Peer review process

All the submitted manuscripts will be evaluated through a double-blind (view format) process and go through the following stages.

Filter review. To establish whether a manuscript merits an external evaluation, the Editor-in-Chief carries out a preliminary review of the manuscript’s relevance and compliance with quality criteria and editorial policy.

External evaluation. Once the first filter has been approved, the manuscript is assigned to at least two external reviewers, experts on the subject, who will independently submit their concept to the Editor-in-Chief. This assessment will be carried out following the evaluation format established for this process.

Possible verdicts. The manuscript can be rejected, accepted after major corrections, accepted after minor corrections, or fully accepted. If one reviewer accepts the manuscript in any of its forms and the other rejects it, a third reviewer will be considered to settle the conflict.

Communication of the evaluation process. The Editor-in-Chief will send the authors the reviewers´ comments requesting adjustments. The authors must resubmit the document with the performed changes, indicating and differentiating them in the text and a reply letter indicating, point-by-point, how each of the observations was addressed. If some comments are not addressed, the authors must state the reason and the literature supporting the decision. The authors have 15 days to correct the manuscript for minor revisions and one month for major revisions. If the manuscript is rejected, the authors will be informed, and the reviewers’ comments attached.

Review of corrections. The corrected manuscript will be sent to the reviewers for their final decision. If none or only one reviewer responds, the Editor-in-Chief will make the final decision based on the submitted manuscript’s corrected version.

Appeals. If the authors disagree with the decision, they will have three (3) business days to send a reply letter counterarguing the decision, explaining how they will resolve the issues with the manuscript or presenting literature supporting the authors’ opinion, or verifying the evaluator’s bias. The Editor-in-Chief will have the final decision on appeals.

Evaluation process times. The evaluation process will take approximately four (4) months, depending on the reviewers’ availability and the authors’ response. If the process takes longer, the Editor-in-Chief will contact the authors to inform them about the process.

Instructions for reviewers
Before agreeing to review a manuscript, reviewers must be sure that the manuscript is within their area of expertise. They must disclose any conflicts of interest and refrain from carrying out the review process if they exist. Manuscripts are confidential; reviewers must maintain such confidentiality before, during, and after the review process.

In evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should focus on the following:

- Originality
- Contribution to the field of knowledge
- Technical quality
- Clarity of presentation
- Extent of the investigation

The report submitted to the Editor must be accurate, objective, constructive, and unambiguous. Comments must be supported by facts and arguments regarding the manuscript’s content.

The reviewers must issue a concept using the following terms:

- Accepted
- Requires minor corrections
- Requires major corrections
- Rejected