Peer review procedure

Peer review

Peer review provides an important role in the publication of scientific works through assessment of validity, quality and originality of submitted papers.
Shapovalov Scientific Publishing OÜ and SSP Modern Pharmacy and Medicine uses double-blind peer review model, which means that the identity of both the author and reviewer are kept hidden.

Peer review procedure

A corresponding author submits an article using our site's submission system or by e-mail. At this stage, authors can suggest appropriate reviewers for their article and include their names and email addresses to the comments section.

After being submitted, an article is being checked by Managing Editor for its structure, spelling and compliance with submission guidelines. If an article doesn't meet above criteria, it's rejected.

On the next stage, an article is passed to Editor-in-Chief, who examines an article to be in accordance with the scope of the Journal, potential interest for readers, importance and relevance for scientists. After this, Editor-in-Chief sends article either to appropriate Section Editor, or passes an article directly to two, at least, peer reviewers with specialty closest to the scope of an article. If needed, external reviewers are invited. Specialists from the same institution where study was performed are not accepted. The invited reviewers should accept terms and conditions in order to exclude conflict of interests, confirm their competence, concerning the scope of the manuscript and specify definite terms of reviewing. Then they decide to accept or decline the invitation. In case of declining, they can recommend alternative reviewers.

In accordance with COPE recommendations on ethical editing for Editors, Editors will assign any submissions they cannot handle (e.g. if they are the author of an article submitted to their own journal) to a member of the Editorial Board or a guest editor.

After reviewing, the Editor-in-Chief (or Section Editor) examines reviewers reports and, if needed, can invite an additional reviewer to get an additional opinion. At this stages, corresponding author can be asked to make revisions to an article using online submission system. Articles can be re-sent to reviewers after revision.

At the final stage, Editor-in-Chief takes the final decision concerning the publication of an article. The authors are informed about the results of reviewing.

In case of manuscript acceptance, the publication process starts. If rejected, the manuscript is sent to corresponding author.

This whole process usually takes 2 to 3 weeks.

Confidentiality of peer review

It is a requirement to maintain confidentiality and integrity of the peer review and editorial decision-making process at all stages, while complying with data protection regulations (including GDPR). The invited reviewer must declare any competing interest before submitting their report to the journal. If they wish to involve a colleague as a co-reviewer for an article, they should ask the journal’s editorial office before sharing the manuscript and include their names, affiliation and any relevant competing interests in the comments for Editors when they return their report.

All peer reviewers should consider the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers before accepting to review a manuscript and throughout the peer review process.

In the process of investigating an ethical query, the submitted manuscript, author, reviewer and any other person (including whistleblowers) involved will be treated in confidence. During an investigation it may be necessary for the Editor to share information with third parties, such as the ethics committee and/or the authors’ institution.


All journals, published my Shapovalov Scientific Publishing OÜ use a service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate — Similarity Check, provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism. All sumbitted articles checked for plagiarism using this tools. We kindly ask authors to follow COPE's Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. All manuscripts with more than 30% of similarity automatically rejected.