Dental and Medical Problems

Dent Med Probl
Impact Factor (IF 2023) – 2.7
Scopus CiteScore (2023) – 4.0
Index Copernicus (ICV 2022) – 134.48
MNiSW – 70 pts
Average rejection rate (2023) – 82.91%
ISSN 1644-387X (print)
ISSN 2300-9020 (online)
Periodicity – bimonthly


Review policy

Special incentive for DMP Reviewers

Starting from July 1, 2024, the following system of APC discounts for Reviewers is introduced:

– 4 reviews – 25% APC discount;
– 8 reviews – 50% APC discount;
– 12 reviews – 75% APC discount;
– 16 reviews – 100% APC discount (awarding the Reviewer a full APC waiver).

The APC discounts concern publications in Dental and Medical Problems. The reviews need to be provided within 2 years. When the Reviewer prepares 4 reviews, they receive a 25% APC discount, and from that moment, the 2-year period is counted. Within that period, the discount is increased proportionally to the reviews submitted. After 2 years, the Reviewer's account is reset, regardless of the number of prepared reviews, and the whole procedure starts again. 

Reviewers' accounts are monitored in this respect by our Editors. However, if a Reviewer/Author knows or supposes that they are eligible for an APC waiver, they should contact the editorial office (

Review process

A manuscript that has passed the initial check is reviewed by two or more independent reviewers. Reviews are based on the so-called double-blind review policy. Editors may ask Authors to identify at least two reviewers, which does not mean, however, their automatic choice. The names of reviewers of each publication are not disclosed. The manuscript is qualified for printing after obtaining at least two (2) positive reviews. In case of even one negative review, the Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the manuscript. The list of reviewers is posted on the Journal’s website once a year.

Guidelines provided by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education:

  1. At least two independent experts not affiliated with the department are chosen to review each submitted article
  2. In case of publications written in a foreign language, at least one of the experts has to be affiliated with a foreign institution from a different country than the author of the article.
  3. The recommended model of reviewing is a double-blind process, in which author(s) and reviewers do not know the identity of one another.
  4. If a double-blind process is inapplicable, the reviewer is obliged to sign a declaration confirming the lack of conflict of interests. Conflict of interests is understood as:
    • direct personal relations (kinship, legal relations, conflict);
    • professional subordination;
    • direct scientific cooperation two years prior the preparation of the review.
  5. The review must be delivered in a written form and end with an unambiguous conclusion whether the article should be published or rejected.
  6. The rules of acceptance or rejection as well as the review form are displayed for all viewers on the website of the Publishing House or the journal or in each issue of the journal.
  7. The names of the reviewers of the particular publications/issues are not revealed. Once a year the journal makes the list of collaborating reviewers public.

Reviews must be prepared in accordance with the ethical guidelines for peer reviewers provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which are available at

Manuscripts must comply with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME). Manuscripts not conforming to the principles of the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki should not be accepted for publication.

Papers describing animal experiments can be accepted for publication only if the experiment conforms with the legal requirements binding in Poland as well as with the European Communities Council Directive 86/609/EEC as of November 24, 1986 or the National Research Council Committee for the Update of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Authors must provide a full description of the anesthetics and surgical procedures applied in their experiment.

All manuscripts must follow the international standards of reporting research, available at

Please be informed that the use of generative AI or AI-assisted technological methods to prepare the review reports is forbidden.

Binding reporting standards:

CONSORT – for clinical trials


PRISMA 2020 – for systematic reviews and meta-analyses


SQUIRE – for formal, planned studies, designed to assess the nature and effectiveness of interventions meant to improve the quality and safety of healthcare


STROBE – for observational studies in epidemiology


ARRIVE – for in vivo animal research


MOOSE – for meta-analyses of observational studies


STARD – for diagnostic accuracy studies


STREGA – for gene–disease association studies


SPQR – for qualitative research


COREQ – for qualitative research

( and (