorial Office:
- is responsible for publication decisions;
- strives to meet the needs of readers and authors;
- continuously improves the quality of the Journal;
- ensures the quality of published materials;
- promotes openness in presenting scientific research from Ukraine and other countries.
The primary factors influencing publication decisions are:
- originality of the manuscript;
- relevance of the topic;
- significance of the research for scholars and readers.
Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy of information, compliance with legal requirements, and adherence to ethical standards. The Editorial Office is not responsible for the scientific, methodological, or professional accuracy of submitted materials, nor for the accuracy of references to online resources and literature sources.
If a manuscript complies with the aims, scope, and editorial policy of the Journal, it is generally published in the author's final version. Otherwise, the manuscript is rejected.
Authors undertake to:
- take responsibility for the accuracy of facts and the content of the article;
- address all reviewer comments and deficiencies identified during review;
- refrain from submitting the same manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals;
- refrain from submitting previously published articles;
- ensure the originality of the manuscript;
- exclude information with restricted access;
- provide proper citations and references;
- ensure correct authorship attribution and obtain the consent of all authors for publication.
Scientific articles must comply with the Journal’s manuscript preparation and formatting requirements.
