Peer review process

Stages of the article evaluation process

Once the Originals are received, compliance with the rules for submitting articles is controlled, approved the same goes to the Editorial Committee who controls the methodological parts and the Research guidelines of the Journal and Scientific Advisory Committee the specificity of the subject of the article. If it is adjusted, it will be subjected to a double blind evaluation by two pairs, at least one of them must be external to the journal. In order to settle any controversy, a third evaluator will be used who will define the instance.

The evaluation procedure used is double blind, to guarantee anonymity in the process it is necessary for the authors to send a version of the document in which they have withdrawn all kinds of information from which it could be possible to infer who the authors are. In the case in which they cite themselves in the text, they must use the word author replacing their name, accompanying the year of publication. Two copies must be sent, one anonymous and one with the names. The Editorial Committee will inform the authors about the result of the evaluation, maintaining the anonymity of the evaluators.

In any of the three stages and if necessary, before following the circuit, the author is sent for the corresponding correction and once it is received, the next stage is continued. If the author does not return corrected 10 (ten) days after sending the article with the observations, it will be considered that it is withdrawn.

Possible Results of the Assessment

All articles will be submitted to an evaluation on which their publication will depend.
Possible results are: Publish / Don't Publish / Possibly Publish

If the evaluation is positive (Publish) the result will be reported to the author responsible for the article. When the evaluation is negative (No Publish) the decision to reject the article is final; If the author wishes to continue with the publication process, he or she may send a new version of his article, starting the evaluation process again in order to examine whether the new version is ready to be published.
In the event that the result is Possibly Publish and changes are requested, the author must send a new version according to the adjustments requested by the evaluator, respecting the 10-day deadline for it to be considered. Said article must go through all the stages of the evaluation process again.