The reviewer carries out an expertise of the authors’ materials, due to which his activities must be unbiased, in observance of the following principles.

Confidentiality

- The manuscript submitted for reviewing must be considered as a confidential document which cannot be handed over for studying or discussing to third persons unauthorized to do so by the Editorial Board. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for reviewing cannot be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.

Objectivity      

- The reviewer must give an objective and reasoned estimate of the results presented in the investigation. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. A reviewer who does not consider himself enough qualified for estimating a manuscript, must inform the editor about it, asking to exclude him from the process of reviewing the manuscript in question.

Relevant researches

- The reviewer must pay attention to the substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and the other previously published work, which is known to the reviewer. Reviewers should point the presence of sources that have influenced the results of the research, but were not given by the author.

Impartiality

- The reviewer is obliged to refuse to review the article if there is a conflict of interests of a scientific or financial nature in relation to the author or organization.

Punctuality

- The reviewer assumes the obligation to review the manuscript within 3 weeks (unless otherwise agreed with the editors). If is not possible to return a review by the due date for any reason, the reviewer must notify the editor as the deliberate review delay or negligence of the review process  contradict generally accepted ethical standards.