0.401
IF
15
MNiSW
136.6
ICV
Instructions for Reviewers
 
General review guidelines

An article submitted for publication is subjected to a double-blind peer-review process participated by at least 2 reviewers. Articles are sent to reviewers in an anonymous form (without names and other personal data of the authors). Reviewers also remain anonymous.

A review should be prepared in English on review form in “Medycyna Pracy” Editorial System (http://www.editorialsystem.com/medpren).

A review should be prepared and submitted to the editorial office within 21 days since the day of receiving an article. After this time the access to the article is blocked by the Editorial System. If a reviewer is not capable of completing this task within such deadline, should inform us about it instantly after accepting the invitation for reviewing the article.

Reviewers are asked to prepare a detailed review evaluating the content of the article. The linguistic aspects are checked by a linguistic editor provided by “Medycyna Pracy”. Poor level of English, making the paper difficult to understand, should be reported by a reviewer, nevertheless it should not be a decisive factor leading to the paper being dismissed.

A reviewer evaluates selected aspects of reviewed articles:
  • if the issues raised in the article are consistent with the profile of the Journal,
  • if the problem discussed is currently valid,
  • if the paper is original and contains certain novelties,
  • if the summary sufficiently informs about the content of the paper,
  • if the key words are correct,
  • if the content of the text is well-elaborated,
  • if the paper contains elements that may be omitted,
  • if the research methods used ensure the reliability of the obtained results,
  • if the interpretation of the results is correct,
  • if the conclusions are supported by the research results,
  • if the terminology is correct,
  • if the figures and tables have clear structure,
  • if all figures and tables are necessary,
  • if the quoted literature is correct,
  • if the language of the paper is correct,
  • if statistical analysis is satisfying.

Final conclusion – options

a) accept without changes
b) accept after changes suggested by reviewer
c) rate manuscript once again after major changes and another review
d) reject

Both acceptance and dismissal of a paper require justification. If a paper requires changes, a reviewer should indicate suggested corrections in a clear way.

Revision of manuscript

A corrected article will be sent to the same reviewer for revision (several revisions are possible). The reviewer are asked to revise the article and send their recommendation concerning publication of the article within 7 days. After this time the access to the article is blocked by the Editorial System.

In case of any doubts please contact us.
 
eISSN:2353-1339
ISSN:0465-5893