Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer reviewers help the Editor-in-Chief in taking editorial decisions and, through the editorial office communication with the author, may also aid the author in the manuscript improving.

Promptness
Whomever invited as referee who feels unqualified enough to review the study presented in a manuscript or realizes that its immediate review will be impossible, should inform the the Editor-in-Chief so that other reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review must be handled as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or talked about with others except as authorized by the Editor-in-Chief. Reviewers should not upload the whole manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool to get assistance in the reviewing process since this may disturb the proprietary rights and authors’ confidentiality.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is improper. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments so that authors can use them for the manuscript improvement. Reviewers can make use of the guidelines as outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers as well as use as reference the Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK) (Elsevier).

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should point out  relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation, derivation, or argument that is declared as previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also inform the Editorial board of any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal awareness.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished information and / or ideas acquired through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers who have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive studies connected to the manuscripts should decline the invitation to review.