In the journal Prospecting and Development of Oil and Gas Fields, peer review is a mandatory procedure designed to ensure the scientific quality of publications and adherence to academic and ethical standards. Its main purpose is to select the most significant research, assess originality and relevance, and verify compliance with the journal’s requirements. Reviewers are expected to act impartially and to follow the principles set out in the Publication Ethics section.

The journal employs a double-blind review system: authors do not know who evaluates their work, and reviewers have no information about the authors. Only manuscripts that match the scope of the journal, are properly formatted, and have passed the initial editorial check are admitted for review.

The preliminary evaluation is carried out by the Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editor. In cases of conflict of interest (such as authorship, co-authorship, family or professional connections), the evaluation is delegated to another member of the Editorial Board. After registration, the manuscript is assigned a unique code and all details identifying the authors are removed.

The anonymised manuscript is then sent to the Editorial Board member responsible for the relevant research area (to manage the review process; in exceptional cases and in the absence of a conflict of interest, a member of the editorial board may also act as a reviewer) and to two independent experts from Ukraine or abroad. Reviewers must be senior scholars (Doctor of Sciences or equivalent) in the corresponding field, unaffiliated with the authors’ institution, and without any conflict of interest.

During the review process, attention is paid to the correspondence between title and content, the novelty and relevance of the topic, the practical value of the results, and their contribution to the scientific community. Based on their evaluation, reviewers may recommend one of the following: accept for publication; accept after minor corrections; accept subject to substantial revision; reject. In cases of rejection or revision, a written justification must be provided.

Authors receive the Editorial Board’s decision together with the reviewers’ comments, though the reviewers’ identities remain undisclosed. Revised manuscripts may be resubmitted for evaluation, but acceptance after revision is not guaranteed.

The final decision on publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account the reviewers’ conclusions. If the Editor-in-Chief is an author of the manuscript or has any conflict of interest, the decision is made by the Deputy Editor. All signed reviews (in paper or electronic form) are kept in the editorial office for three years after the issue’s publication.

The usual review period is 2-4 weeks, while the average time to the first editorial decision is 4-8 weeks.