Contribution to editorial decisions

The peer-reviewing process assists the editor in chief and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and helping the author to improve his / her research.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor in chief and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. The manuscripts cannot be disclosed or discussed with others, except for the editor in chief of the journal.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. The review must be reinforced by clear opinions and scientific arguments, and it must be in accordance with the journal’s regulations.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers must notify the editor in chief in case there is similarity or overlap between their manuscript submitted to the journal and any other published research.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

It is not allowed for reviewers to use any information and ideas stated in the reviewed manuscripts for personal purposes, competitive interests, or any other interests. Reviewers should not consider 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 associated with the papers.