Taking into account that the analysis and evaluation of a scientific article submitted by the author (or one of the co-authors) for publication in the journal “Bulletin of the Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education” is conducted confidentially through double-blind peer review, where the reviewer does not know who the author of the article is, and the author does not know who is reviewing their article, the reviewer must adhere to the following ethical standards:

• treat work on a scientific article as confidential;
• provide an objective assessment of the scientific article under review within the allotted time frame (and refrain from making personal criticisms in the review);
• explain one’s own judgment regarding the reviewed scientific article and provide reasoning so that the author(s) can understand the basis for such judgment;
• report any similarities between the reviewed scientific article and another article, whether already published or currently under consideration by the editorial board of another publication;
• ensure the confidentiality of any unpublished data, their interpretation, or other information from the scientific article and not use information contained in the reviewed unpublished work in their own research;
• to the best of their knowledge, inform the executive editor if the reviewed scientific article contains plagiarized material or falsified data;
• not to retain copies of the reviewed scientific article in any form, in order to avoid violating the requirements of laws and regulations governing copyright.