“…If the committee has invited you to review a manuscript, please consider the following: Reviewing manuscript critically, but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors improve their work Reviewing multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary Providing all required information within established deadlines Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review Reporting possible research misconducts Suggesting alternative reviewers in case they cannot review the manuscript for any reasons Treating the manuscript as a confidential document Not making any use of the work described in the manuscript Not communicating directly with authors, if somehow they identify the authors Not identifying themselves to authors Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original work Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge Writing review report in English only Authoring a commentary for publication related to the reviewed manuscript. …”

“…Besides, the conference featured a Late Breaking Results track, where original and unpublished ideas that are still in the early stages of research were encouraged. …”

“…The book is based on extensive and original material, as it turned out by studying of secondary literature that many details are based on not provable sources. …”