The scientific articles, being sent to the publishing house, pass through reviewing. The double- blind peer (anonymous) review process is used in the Journal :
- the personal data of the author/authors are not revealed to the reviewer;
- the personal data of the reviewer are not revealed to the author/authors. .
The scientific articles, being sent to the publishing house, pass through the initial control of the completeness and  correctness of their formation and correspondence to the Requirements to Manuscripts, presented in the site.

The Responsible Editor defines the correspondence of the article to the Journal profile and directs it to the reviewing of the expert, the doctor or the candidate of sciences, having the scientific specialization, which is close to the article by its theme.

The reviewing term is defined by the Responsible Editor in each separate case, taking into account the creation of conditions for the maximally operative publication of the article.

The following problems should be revealed in the review :

• the correspondence of the article contents to the name of the declared theme ;
• the article correspondence to the modern achievements of the scientific- theoretical thought;
• the accessibility of the article to the readers, whom it is relied upon, from the view of the language, style, material location, the presence of tables, diagrams, drawings, etc;
• the practicability of the article publication, taking into account the present publications on this theme ;
• the definition of the positive positions and drawbacks of the article, corrections and additions to be entered by the author ;
• the absence of borrowings from the works of the other investigators without the proper reference to the latest ones ;
• the conclusion on the possibility of the manuscript publication in the Journal : “recommended”, “recommended, taking into account the correction of the drawbacks, defined by the reviewer” or “not recommended”.

The reviews are certified, according to the order, established in the institution, where the reviewer is working. The presence of the positive review is not the enough reason for the article’s publication. The final decision on the practicability of the publication is accepted by the Editorial Board. The articles of the authors without the scientific degree and postgraduates are accepted with the review of the scientific leader or the expert with the scientific degree in the indicated branch of knowledge. After the Editorial Board’s adoption  of the decision on the article’s admission to publication, the Responsible Secretary informs the author on that and states the term of publication. The originals of reviews are kept in the Editorial Board and in the publishing house of the Scientific Journal PNAP.