Open peer review Process

Steps for the selection and acceptance of articles

The editorial process of DeporVida begins from the very moment the article is submitted for its publication.

Receiving the original is the first step, because the manuscript must comply with the policy sections of the journal (types of articles, structure, extension, referencing guidelines). It is the general editor who first checks these elements and registers the date when the work is received. This information is considered for its publication, if it is accepted. Only then begins a preliminary review regarding structure and quality of the original. This constitutes a filter for every author´s work, leading the work to be published or not. Then, the acknowledgement receipt certifies the correct submission of the original.

The general editor may reject himself the works received without an external consultation process; if the originals are inappropriate for the journal, illegible and lacking the quality demanded, their aims do not answer to the scientific objective or scientific fraud is evidenced.  

The previous assessment ensures the quality of the work to either return it to the author or to send it to the open peer review process. If the article lacks structure errors only, it is sent to the author for its correction. The author must then, mend the errors identified and send it back to the editor within the next month. It is important to explain that the date of the acceptance of the original is not assigned until all errors are fixed. Once it is approved, the manuscript goes to the open peer review process, which may last for another month, until the experts issue the report.

Open peer review searches for the quality background opinion of two external reviewers with the mainstream objective of improving the article´s requirements. Reviewers are experts in the scope area, due to they must assess their colleagues’ manuscripts. Along the evaluation process, both reviewers and authors, know each other; there is no anonymity.

Reviewers analyze the quality and rigor of the presented arguments, also their validity, feasibility, opportunity and relevance for the discussion of problems within the research scope of action; originality and updating, clear language and easy to understand text, technical terms defined and clear phrases. The use of jargon should be avoided. The manuscript must comply with the ethics criterion of the authors, among others from the article review sheet; which means an approach to the scientific credits of the text. During the scrutiny, reviewers will demonstrate there is no plagiarism or self-plagiarism and other authors’ ideas are properly referenced. At the end of the review process, reviewers indicate whether the article can be published as it is or not, or if it should be modified or totally rejected.

If one of the reviewers would not approve the publication of the original, it will be assessed by a third reviewer, whose report will solve the contradiction regarding its publication and take a final decision in agreement with the editor of the journal. In case there is any unexpected conflict here, the editor´ s decision will be final.

If the report suggests some corrections, the author will be responsible to mend them within the period of time established by the journal (a month). Once the manuscript is resent with the suggested corrections, they will be revised again; and if it is necessary, it will be sent back to the author once more as many times as needed until the document is ready and correct. If it does not comply with this requirement, the original will not be published. In these cases, the acceptance date will be established from the last version approval.

Rejecting an article does not always mean it has no quality. Possible reasons are: it may not stick to the journal´ s topics, or the contribution presented is not relevant or it is very similar to another work already published.

Open peer review improves the contributions’ quality, at the time it approaches the standards every peer reviewed journal requires. The revised version will answer to all the inquiries of the reviewers. For its publication, the article has to follow the required format; otherwise, it can be rejected.

Rejection disqualifies the manuscript for a future submission to the journal.

Reviewers do not decide whether an article it is accepted or not; it is the general editor who finally decides which original is published.