Peer review

Peer review and expert review of materials that have been sent
to The Suicidology editorial office

Manuscripts are accepted for consideration only if they comply with the rules for formatting articles.

The publisher reviews all materials submitted to the editorial board that correspond to the subject matter of the journal, with the aim of their expert assessment.

All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office are subject to mandatory review. Members of the editorial board and other organizations with professional knowledge and experience in a specific scientific area in accordance with the topic of the manuscript are involved in the review.

Reviewers cannot be co-authors of the article and employees of the department in which the work was performed.

Expert evaluation of works is carried out confidentially as a double blind review. Reviewers are sent materials without mentioning the authors and the organization where the work was performed. Information about the reviewer is also anonymous for the authors and is intended only for the editorial board.

The review should contain a qualified analysis of the article material, its objective assessment and sound recommendations.

The review covers the following issues:

  • - compliance of the article with the profile and subject of the journal
  • - correspondence between the title of the article and its content;
  • - compliance of the article with the rules of registration (abstract, keywords);
  • - general characteristics and assessment of the content of the article (relevance of the research topic, scientific and methodological level, novelty, reliability and validity of the main provisions and conclusions, scientific and practical significance);
  • - concretization of the positive aspects, as well as the shortcomings of the article, recommendations to authors for making corrections and additions to the article.

In the final part, a recommendation is given on the advisability of publishing the manuscript, the need for its revision or rejection. In the case of a negative review, the reasons for rejecting the manuscript are argued.

Each of the reviewers submits a review of the manuscript of the article to the editorial board within a period not exceeding 2 months.

If the reviewer approves the article in general but there are some comments, the text of the review is sent to the author in order to update the article, with confidentiality regarding the identity of the reviewer. After the author returns the article, corrected based on the comments of the reviewer, the manuscript is sent for the review to the same reviewer.

In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to provide a reasoned reply to the editorial office of the journal. The article can be sent for another review to the same or a different reviewer, or for discussion in the editorial board for making the final decision.

In case of well-reasoned grounds for rejecting the manuscript, the editorial board makes a collegial decision about this, the author (s) is sent a reasoned refusal to publish.

The period for consideration of manuscripts materials is no more than 3 months from the date of their receipt by the editorial office.

The originals of the reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years from the date of publication and are provided at the request of the expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation.