Peer Review
Peer review
Manuscripts submitted for publication to RCdE will go through an initial check by the Editorial Committee to determine its relevance, scientific content and if it follows the journal´s format. Once the manuscript meets these conditions it is sent for evaluation by external reviewers (double blind) who are specialists in the subject area of the submitted manuscript, preferably an active researcher with publications in the last 3 years. The average evaluation time is estimated between 6 and 8 months. The speed of publication of a paper depends on the availability of the invited reviewers (Ad honoren), and the response time of the authors to the reviews.
Editorial decisions
RCdE reserves the right to accept or reject articles and may make suggestions to improve their content. Decisions of the journal may be as follows:
- Accept: The manuscript is accepted with minor changes. In this case the editor will request from the author(s) the final version of the manuscript and the complementary files: text in Word, tables in Excel and/or editable Word file, and final figures according to the format indicated in the instructions to authors.
- Minor changes: When the manuscript is publishable after minor changes. The editor will send to the corresponding author a copy of the evaluation and a document with the corrections requested/suggested by the reviewers. The authors will have 15 days to make the corrections and submit a revised text to the journal to continue the editing process.
- Major revisions: When the manuscript requires major changes, the editor will send a copy of the reviewers' evaluations and comments to the corresponding author. The authors will have 20 days to send the corrected version of the text, indicating the places where the changes were made with their corresponding explanation and justification. If for any reason the corresponding author cannot send the final version or the corrected version by the deadline, he/she should notify the editor to set a new deadline, which should not exceed more than 20 days. If the author does not meet the deadline, the manuscript will be considered as a new submission and the evaluation process will start over.
- Reject: If the paper is rejected, the editor will notify the author(s) stating the reasons for the rejection decision.
In addition to making corrections in the text, the authors must submit a letter to the journal answering each of the queries and comments made by the reviewers in the evaluation form and in the text sent by the anonymous reviewers. When the authors do not agree with an opinion or recommendation of a reviewer, they should provide a verifiable scientific justification for not following the recommendations.
Appeals: In case the authors do not agree with the editorial decision taken based on the external reviewers' decisions, they may present their arguments (supported by scientific literature) that shows the bias or erroneous interpretation of the evaluation. The final decision of an appeal will be analyzed and approved by the Editor-in-Chief.
Role of the reviewer
Reviewers should have a critical approach to science and focus on recognizing the originality and relevance of the manuscript, the scientific rigor of the methods used in the study, the validity of the results, the content of the discussion, as well as the impact of the study and bibliographic support. The reviewers are expected to be impartial and objective, not to discuss the content of the text in other spaces until the manuscript is published, to avoid contacting the authors during the peer-review process, to declare conflict of interest if any and to avoid any type of impersonation.