1. Two independent reviewers from outside the author’s place of work are appointed to assess each publication.
2. The rule is observed that authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identity (so-called double-blind process). Until the article is published, all contact between the author and the reviewer shall be made only through the editorial team.
3. The reviewer declares no conflict of interests, stating that the following do not occur between the reviewer and the author:
   a) direct personal relationships (kinship, legal relations, conflict),
   b) relations of professional subordination,
   c) immediate scientific cooperation within the last two years preceding the preparation of the review.
4. The reviewer is required to keep confidential all details of the reviewed article.
5. The reviewer is not allowed to use the unpublished article.
6. Reviews are confidential and are shared only with those involved in the editorial process.
7. The review must have a written form and it must end with an explicit conclusion indicating whether the paper should be admitted or rejected for publication – reviewer’s form.
8. The author receives two reviews for consultation and they give their written opinion on the reviewers’ remarks.
9. The list of reviewers of papers published and rejected in a given year is published once a year, in last issue and on the Internet website.

Review form [download file]

Reviewer’s statement [download file]