Peer Review and Publication Policies

Peer review process
Reception and initial evaluation of the article: the article submitted will be initially evaluated by a member of the editorial committee. This will continuously monitor the peer review process and conduct a critical reading of the evaluations obtained to prepare a final opinion addressed to the author. This evaluation will ensure that that the article complies with the scientific standards of the journal.

 

Selection of reviewers:

For each manuscript, two reviewers are appointed, selected based on their expertise and knowledge in the relevant subject area, with the aim of ensuring a rigorous and impartial evaluation. Selection is made from a pool of volunteer experts external to the RELART editorial team, whose academic and professional credentials have been previously verified, while also ensuring that the participation of external reviewers does not exceed 25% (endogeny criterion).

Furthermore, prior to manuscript assignment, reviewers are required to submit a signed declaration of absence of conflicts of interest.

Double-blind review process: The review process is double-blind, ensuring that Both authors and reviewers maintain anonymity throughout the process.

Evaluation criteria: the reviewers evaluate the article based on a list of criteria clear and objective that include: Originality, Relevance of the topic, Methodological clarity, Interpretation of results and Clarity in presentation. This approach ensures a process rigorous, objective and fair in the evaluation.

Estimated process times: The peer review process is estimated at 3 weeks, and the drafting of the final report in 3 weeks. The journal undertakes to meet these deadlines, although there may be unforeseen delays due to circumstances outside the control of the magazine.

Conflict of interest management: in the event that a conflict of interest is identified by part of the reviewers, this will be managed according to the guidelines established by the Editorial Committee. If it is not possible to ensure impartiality in the evaluation, the article will be assigned to alternate  reviewers.

Handling rejected articles: If an article is rejected, authors will receive Detailed comments from the editorial committee. This will allow them to improve the manuscript in if they wish to submit it again to the journal or to another publication.

Review of the quality and performance of reviewers: reviewers are evaluated by the editorial management system to ensure that the Review is maintained with high standards of quality, impartiality, and objectivity.

Editorial decision: After peer review, the editorial board will make a final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the article, notifying the authors of the results.

Publication process
After the acceptance of an article, at the end of the evaluation stage, a process of Proofreading covering spelling, style and bibliographic aspects, carried out by specialized professionals.
The article then goes through the layout process followed by a detailed review of the model. This review is carried out by a proofreader, the editorial secretariat, the corresponding associate editor and author. 
Once the mockup has been approved by all parties involved, the item is prepared for its publication in the next issue of the journal.

Post-publication review process
The journal adheres to the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and considers the possibility of conducting post-publication review to ensure the ongoing quality of articles and to correct any significant errors that may arise after publication.