Peer review

A double peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of "Eurasian Physical Technical Journal". This means that the authors are aware of the reviewers, nor the maintains any contact with the reviewer. The manuscripts are sent to two reviewers.

  1. Members of the editorial board and leading international experts in corresponding areas of life sciences are invited to perform an independent peer reviewing. Editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief or science editor choose readers for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 6-8 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
  2. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:

- to accept the paper in its present state;

- to invited the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;
- that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;
- to reject the manuscript outright.

  1. If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 2 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
  2. If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must notify the editors in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after 3 months from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the article, the editors remove it from the register. In such situations, the authors are sent an appropriate notification of the removal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the time allotted for revision.
  3. If the author and reviewers have unresolvable contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor is obliged to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the chief editor of the editorial office or the editorial board.
  4. The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
  5. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
  6. The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient reason for publishing an article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
  7. Reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for 3 years.

The editorial office of the journal sends copies of reviews to the Ministry of Science and Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan upon receipt of the corresponding request by the editorial office