I work in the field of organization theory and labour sociology and to this point of my career, I have reviewed about 4-6 papers. I have been asked by a journal to review a paper. The journal's scope is Project Management with contributions from social sciences, business administration, but also construction/civil engineering.
I read the proposed paper and found that the anonymization is inadequate. The author(s) cite preliminary work in plain text and also papers that are currently still in the review process. This allows me to narrow down the authorship to a circle of five people around a PI without doing any intentional research.
While I don't know the scientists and their papers, I think this runs counter to the point of a double-blind review process.
How should this be handled? Should the paper be reviewed normally and the editors be told that the anonymization was inadequate? Or should I refrain from a review altogether?