Peer review process

Once the article is received, the virtual platform automatically sends the author a message confirming receipt. Then, the preliminary evaluation begins by the Associate Editor, a member of the Editorial Committee of the journal, who verifies: that the checklist of the publication requirements that the author responds to on the platform is met, plus the relevance of the subject of the article and its quality. If the article is approved by the specialist, it suggests names of reviewers for it. Once this has happened, the Editorial Team invites the suggested reviewers by email or searches the platform's registry for other reviewers based on their areas of interest. If there is no success in the invitations, specialists are sought in the subject of the article, in different databases or mainstream journals; those reviewers who agree to review, the Editorial Team registers them on the platform, to start the peer review process through it, ensuring the anonymity of the authors and reviewers in the evaluation and approval process of the manuscripts (double blind). At least, each article must have three evaluators.

If there are discrepancies in the final recommendation among the participating reviewers, it is sent to the corresponding member of the Editorial Committee, so that they issue their final recommendation, which is reported to the authors.

Once reviewed by the reviewing peers, the author is informed of the Editorial Decision through the virtual platform, with the following alternatives: approval with minor modifications, major modifications, re-evaluation of the article or definitive rejection of it.

If the final recommendation of the review is a Re-evaluation, the new version received from the authors is sent for a Second Round of evaluation to those reviewers who recommended its re-evaluation. The lack of response from these reviewers is replaced by sending the new version to the member of the corresponding Editorial Committee, for their final decision.