Peer-Review

All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of the “Cardiology of Uzbekistan”  undergo mandatory double-blind peer review (the reviewer does not know the authors of the manuscript, and the authors do not know the reviewers).

1. The manuscript should be submitted electronically to the editorial office through the website. The manuscript must be formatted in accordance with the requirements for scientific articles submitted for publication in the journal.
2. The manuscript undergoes a mandatory initial review: the editorial office has the right to refuse publication or send its comments on the article, which must be corrected by the author before peer review.
• Checking the completeness of the manuscript: if the requirements for the completeness or formatting of the manuscript are not met, the editorial office has the right to refuse publication or request in writing that the missing materials be provided or that the version uploaded to the website be corrected.
• Manuscripts are checked in the "Antiplagiarism" system. The originality of the manuscript must be at least 75%. We expect that manuscripts submitted for publication are written in an original style, implying new insights without using previously published text. Manuscripts with originality below 75% are not considered.
3. Self-citation: the editorial office sets the amount of non-original text for citations and self-citations (no more than 10% with the authorship of any co-author).
4. Articles are peer-reviewed by members of the editorial board and the editorial committee, as well as invited reviewers – leading specialists in the relevant field of education in Uzbekistan and other countries. The decision on the selection of a particular reviewer for the article's expertise is made by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, scientific editor, or head of the editorial office. The peer review period is 2-4 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer, it may be extended.
5. Each reviewer has the right to refuse to review if there is an obvious conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the review results, the reviewer gives recommendations on the article's further fate (each reviewer's decision is justified):
• the article is recommended for publication in its current form;
• the article is recommended for publication after the reviewer’s comments are addressed;
• the article cannot be published in the journal.
6. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the article, the journal's editorial office sends the review text to the author with a suggestion to consider them when preparing a new version of the article or to reasonably refute them (partially or completely). Revising the article should not take more than 2 months from the date of sending the email to the authors about the need for changes. The revised article is resubmitted for peer review.
7. If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must inform the editorial office in writing or verbally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version within 3 months from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the authors about refusing to revise the article, the editorial office removes it from consideration. In such cases, the authors are sent a corresponding notification about the removal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the revision period.
8. If the author and reviewers have irreconcilable disagreements regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the editor-in-chief makes a decision at the editorial board meeting.
9. The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at the editorial board meeting following the reviewers' recommendations. An article that is not recommended for publication by the editorial board’s decision is not accepted for re-review. A notification of refusal to publish is sent to the author by email.
10. After the editorial board of the journal makes a decision to accept the article for publication, the editorial office informs the author of this and specifies the publication timeline.
11. The presence of a positive review is not sufficient grounds for the article's publication. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
12. Originals of reviews are kept in the journal's editorial office for 3 years.