Peer Review Statement
Applies to the proceedings track (English). Abstracts for the conference abstract book undergo editorial screening for scope and format.
Screening
- Scope check (conference topics).
- Format and completeness check.
- Similarity screening (plagiarism / redundant publication).
Review
- At least 2 independent reviewers per full paper.
- Confidential process; reviewers remain anonymous.
- Conflict of interest must be declared and managed.
Decision
- Accept
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
Revisions
- Authors submit a point‑by‑point response.
- Revisions may be sent to reviewers again (as needed).
- Deadlines are defined in the proceedings timeline.
Integrity
- No fabricated data, references, or images.
- AI use beyond spelling/grammar must be disclosed.
- Copyright permissions for third‑party materials are required.
Presentation
- Accepted papers should be presented on‑site by at least one author.
- Registration is required for presenting authors.
Downloads
A short checklist helps to make reviews consistent and auditable.
Minimum
2 reviewers
Model
single‑blind*
Decisions
4 types
Responsible
editors
* Single‑blind review is planned (reviewers anonymous). The editorial office may refine details depending on publisher requirements.
Responsible roles: Proceedings Editors / Publication Chair • Contact: biotech-congress@yandex.ru