Peer Review

Physical Rehabilitation and Recreational Health Technologies employs a Double-Blind Peer Review process.
  • The identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers.
  • The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.
    This ensures maximum objectivity and prevents any potential conflicts of interest or bias.
Initial Screening (Internal Review)
Every manuscript undergoes an initial assessment by the Editorial Board to ensure:
  • Alignment with the journal’s Aims and Scope.
  • Compliance with the Author Guidelines (formatting, structure).
  • Plagiarism screening (minimum 80% originality required via iThenticate/Turnitin).
    Manuscripts that do not meet these basic requirements are rejected at this stage (Desk Rejection) without further review.
External Peer Review Process
  • Each manuscript is sent to at least two independent external experts (reviewers) specializing in the relevant field.
  • Reviewers evaluate the scientific novelty, methodological rigor, relevance of literature, and validity of conclusions.
  • The average duration of the peer review process is 4–8 weeks.
Reviewer Decisions
Based on the reviewers' reports, the Editorial Board makes one of the following decisions:
  1. Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted in its current form.
  2. Minor Revisions: The manuscript is accepted provided the authors address small technical or stylistic issues.
  3. Major Revisions: The manuscript requires significant scientific improvement and must undergo a second round of review.
  4. Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to low scientific quality, significant methodological flaws, or lack of novelty.
Final Decision
The final decision on publication is made at a meeting of the Editorial Team based on the recommendations of the reviewers. The Editorial Team reserves the right to reject a manuscript if the authors fail to address the reviewers' comments adequately.
 
Ethical Responsibilities
  • Confidentiality: All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are prohibited from using data from unpublished works for personal gain.
  • Objectivity: Reviews must be conducted impartially. Personal criticism of the author is considered unprofessional and unacceptable.
  • Competing Interests: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting the invitation to review.

Publication by Editorial Board Members and Editor-in-Chief

  • Transparency: Editorial Board members and the Editor-in-Chief are permitted to submit manuscripts to the journal. However, the process is strictly managed to avoid any conflict of interest.
  • Recusal: If an author or co-author is a member of the Editorial Board or the Editor-in-Chief, they are completely excluded from the decision-making process regarding that manuscript.
  • Independent Review: Such submissions are assigned to at least two external independent reviewers who have no affiliation with the authors’ institution.
  • Disclosure: The published article must include a statement disclosing the author’s editorial role and confirming that they were not involved in the peer review or editorial decision for their own work.

The Conflict of Interest Statements  section of the manuscript will include:

[Author Name] is a member of the Editorial Board [or Editor-in-Chief] of Physical Rehabilitation and Recreational Health Technologies. To ensure a fair and transparent review process, the author was completely excluded from the editorial handling, peer review coordination, and decision-making regarding this manuscript. This article underwent independent double-blind peer review by external experts who have no affiliation with the authors.

Policy on Manuscripts from the Publishing Institution

The Journal welcomes high-quality research from the faculty of the Kharkiv State Academy of Physical Culture. To ensure an unbiased peer-review process, the following rules apply:
  1. If an author or co-author is affiliated with the same institution as the Editor-in-Chief or the Handling Editor, these editors are strictly recused from managing the manuscript.
  2. Such materials are assigned to the Deputy editor-in-chief.
  3. Manuscripts from the publishing institution must undergo double-blind peer review by at least two external experts who have no affiliation with said institution.
  4. The proportion of articles from the publishing institution is strictly monitored and limited (usually not exceeding 20–25% per issue) to maintain international diversity.
  5. The published paper will include a statement in the "Conflict of Interest" section disclosing the editorial affiliation and confirming that the editor was not involved in the decision-making process.