Each article submitted to the editorial board goes through the peer review process, except for reviews of scientific (popular science) works and reports of an informative nature.
Editorial board of the scientific professional edition «Scientific journal of N.P Dragomanov. Series 15. Scientific and pedagogical problems of physical culture (physical culture and sports) defined the following procedure for reviewing manuscripts:
- The author submits to the editorial board an article that meets the requirements of scientific journal policy and article preparation rules. Non-compliant manuscripts are not registered and are not allowed for further review, as the editorial board informs the authors.
- Each article submitted to the editorial board undergoes three levels of peer review on the research profile: open - external and internal, and blind. The recommendation of an external (open) peer reviewer, who cannot be the scientific supervisor of the author / applicant, serves as a basis for further internal and blind review of the manuscript.
- Conducts peer review and appoints the editor-in-chief of the scientific professional edition “Scientific journal of NP Dragomanov NPU. Series 15. Scientific and pedagogical problems of physical culture (physical culture and sports). According to the decision of the editor-in-chief (according to the recommendation of the editor-in-chief), some articles by renowned scientists, as well as authors specially invited by the editorial staff to write the article, may be exempted from the standard review procedure.
- The reviewers of the manuscripts may be members of the editorial board of the scientific professional edition “Scientific journal of Dragomanov NPU. Series 15. Scientific and pedagogical problems of physical culture (physical culture and sports).
- The interaction between the author and the reviewers is done by e-mailing with the editor-in-chief of the journal "MP Dragomanov NPU". Series 15. Scientific and pedagogical problems of physical culture (physical culture and sports).
- If the reviewer indicates the need to make certain articles in the article - the article is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the comments in the preparation of the updated version of the article or justify their refutation. The author of the revised article adds a message that answers all the comments and explains all the changes made in the article. The revised version is re-submitted to the reviewer for decision and to prepare a reasoned opinion on the possibility of publication. The date of the recommendation of the article for publication is the date of receipt by the editor of a positive opinion of the reviewer (or the decision of the editorial board) regarding the expediency and possibility of publishing the article.
- In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the manuscript has the right to submit a reasoned answer to the editorial board. In such circumstances, the article is considered at a meeting of the editorial board. The editorial board may refer the article for additional or new review to another specialist. The editorial board reserves the right to reject the article in the event of the author's inability or unwillingness to consider the recommendations and comments of the reviewers.
- After receiving positive reviews, the manuscript is sent for literary and technical editing. The interaction of the author and the literary (technical) editor can take place in any form - in person, via e-mail, Skype or by phone. Minor stylistic or formal corrections that do not affect the content of the article are made by a literary (technical) editor without agreement with the author.
- The final decision on the possibility and expediency of publication shall be made by the Editor-in-Chief in accordance with the recommendations of the responsible Secretary of the Journal. After the decision is made to allow the article to be published, the responsible secretary informs the author and specifies the expected publication period.