The authors are responsible for the scientific content of the manuscript. The journal reserves the right to request any scientific materials on the basis of which the article was prepared.
The journal "Family Medicine" performs a careful selection and evaluation of manuscript compliance with the publication criteria:
- Novelty of submitted materials (abstracts, reports of forums held, placement of articles in their publication is not considered as an alternative to novelty).
- Relevance of the clinical significance of the data presented.
- Conclusions must be supported by convincing data.
- Importance for a specific field of science or practical pediatrics.
All manuscripts submitted for publication are reviewed for originality, methodology, importance, quality, ethical nature, and consistency with the goals and objectives of the journal.«Family Medicine» uses a generally accepted standard scheme for the evaluation process. The editor-in-chief has the right to evaluate the editorial and scientific content of the journal and determines the timing of publication of the material.
The complete editorial process consists of successive steps. After an article is accepted by the Editor-in-Chief, deputy or member of the editorial board, it is technically reviewed to assess the suitability of the manuscript: the relevance and importance of the scientific material, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal's audience.
Submissions that do not meet the requirements for publication are rejected. In cases where only minor changes to the articles are recommended, the author is usually invited to revise the manuscript. Authors whose articles are accepted receive an appropriate acknowledgement, and the article undergoes further preparation for publication. The technical review usually lasts several days.
Any manuscripts submitted are treated as confidential documents. The editor(s) and editorial board are obliged not to disclose any information about the submitted paper to anyone except according to the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editors, and the publisher, as appropriate. The Journal maintains a rigorous review process. Reviewing is done on a double-blind basis--the faces of reviewers and authors are confidential. They should not be disclosed or discussed with others, except as authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.
At least two review reports should be obtained for each submitted article. Suggestions for the selection of reviewers may be made by the Editor-in-Chief during the initial review of the article. Alternatively, the editorial board may invite qualified members of the editorial board, reviewers from the journal database, or new reviewers identified by web search for relevant articles.
To assist the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board, the journal's editorial staff handles all communications with reviewers, authors, and outside editors. Reviewers are given three to four weeks to write their feedback. Reviewers are invited to submit their report within one week to review the manuscript corrected after comments. In both cases, extensions of the deadline may be granted upon request.
After receiving the reviewers' reports, the final decision to accept or reject the article is made by the Editor-in-Chief or other editors approved by the Editor-in-Chief. When making the decision, the Editor-in-Chief or his/her deputies check the qualification and experience in peer review of individual reviewers, the adequacy of the reviewer's recommendations and comments and the authors' cooperation, and the scientific significance of the article. The Editor can choose the following decision: to accept, to reject, to ask the author to finalize the document, to invite an additional reviewer.
If there is a suspicion that the article contains elements of plagiarism, the editors check the content of the manuscript using appropriate software. Reviewers fill out a special review form electronically, where they note general comments for the editor and specific comments for the author. The chief editor may disagree with the opinion of the reviewers, in which case they should justify their decision for the benefit of the authors.
The review process after submitting a manuscript for publication can take up to 3 months.
The journal handles the entire process of preparing articles for publication, including editing and digital processing (conversion to PDF, XML, etc.).