Guide for Authors

Guide for Authors2019-01-15T12:00:42+00:00



Please use our template to edit your manuscript before submitting for review.

  • Volume of a manuscript should not exceed 10.000 words, without Tables, Figures and Images.
  • Title of a manuscript should not exceed 15 words.
  • Full names and surnames of the authors, as well as full names of the author’s affiliation – university, institute, company, de­part­ment, town and country should be clearly given. Corresponding author should be indicated, and their e-mail address provided.
  • Abstract of a manuscript should be no longer than 250 words.
  • Keywords should contain 3-5 items.
  • SI units should be used throughout.
  • Abbreviations should be used according to IUPAC and ISO standards and defined when first used.
  • Footnotes should be avoided. When their use is absolutely necessary, they should be numbered consecutively using Arabic numerals and appended at the end of the manuscript.
  • References should be cited using Arabic numbers in square brackets,  according to the Vancouver referencing style. Please use our Quick Reference Guide
  • Figures and illustrations with a title and legend should be numbered consecutively (with Arabic numerals) and must be referred in the text. Images should be numbered as Figures. Additionally, Figures should be supplied as a separate file saved as jpg or tif at 300 dpi minimum. Type size in the description of axes should be proportional to the size of the Figure.
  • Tables with a title and optional legend should be numbered consecutively and must be referred in the text.
  • Acknowledgements may be included and should be placed after Conclusions and before References.


Distinguishing scientific from professional articles

The importance of usefulness of an article is not determined by whether it is scientific or professional. The difference between a scientific and a professional work is the originality of the results of research, debate and conclusions obtained by verified scientific methods. A professional paper can be more important for spreading knowledge and profession and economically more useful in application, but this does not mean it is a new contribution to the increase of scientific knowledge.

The accepted manuscripts are categorized into:

Original scientific paper is the first publication of original research. It must be presented so that the research can be repeated giving results with equal precision within the limits of the trial error, which means that the correctness of analyses and conclusions can be checked.

Scientific review is a complete review of a issue or a field of research based on already published work but contains original analyses synthesis or suggestions for further research. It has a more comprehensive introduction than the original scientific paper.

Preliminary communication includes new scientific results demanding urgent publication while the research is underway. This kind of article does not have to ensure the repetition and checking the presented results. It is published only with the author’s obligation to publish the original scientific paper when the research is completed.

Conference paper is the work presented at a professional conference organized on local, regional or state level. It will be published if it has not been published in full in Proceedings, as a report, a study etc.

Professional paper deals with the issues in the profession. It gives professional instructions and suggestions for how to solve the issue (technique, technology, methodology).

Professional review is a complete review of a professional issue (technique, technology, methodology) based on already published work indicating the best ways for solving the issue.

The papers that are not categorized include:

Presentation and communication from practical experience deals with solving the problem of particular laboratory, institution or industry and serve to inform interested parties of the solution applied.

Position paper is an essay that presents an arguable opinion about an issue.

Commentary is paper connected with actual news and condition in science and textile/clothing industry.


Open Access – Textile & Leather Review applies the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-SA 4.0) license to articles and other works we publish. This license was developed to facilitate open access – namely, free immediate access to original works of all types under the following terms. You are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) for any purpose, even commercially. Terms of use apply to attribution (You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use) and sharealike (If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original). No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

If you submit your article for publication by Textile & Leather Review, you agree to have the CC BY-SA 4.0 license applied to your work. Under this license, you as the author agree to make articles legally available for reuse, without permission or fees, for virtually any purpose. Anyone may copy, distribute, or reuse these articles, under stated terms of use. This facilitates freedom in re-use and also ensures that Textile & Leather Review content can be mined without barriers for the needs of research.


Textile & Leather Review is committed to peer review integrity and upholding the highest standards of review. Once your manuscript has been assessed for suitability by the editor, it will then be double blind peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees.

Step 1: Editors assessment – Peer review begins with submitting your manuscript to the journal. The journal editors will decide if the manuscript is suitable based on the journal’s aim and scope. The editors might reject the manuscript immediately; otherwise, the manuscript will proceed to the next stage, and into peer review.

Step 2: First round of peer review – The editor will contact researchers or academics who are experts in your field, through the Editorial Advisory Board, to read your manuscript, and suggest whether to publish your manuscript in the journal. They make an assessment of your work in terms of its originality, suitability of the description of your study design and methodology that allows replication of your work by others, appropriate and clear presentation of your study results and reliability and significance of your conclusions. Your manuscript needs to meet high review standards in order to be published in the journal.

You will then be provided with a feedback on your manuscript, telling you if any changes need to be made before it can be published. Please note that the final editorial decision on a manuscript and the choice of who to invite to review is always at the editor’s discretion.

Step 3: Revise and resubmit – You can then amend your manuscript based on the reviewer’s comments, resubmitting it with any or all changes made.

Step 4: Accepted – If everything works as described, submitted manuscript will be published.

Peer review integrity – Every article published in Textile & Leather Review undergoes peer review; its quality, validity, and relevance are assessed by independent referees within the relevant field.

Textile & Leather Review has partnered with Publons, the world’s leading peer review platform, to officially recognise your peer review contributions.

When you review for Textile & Leather Review you will be asked if you want to track, verify and get recognition for that review on Publons. You can then use your verified peer review record as evidence of your contributions to the scientific community in promotion and funding applications.


Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement – Textile & Leather Review follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers and COPE general guidelines as well


Fair play – Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality – The Editor-in-Chief and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest – Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the Editor’s own research without the explicit written consent of the author(s).

Publication decisions – The handling Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts should be published. The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal’s Editorial Board and constrained by concurrent legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.


Contribution to editorial decisions – Peer review assists the Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

Promptness – Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.

Standards of objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest – Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.


Reporting standards – Authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism – The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, they need to make sure that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. During manuscript submission authors are obliged to sign the originality research statement.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication – An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of a manuscript – Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as coauthors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in the Acknowledgement section. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and human or animal subjects – If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest – All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s Editor-in-Chief or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.

Publisher’s confirmation – In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the Editors-in-Chief, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes a prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.

The Publisher and the Journal do not discriminate on the basis of age, color, religion, creed, disability, marital status, veteran status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier status, or sexual orientation in its publishing programs, services and activities.