Confidentiality is an obligation from invitation onward
The invitation may disclose unpublished questions, results, methods, identities or editorial information. Treat this information as confidential before accepting, during review and after the assignment ends. An invitation is not permission to circulate the abstract or discuss the work.
Confidentiality protects authors' priority and participants' information while enabling candid editorial evaluation. The reviewer receives access for one limited purpose: advising the journal about the submitted work.
Know what material is protected
Confidential material includes the manuscript, figures, tables, supplementary files, protocols, underlying data, code, editorial correspondence, reviewer identities when protected by the review model, and information about submission status or decisions.
Some information may already be public through a preprint, registration record or conference presentation. That does not automatically make the journal's confidential version, reviewer exchanges, unpublished revisions or editorial deliberations public. Distinguish public sources from material obtained through review.
Access is limited to authorized review activity
Open and use the manuscript only to complete the assigned assessment. Do not use its unpublished methods, hypotheses, results or data to advance your own research, commercial activity, patents, grants or collaborations.
Do not search confidential files for information unrelated to the review or use access as a way to monitor competitors. A reviewer's scientific curiosity does not expand the purpose for which access was granted.
Secure receipt, storage and access
Use the journal's authorized editorial system where possible. Protect downloaded files and notes with appropriate device access controls; avoid shared computers, unprotected public storage and forwarding files to personal or group mailing lists.
Limit local copies to what is necessary for review. If institutional systems automatically synchronize files, consider whether their access and retention settings are compatible with the journal's confidentiality requirements. Ask the editor if a proposed workflow is uncertain.
No unauthorized sharing or informal consultation
Do not send the manuscript to a colleague, laboratory group, trainee or statistician without permission from the journal. Even a request for informal advice can reveal unpublished content or author identity.
When specialist input would materially improve the review, tell the editor what expertise is needed and request authorization before sharing. The editor may recruit another reviewer instead of approving consultation.
Co-reviewing requires editorial authorization
Training a junior researcher through co-review can be valuable, but the invited reviewer must first follow the journal's permission and contributor-identification rules. The invited reviewer should explain confidentiality requirements to any approved participant.
Do not treat a permitted co-review as a transfer of accountability. Review contributors should be identified as required by the journal, and the invited reviewer remains responsible for the report they submit.
Protect confidentiality in blinded and open review
In an anonymized process, do not deliberately investigate author identities or disclose a reviewer identity protected by the journal's model. If an identity becomes apparent naturally and creates a conflict, inform the editor rather than pursuing additional identification.
An open-review model may authorize named reports or publication of certain review materials. It does not automatically authorize publication of private correspondence, unpublished datasets or other information beyond the journal's stated arrangements.
AI tools, translation and cloud services
Do not upload an unpublished manuscript, figures, data or confidential correspondence into an external generative-AI system or other third-party service unless the journal explicitly permits that use and applicable confidentiality and data-handling conditions are met.
Translation, grammar, transcription, summarization, similarity-checking and code-analysis services can also transmit protected material. Evaluate their handling of uploads, retention, training use and access before using them. Human responsibility for the report cannot be delegated to an automated tool.
Data, code and supplementary research materials
Datasets and code supplied privately for review may contain participant information, proprietary methods, unpublished analyses or credentials. Do not copy them into unrelated repositories, distribute them or execute unfamiliar files in insecure environments.
Where verification requires specialized software or additional access, coordinate with the editor. Public availability of one dataset does not waive restrictions on other confidential materials submitted with the manuscript.
Human participants and identifiable information
Manuscripts may contain identifiable clinical images, detailed case narratives, genomic information or combinations of data that permit re-identification. Treat such content with heightened care and avoid reproducing it in unsecured notes or messages.
If a manuscript appears to reveal unnecessary identifying information or raises consent concerns, report the specific issue confidentially to the editor. Do not contact participants or seek additional identifiable data independently.
Communication stays within the editorial process
Send questions, requests for missing files and methodological concerns through the editor or designated editorial system. Do not contact authors directly about a manuscript under review unless the journal has expressly authorized that interaction.
Keep confidential comments to the editor separate from comments intended for authors. Before submitting, verify that sensitive integrity concerns, identity information or disclosures have been placed in the appropriate channel.
Integrity concerns without external disclosure
Possible plagiarism, image manipulation, data anomalies or peer-review manipulation should be reported to the editor with precise observations. A suspicion is a reason for assessment, not a license to circulate the manuscript or accuse authors publicly.
Do not independently alert employers, institutions, funders, social-media audiences or other journals as part of the assigned review. The editor should coordinate the appropriate integrity process, subject to applicable obligations and journal procedures.
Confidentiality and competing interests
If you recognize a conflict after seeing confidential information, stop and inform the editor promptly. Do not continue reviewing while privately assuming the conflict can be managed.
Recusal does not release the reviewer from confidentiality. Information already received must remain protected even if the assignment is withdrawn or transferred.
When public versions of the work exist
A preprint, trial registry entry, dataset record or public presentation may legitimately overlap with a submitted manuscript. You may use legitimately public information to understand context, subject to journal instructions and conflict rules.
Do not disclose private differences between the submitted version and the public version, reveal unpublished reviewer exchanges, or imply that public dissemination makes editorial deliberations public.
Review notes, screenshots and personal records
Notes, annotated PDFs, screenshots and copied passages may reproduce confidential information even when they are stored separately from the original file. Handle them under the same safeguards.
Avoid placing unpublished content in public presentations, teaching material, personal knowledge bases or shared collaboration spaces. If you need to document an integrity concern, use the journal's secure communication channel.
After submitting the review
Confidentiality continues after the report is filed, after an editorial decision and, where applicable, after the article appears. Do not discuss private reviewer exchanges or disclose protected identities merely because the scientific findings become public.
Follow the journal's instructions for retention or secure deletion of downloaded files and notes. If the editor requests clarification or re-review, continue using authorized channels.
If a breach or accidental disclosure occurs
Notify the editorial office promptly if a confidential file was sent to the wrong person, uploaded to an unauthorized service, stored in an exposed location or otherwise disclosed. Explain what was shared, when and with whom, to the extent known.
Do not conceal a breach or attempt an undocumented workaround. The journal can assess containment, author notification and any additional steps appropriate to the circumstances.
Distinguish confidentiality from suppressing legitimate concerns
Confidentiality does not require ignoring serious safety, ethics or integrity concerns. It requires using the appropriate authorized route and sharing only information needed for responsible assessment.
Where a reviewer believes an exceptional legal or safeguarding obligation applies, they should obtain appropriate guidance and, where feasible, coordinate with the editor rather than assuming ordinary public disclosure is permitted.
Pre-submission and end-of-review security audit
Before beginning, confirm that your devices, storage, collaborators and tools can protect the files. Before submitting, check that no confidential material appears in the wrong report field and that all citations or excerpts are necessary to explain your review.
At completion, close unauthorized access, follow the journal's retention rules and retain no material for personal advantage. If unsure whether a file or note may be kept, ask the editorial office.
Treata confidentiality standard for reviewers
Treata expects reviewers to treat all nonpublic submission and editorial material as confidential from invitation onward, use it only for the assigned review, share it only when authorized and safeguard it in storage, communication and permitted digital tools.
Reviewers should seek permission for co-reviewing, respect the journal's review model, report integrity concerns through the editor, disclose breaches promptly and follow journal-specific retention instructions. These responsibilities operate alongside Treata's Peer Review, Competing Interests, Artificial Intelligence and Research Integrity policies.
Continue learning
Related reviewer guidance
Publisher-wide standards