1. Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions.
2. Promptness: In the event that a selected reviewer feels unqualified to complete a prompt review of a manuscript within the stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the Editorial Office, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.
3. Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage or be shown to, or discussed with others except as authorized by the editors.
4. Conflict of interest: Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscripts.
5. Standards of objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper.
6. Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any kind of similarity or overlap between the manuscripts under consideration or with any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge must be immediately brought to the editor's notice.