Peer Review process
The evaluation process consists of three steps, namely:
1. Preliminary analysis by the editors to verify: adherence to the general instructions defined by the editorial policy; the focus and scope of the journal, the relevance and contribution of the text, and similarity analysis of all submitted documents using the Turnitin platform. Research involving animals and humans must include ethics committee certificates issued by their research institution upon submission. In case of doubts about the documentation provided, the journal may reject the article. Articles that do not meet the criteria will be returned to the authors for corrections as many times as necessary. If the works are deemed inadequate or do not comply with the journal's standards, they may be rejected based on the evaluation; otherwise, they will be sent for peer review.
2. Forwarding to reviewers: The article that complies with the standards will be submitted for merit and scientific method evaluation by at least two ad hoc reviewers from institutions other than that of the authors, selected by the editors among world specialists in the field. In line with open science practices, the journal offers authors and reviewers options for an open peer review process, with or without identification of their names. Authorization for the disclosure of names can be provided by the authors at the time of article submission and by the reviewers when completing the Open Science Compliance Statement. In the event of the publication of the reviews that supported the decision to publish the article, they may be edited by the journal's editorial board. Reviewers will have six weeks to recommend through the TCAM portal one of the following options:
- Accept
- Revisions required
- Rejection
After analyzing the reviewer reports, the editors forward the decision to the authors. If the decision is "revisions required," the article is returned to the authors for correction, modification, adjustment, and/or justification according to the reviewers' comments. The revised manuscript should be submitted to the TCAM portal by the same author who submitted the original manuscript. The revised version of an article should be resubmitted along with a cover letter explaining each change requested by the reviewers. Suggestions that are not accepted should be properly justified. Changes must be highlighted in the text. Care should be taken to maintain the confidentiality of the authors' identity. Editors evaluate the revised article and cover letter and will forward them to the reviewers when needed. In the event of rejection of the article by one of the two reviewers, the editors will decide whether to send it for evaluation by a third reviewer. Editors are responsible for the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of articles.
3. The corrected article is then resubmitted to the reviewers for further analysis. Upon approval, the article is forwarded for typesetting. The final proofs of the articles are sent to the corresponding author in PDF format for final approval. If necessary, the author has 72 hours to correct and return the revised original. If there is no response to the proof within 72 hours, the Editor-in-Chief considers the unchanged version final, and significant modifications are no longer allowed. Only minor changes, such as spelling corrections and verification of illustrations, are accepted. Extensive modifications necessitate reevaluation by the reviewers and may result in delays in the publication of the article.
