Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to Newsletter of Precarpathian University. Physical culture undergo a structured peer-review process to ensure scientific quality, originality, and relevance.
Deadlines of manuscript’s review:
1. The Chief Editor of the Journal reviews the manuscript submitted for publication for ten workdays beginning from the date of receiving the manuscript by editorial office.
2. Review of the manuscript by experts is performed out within 4 weeks from the date of its submission from the Chief Editor.
Initial Editorial Screening
Upon submission, the manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the editorial office to verify:
- originality and absence of prior publication or simultaneous submission;
- compliance with the journal’s Focus and Scope;
- adherence to the Author Guidelines;
- compliance with ethical standards, including plagiarism screening.
The journal uses plagiarism detection software prior to peer review.
Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review (desk rejection).
External Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a handling editor and sent to at least two independent expert reviewers in the relevant field.
The journal applies a single-blind peer-review process, in which reviewers know the identity of the authors, while authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
Reviewers are selected based on their scientific expertise and are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest before accepting the review.
Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers’ reports and the handling editor’s assessment, one of the following decisions is made:
- Accept
- Minor Revisions
- Major Revisions
- Reject
In some cases, a revised manuscript may be sent for an additional round of review.
The final decision is made by the Editor / Editor-in-Chief.
Revision Process
The manuscript revised (rewritten) by author is re-submit to review. The authors should make all necessary corrections in the final version of the manuscript and to return corrected text and also its identical electronic version with initial version and cover letter-response for reviewer to the editorial board.
In this case the date of submission to the editorial board is the date of returning of revised manuscript.
If the reviewer makes the same decision for repeated review (impossibility to accept the paper without revision), the manuscript is considered to be rejected and is not the subject for review by the editorial board of the Journal anymore.
For overall negative assessment of the manuscript, the reviewer should make a very compelling argument for his conclusion.
The final conclusion on reasonability for publication is made by the chief editor by virtue of expert reviews according to conformance of represented data with matter of the Journal, its scientific significance and relevance.
Author is informed about decision made for 5 workdays (by e-mail). The editorial board sends the review of the manuscript to authors in electronic copy without signature and indication of surname, occupation and affiliation of reviewers in a mandatory manner. If the manuscript is rejected the copies of review and reasonable rejection are sent to author.
The editorial board does not retain rejected manuscripts.
The manuscripts accepted for publication are not returned. The manuscripts with negative response from the reviewer are not published and also are not returned to the author.
Confidentiality and Integrity
All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose or use unpublished materials for personal benefit.
The journal follows COPE guidelines in cases of suspected misconduct
