1. Two independent reviewers from outside the author’s place of work are appointed to assess each manuscript.
2. The rule is observed that authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identity (so-called double-blind process). Until the manuscript 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 manuscript.
5. The reviewer is not allowed to use the unpublished manuscript.
6. The reviewer is not allowed to use any generative artificial intelligence tools to perform the review.
7. Reviews are confidential and are shared only with those involved in the editorial process.
8. The reviewer is obliged to review the manuscript within the agreed deadline. If the reviewer cannot undertake the review or meet the deadline, he/she should immediately inform the editorial office.
9. The reviewer is required to fill out the review form.
10. The review form includes an explicit concusion indicatind whether the manuscript should be accepted or declined.
11. The authors receive two reviews for consultation and they give their written opinion on the reviewers’ remarks.
12. The editor-in-chief decides about the final approval or rejection of the submitted manuscripts, taking into account the opinions of editors and reviewers.
13. 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Review form (out-of-date)

Reviewer's statement (out-of-date)