Editorial Process

The editorial process consists of 9 steps that the manuscripts sent for evaluation must be approved sequentially

The Editorial Manager of the journal is in charge of verifying compliance with the ethical and formal requirements established in the "Author Guidelines." Then, the article is specifically reviewed with specialized software for the detection and prevention of plagiarism. If the manuscript is compliant, it is submitted to the Editor for assessment. The editorial manager also ensures that the procedures are properly followed and that the assessment deadlines are met on time.

The Editor of the journal analyzes the relevance of the manuscript within the scope and objectives of the journal and the interest of the subject developed. If the manuscript is relevant, it is assigned to an associate editor according to the subject areas for assessment.

The associate editor of the journal analyzes the originality, innovation and scientific/technological contribution of the manuscript. If the manuscript is of interest and complies with the requirements, external peer reviewers from relevant databases are appointed.

The reviewers prepare an assessment report considering the following parameters, if applicable, a) alignment with the scope of the journal b) innovation/relevance c) methodology d) data analysis e) quality of data presentation f) conclusions, and g) references. The reviewers will have a period of 30 days to complete their review. If the reviewers do not reply within that period, new reviewers will be appointed.

The associate editor manages the evaluation process by monitoring each of the reviewers. Once a minimum of two assessment reports are obtained, a recommendation for resolution  is made to the Editor. In case of a discrepancy between reviewers, the associate editor may request the report of a new assessor.

The Editorial Manager analyzes the recommendation of the associate editor and communicates to the Editor who will make a final decision and will inform the corresponding author, adding the reports of the assessors, keeping their identities confidential.

In case the resolution is a rejection, the manuscript is returned to the corresponding author with the corresponding observations. The corresponding author is free to send the manuscript to another journal for assessment.

In case the resolution is to request a reviewed version, with or without minor adjustments, the new manuscript is assigned to the same associate editor for processing, who will prepare a new recommendation to the editor directly or with the support of peer reviewers as decided.

In case the resolution is to accept the manuscript, it will be assigned to the editorial process team who will proceed with the publication process. Only minor editorial changes can be made to the manuscript during this process. Any major change will imply a new revision of the manuscript by the same associate editor.