Scientific articles submitted to the Editorial Board of the scientific and methodical collection “Criminalistics and Forensics”, a scientific, professional publication, are passed through the peer review of the Institute. It should be noted that the articles of doctors and candidates of science are not reviewed.
Forms of articles’ peer review:
– internal (reviewing manuscripts of articles by members of the Editorial Board, employees of Kyiv Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise or by specialists of those educational institutions that initiated the submission of the article);
– external (reviewing by leading experts in the relevant field of forensic science, criminal process, forensic examination and intelligence operations as well as forensic medicine).
The executive secretary determines the compliance of the article with the profile of the scientific and methodological collection “Criminalistics and Forensics” and the requirements for the articles’ design.
Articles are sent for peer review to specialists (doctors or candidates of science) who are leading experts in this field of knowledge.
The terms of peer review in each case are determined by the executive secretary, taking into account the conditions for the most rapid publication of the article.
The peer review should highlight the following issues:
– whether the content of the article corresponds to its title;
– to what extent the article corresponds to the modern achievements of scientific and theoretical thought;
– whether the article is available to readers on whom it is designed in terms of language, style, location of the material, visibility of tables, charts, drawings, etc;
– whether the publication of the article expedient in the light of the previously issued literature on this issue; what exactly are the positive aspects, as well as the shortcomings of the article, corrections and additions must be made by the author;
– conclusion about the possibility of publishing this scientific article in the collection: “recommended”, “recommended, taking into account the corrections of the deficiencies indicated by the reviewer” or “not recommended”.
The article, not recommended by the reviewer for publication, is not accepted for reconsideration.
Having a positive peer review is not sufficient reason to publish an article.
The final decision on the expediency of publication is made by the Editorial Board of a scientific, professional edition.