3. Duties of Reviewers

Contribution of Peer Review

Peer review supports the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication as a core of the scientific method.


The reviewer who does not consider himself competent to conduct the evaluation of the article or not ensure that the review is conducted within the established timeframe should notify the editor of «Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy» and refuse to conduct the review.

Standards of Objectivity

The reviewers evaluate a manuscript based on the objective criteria. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should clearly state their point of view and argue for it.

Acknowledgement of Sources

If the reviewers suspect misconduct or any information that had been previously reported and unidentified by the relevant citation the reviewer should write about it in confidence to the editor. A reviewer should report to the editor about overlapping between the manuscript under consideration and any other published article that is in the reviewer academic competence.


The reviewers must not use results of the reviewed manuscript before its publication to further their own interests. The reviewers should work confidentially with the manuscript and not discuss it with other experts.

Conflict of Interest

The reviewers must disclose to the editors any potential and actual conflicts of interest that could influence on their opinions of the manuscript, and should recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscripts if the potential for bias exists.