Home Calls for Papers Research Services Courses Editorial Repository About Us
Español English
Scientific Excellence

Editorial and Review Process

Our rigorous evaluation process ensures the quality and academic excellence of publications, complying with international standards (Double-Blind).

Editorial Workflow

1

Reception and Initial Evaluation

1-3 days

The editorial team verifies that the manuscript meets formal requirements and thematic scope. A strict originality check is performed using anti-plagiarism software.

2

Editorial Assignment

1-2 weeks

A specialized editor evaluates the scientific relevance of the manuscript and decides whether to proceed to peer review or reject it at this stage (Desk Reject).

3

Peer Review (Double-Blind)

6-8 weeks

The editor assigns at least 2 international experts (national or foreign) in the field. During this process:

  • Guaranteed anonymity: Reviewers do not know the authors' identities, and authors do not know the reviewers'.
  • Rigorous evaluation: Originality, methodological rigor, contribution to the field, and expository clarity are evaluated.
  • Tie-breaking: If evaluations are discrepant, a third deciding reviewer is called.
4

Decision and Revisions

2-4 weeks

The editor analyzes reports and issues a decision (Acceptance, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Rejection). Authors must respond to observations by addressing raised objections.

5

Editing and Final Publication

Final Stage

After scientific approval, the manuscript undergoes copyediting, layout, galley proof review, and JATS XML markup, to finally be published and digitally preserved.

Average Editorial Metrics

42
Days to first decision
78
Days to publication
87%
Initial rejection rate
3.2
Reviews per article

Transparency and Ethics

We strictly adhere to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The entire process is designed to be impartial and free from prejudices related to nationality, religious beliefs, or authors' political views.

View Author Guidelines