Manuscripts should be reviewed with safeguarding confidentiality of the authors. The authors trust the editorial office the results of their scientific work and creative efforts, which may influence their reputation and career. The author's rights may be violated in case of promulgation of confidential information while reviewing. Reviewers also have the right for confidentiality, that should be preserved by editorial office. Confidentiality can be disturbed only in case of fraud and dishonesty.
The editorial office should not disclose information about the manuscripts (including their receipt, content, status in the reviewing process, critique from reviewers or final result) to anybody except authors and reviewers. It includes requests for the materials using for legal actions.
The editorial office must clearly explain to their reviewers that the manuscripts that are sent for review are private property of the authors. Therefore, reviewers and editors should respect the rights of the authors without discussing their work publicly. They are not allowed to appropriate oneself ideas before the manuscript publication. Reviewers are forbidden to make copies of manuscripts for their files, to transfer them to third parties, except the editorial office permission presence. Reviewers must return or destroy copies of manuscripts after submitting the reviewing form. The editorial office must not keep copies of rejected manuscripts.
Reviewers comments can`t be published or be promulgated in another way without the permission from the reviewer, author and editor.
The journal "Endovascular Neuroradiology" does not publish review together with the manuscript. We believe that such procedure is unacceptable and break confidentiality of authors and reviewers. The review may be published with manuscript and explanations by the both permissions (author and reviewer) only after the decision at the general meeting of the editorial board, council and the founders' representatives in cases of conflict (disagreement of the author with comments of the reviewer, disagreement with the refuse to publish, cases of plagiarism detection, violation of ethical norms, conflict of interests, etc.).