Review process

1. The Editorial Staff registers an article, provided the latter meets the requirements to the author’s original, which are published in the Journal or placed on,

2. The registered article is subjected to compulsory reviewing.

3. The Editor-in-Chief estimates the scientific value of the author’s original and assigns two reviewers – independent specialists, whose specialization is the closest one to the subject of the article. As a rule, these reviewers are leading Ukrainian specialists in the field of orthopaedics and traumatology, as well as in other related medical fields.

4. The term of reviewing (two weeks) is specified in the Manuscript Review Chart. This term can be prolonged depending upon the situation and the request of a reviewer.

5. Inorder to receive the maximally full and objective review of an article, the Editorial Board has developed the Manuscript Review Chart, which the reviewer should pay attention to.

6. The reviewer concludes:

- the article is recommended for publication in the author’s variant;

- the article is recommended for publication with regard for correction of specified shortcomings;

- it is recommended to give the article for additional reviewing to another specialist;

- the publication is refused with the statement of the cause.

7. The Editor-in-Chief examines suggestions of the reviewers and takes the necessary decision: to set the article in type or give the text of a review to the author with suggestion to take the recommendations into account and improve the article. The article, revised by the author, is sent for reviewing again.

8. Since 2012 the Journal has been practicing double blind reviewing: the authors do not know who reviews their work, and the reviewers do not know whom they review. All the correspondence between the reviewers and authors is performed via the Editorial Office. A reviewer can base his decision concerning publication of an article on the opinions of the experts, invited by him.

9. The opinion of a reviewer is not final. If opinions of reviewers do not coincide, the Editor-in-Chief sends the article for additional reviewing to one more expert.

10. If an author does not agree with the review, he can send a justified reply to the Editorial Office. The Editorial Board takes a decision about suitability of the publication on the basis of the validity of the article and its compliance with the subject area of the journal. In conflict situations the decision is taken by the Editor-in-Chief.

11. Each issue is finally approved by the Scientific Council of the State Institution “Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology of the National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine” (the founding organization) at its regular meeting.

12. Incase of its positive review the author’s text is sent to the Editorial Office for its scientific editing, spell checking, technical editing and laying-out.

13. The originals of articles and reviews are stored at the Editorial Office of the journal during three years.