1. A reviewer has the responsibility to protect the confidentiality of the ideas represented in the papers. He should not show the paper to anyone else or use ideas from papers he reviews to develop new ones.
2. If a reviewer feels inadequately qualified or lacks the time to judge the manuscript, he should return it promptly to the Editor.
3. A reviewer should judge the quality of the manuscript objectively.
4. A reviewer should be sensitive to the appearance of a conflict of interest. If in doubt, the reviewer should return the manuscript promptly without review, advising the Editor of the conflict of interest or bias.
5. A reviewer should not evaluate a manuscript authored or co-authored by a person with whom the reviewer has a personal or professional connection if the relationship would bias judgment of the manuscript.
6. A reviewer should provide sufficient comments for the manuscript and explain his judgments adequately so that Editors and authors may understand.
7. A reviewer should remind the authors of the failure to cite relevant work by other scientists.
8. A reviewer should call to the Editor’s attention, if there is any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any published paper or any manuscript submitted concurrently to another journal.