REVIEW PROCEDURE FOR MANUSCRIPTS

All manuscripts submitted for publication must go through the review process. This journal uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process.

1. All manuscripts are initially treated by editors to assess their compliance with the requirements of the journal and the subject. Incomplete packages or manuscripts not prepared in the advised style will be sent back to author(s) with suggestions for correction.
2. Manuscripts, which  follow the requirements, are sent to one (or more) reviewers for review with hidden name of author.
3. The reviewer reads received manuscript.  The main criteria for manuscript evaluation include the originality and novelty of the research, importance of the topic for the field, as well as its accessibility and interest for experts in different fields of sport science. Reviewer checks the relevance and completeness  of aim, methods, results and their discussion.  Reviewer also checks the suitability of article to the principles of ethics of scientific publications upon recommendations of COPE. Reviewer leave comments about the article and possible improvements. Reviewer assigns a general priority level:
   • (a) manuscript accepted for publication;
   • (b) manuscript returned to authors with suggestions for the correction;
   • (c) manuscript rejected (indicating the reasons).
4. In case ‘b’ manuscript sent to reviewer after correction (to check if the manuscript is improved adequately) for the final concluding .
5. In the event that a journal’s publisher, editors or reviewers are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct (plagiarism, fabricated data, manipulating, ghostwriting, guest authorship etc.) relating to a published article in their journal, the publisher or editor follows COPE’s guidelines and adequate institutions will be informed (institutions employing the author, scientific societies, scientific editors associations etc.). Reviewer can ask redactors to check article for plagiarism, using «UniCheck» program.
6. The preliminary evaluation process usually takes approximately 3 weeks.
7. The final decision about publishing the article make Chief-Editor and Editorial Board members during Editorial Board meeting.  Issue of journal is approving by Scientific Council of National University of Ukraine on Physical Education and Sport.

Conflict of interests

1. Authors, editors and reviewers of journal are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest that could interfere with the objectivity or integrity of a publication.
2. The editorial office should acquire information on sources of financing of a publication, financial contributions of research institutions, scientific associations and other («financial disclosure»).
3. Authors should disclose at the time of submission any financial arrangement they may have. Such information will be held in confidence while the paper is under review and will not influence the editorial decision, but if the article is accepted for publication, the editors will usually discuss with the authors the manner in which such information is to be communicated to the reader.
4. The journal expects that authors will not have any financial interest in a company (or its competitor) that makes a product discussed in the article. Journal policy requires that reviewers, editors reveal in a letter to the Editor-in-Chief any relationships that they have that could be construed as causing a conflict of interest with regard to a manuscript under review. The letter should include a statement of any financial relationships with commercial companies involved with a product under study.