|   |   | 


1. To evaluate each publication, at least two independent reviewers are appointed, if possible outside the unit affiliated by the author of the article.
2. In the case of texts in a foreign language, at least one of the reviewers is affiliated with a foreign institution other than the author of the work.
3. The recommended solution is a model in which the author (s) and reviewers do not know their identities (the so-called "double-blind review process"). The editors do not reveal to the authors articles of the reviewers.
4. In case, that the reviewer and the author of the article come from the same unit or know each other, the reviewer must sign a declaration of no conflict of interest; a conflict of interest is considered to occur between the reviewer and the author: a) direct personal relationships (kinship, legal relationships, conflict), b) professional subordination relationships, c) direct scientific cooperation during the last two years preceding preparation of a review.
5. The review is in written form and ends with a clear conclusion as to release of an article for publication or its rejection.
6. The rules for qualifying or rejecting publications are made public on the journal's website
7. The names of the reviewers of particular articles are not disclosed. Once a year, the editorial office publishes a list of cooperating reviewers on the journal's website.
>>> Reviewing rules

>>> General rules and guidelines for publication of articles

>>> Review template