The procedure for reviewing the original author of articles in the journal «Modern science and innovation»
1. Originally articles accepted for consideration only if they meet the requirements for publication in the journal "Modern science and innovation", posted on the official website of the branch NCFU in Pyatigorsk in the "Science Journal" and in the current issue of the journal. Author's articles designed in violation of the requirements will not be considered and will not be returned.
2. Article recorded in the log entries with the date of receipt, name, name of the author / s, places of work of the author / s. Article is assigned a unique registration number.
3. All research papers received by the editorial board are subject to mandatory review.
4. The Editor in Chief (Deputy) determines that the profile of the journal article, the requirements for registration and send it for review. Author's articles are not on the profile will not be returned to the author, the author is notified of non-compliance profile of the journal article.
5. As a member of the editorial board are the reviewers and external reviewers - scientists and experts in the field (doctors, PhDs). Presented original articles transferred for review to members of the editorial board, supervising the appropriate branch of science. In the absence of a member of the editorial board or receipt of the article by a member of the editorial board of the chief editor sends the article to review the external reviewers.
6. The reviewer should consider and submit to the editors of opinion articles within 30 calendar days of receipt, or a reasoned refusal to review.
7. The review shall be conducted confidentially to the authors of articles; it is confidential and is provided to the author of the manuscript of his written request, without a signature and the name, position, place of work the reviewer. Review indicating the author reviews can be provided upon request of expert advice in the WAC of the Russian Ministry of Education.
8. The review should include: a general analysis of the scientific level of the terminology, the structure of the manuscript, the relevance of the topic; assessment of preparedness of the manuscript for publication in respect of language and style, matching the content of the article its title, registration requirements, analysis of scientific presentation, matching methods used by the author, procedures, guidelines and research achievements of modern science and practice.
9. The reviewer may recommend an article for publication; recommend to the publication of revised based on comments; not to recommend the article for publication. If the reviewer recommends an article to be published revised based on the comments, or does not recommend an article for publication - in the review shall provide reasons for such a decision.
10. A reviewer may indicate the need to make additions and refinements in the manuscript, which is then sent (via the Editor) to the author for revision. In this case, the date of receipt of the manuscript to the editor is the date of the return of the modified manuscript. Recycled paper is sent to the author for review again.
11. Upon receipt of the review to the editorial board at the next meeting of the editorial board discusses the reviews received and the final decision about the publication or to refuse to publish articles. After the final decision about the publication of articles, information on the adoption of article posted on the website. Authors who refuse to publish manuscripts sent a reasoned refusal.
12. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the author of the reviewer, the manuscript in consultation with the editorial board can be re-directed to (additional) review.
13. The order and sequence of publication of the article is determined by the volume of published materials and a list of columns in each issue.
14. The original reviews should be stored for five years.