Ethical principles in reviewer work
The reviewer provides scientific expertise of author materials whereupon his/her action must be impartial in nature and follow the basic principles:
A manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document, which cannot be transmitted for review or discussion to third parties who do not have full powers from a publisher.
Reviewers must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
A reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned assessment to study results. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
The reviewer who, in his/her opinion, is not qualified to assess the manuscript, or cannot be objective, for example, in the case of a conflict of interest with the author or the organization, must inform the editor with a request to exclude him/her from reviewing this manuscript.
A reviewer should report potential ethical issues in the paper to the editor, including plagiarism and other substantial overlaps between published manuscripts with no relevant citation.
The ethics code of scientific publications was developed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Scientific Publications.
The current text of the Code is available on https://publicationethics.org/
Non-profit partnership "The Ethics Committee of Scientific Publications"
Russia, Moscow, firstname.lastname@example.org