Review ethics of scientific publications

The reviewers should:

  • rapidly respond to the offer to write a review especially if they are not going to write it;
  • explicitly state it if they do not have sufficient knowledge of the research subject;
  • declare any possible conflict of interests ( e.g. related to personal, financial, intellectual, political or religious interests);
  • observe the confidentiality of information or ideas received in the course of reviewing ; prevent their use for personal gains;
    refuse to write a review if they feel they will be unable to make an impartial and fair assessment;
  • involve anybody ,including their assistants, in drafting a review only if the journal Editorial Board agree to it;
  • promptly notify the journal if any errors are encountered in the work ,there are any doubts about the ethics of the work, there is any similarity between the manuscript and another document or there is a suspicion of inequitable conduct at the time of research or submission of the manuscript to the journal;
  • carry out the review writing within a reasonable period of time;
  • contact the authors directly only with a prior permission of the journal Editorial Board;
  • prepare an objective and meaningful review that may help the authors to improve their manuscripts;
  • refrain from derogatory personal comments or ungrounded accusations;
  • be particular in their critics and justify their general conclusions with strong evidence and relevant references;
  • review changes made in the manuscript or a new version of the manuscript at the request of the journal Editorial Board.