The Peer reviewing guidelines provides considerations for assessing the suitability of submitted material for publication, a guideline that facilitates an efficient peer review process. Peer reviews have the opportunity to provide comments to the author and the editor, as well as to the editor alone.

Manuscripts sent in the Original Research section are considered confidentially. The peer reviewer will receive the manuscript with all references to the author omitted, if technically possible. Unless the peer reviewer declares otherwise, he/she shall remain anonymous to the author. If a further peer reviewer comments on the manuscript, he/she will receive the comments of the previous peer reviewer(s), with the name(s) omitted. If the peer reviewer becomes aware that he/she cannot objectively evaluate the manuscript or has any conflict of interest, either with the putative Authors or with the research, he/she is obliged to decline the invitation.

The peer reviewer should strive to ensure that the comments made are objective and supported by professional arguments and evidence. The peer reviewer's opinion on a given problem or research may of course differ from that of the author, but it is always recommended that the resulting opinions are supported by scientific evidence, thereby increasing the acceptance of the dissenting opinion and the professional quality of the manuscript. The peer reviewer should only request a reference to his/her communication in cases where there is an absolute professional justification. The peer reviewer should be objective, help the authors to improve the manuscript, and not be offensive in his/her wording. The peer reviewer should endeavor to meet the deadline for the peer review.

The peer reviewer needs to remember that all manuscripts submitted for peer review are confidential and may not be shared with third parties without permission. If the involvement of a third party is required for certain issues, this should always be discussed with the responsible editor, who may permit it if necessary. Peer reviewers are required to declare, before providing a peer review, that they have no bias or interest in the subject matter, results, and conclusions of the manuscript which might affect the peer review. If the peer reviewer suspects plagiarism or other ethical misconduct in connection with the manuscript, he/she must immediately report it to the editorial board of the journal. The COPE Guidelines shall prevail in all matters relating to the ethics of peer review. It is recommended that the Author's Guidelines produced by Health Promotion (Hungary) be consulted before the preparation of a peer review. As a general point of reference for manuscripts, the "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals" apply. The peer review can be prepared by completing the peer review form appropriate to the type of manuscript. These criteria are also available for Authors at the end of the Author's Guidelines.