Peer Review Process
Manuscript Evaluation in Sapiens Biotech International Journal (SBIJ)
The Sapiens Biotech International Journal (SBIJ), published by Sapiens Ediciones, is a multidisciplinary biannual journal founded in 2024. Its double-blind peer review process ensures the quality, originality, and impact of the articles, guaranteeing an objective evaluation based on the relevance and scientific rigor of the manuscripts.
The review is conducted by renowned specialists with no conflicts of interest regarding the evaluated work. These reviewers, selected for their academic background and expertise, collaborate with the Editorial Committee to validate the originality, methodological soundness, and alignment of the article with the journal’s standards.
SBIJ has an expanding international network of reviewers, consisting of PhD researchers or experts with publications in high-impact indexed journals, such as Web of Science and Scopus.
The process is confidential: reviewers must handle manuscripts with strict confidentiality and are not allowed to disclose or use their content. If additional expert opinions are required, authors will be notified in advance.
This rigorous evaluation system reflects SBIJ's commitment to academic excellence and the dissemination of high-impact knowledge on a global scale.
Initial Review
In the first stage, the editorial team of Sapiens Biotech International Journal (SBIJ) conducts a preliminary evaluation of the received manuscripts. Within a maximum of 72 hours, authors receive an email notification with a unique reference number. During this phase, the Editor-in-Chief or the assigned Editor reviews the document to determine its alignment with the journal’s focus and standards, assessing its originality, academic relevance, and contribution to scientific knowledge.
Manuscripts may be rejected at this stage if they do not fit the journal’s scope, have structural deficiencies, fail to clearly describe their findings, or contain plagiarized content. If rejected, authors are informed within the established timeframe. In cases of uncertainty, editors may consult the scientific committee.
Articles that pass this initial review proceed to the peer review phase. Within a maximum of 30 days after manuscript submission, authors will be informed of the outcome of this stage. Approved papers will be sent to specialized reviewers, who may be members of the journal’s reviewer panel or external experts in the field, typically researchers or faculty members of national and international postgraduate programs.
Double-Blind Peer Review
Manuscripts advancing to this phase undergo a double-blind peer review. Each reviewer uses a detailed evaluation form that considers aspects such as:
- Relevance of the work to the academic field and its impact on scientific knowledge.
- Clarity and coherence in writing.
- Theoretical rigor and logical structure of the content.
- Proper and up-to-date use of bibliographic sources.
- Methodological soundness and appropriateness of the research design.
- Depth and coherence of the analysis.
- Originality and contribution of the conclusions.
The estimated time to complete this review is up to 30 days. Upon completion, authors receive the editorial decision. If reviewers request modifications, authors are given between 8 and 15 days to make the necessary adjustments, as indicated by the editor.
Once the reviews are completed, manuscripts undergo an editorial quality control process, including grammatical and spelling review, verification of journal compliance, and final editing. However, successful completion of this process does not imply immediate publication, as the final decision depends on the editors, who consider factors such as editorial policy, publication priorities, and the journal’s schedule.
Review Process Details
Role of the Academic Editor
The Academic Editor oversees the entire evaluation process, determining the need for additional reviews based on the manuscript’s quality and rigor. Once assigned, reviewers have a maximum of eight days to submit their evaluation. In case of delays, authors will be promptly informed about the status of the process.
Reviewer Confidentiality
Reviewer anonymity is guaranteed throughout the evaluation process, except in cases where reviewers choose to reveal their identity.
Number of Assigned Reviewers
Manuscripts are typically evaluated by two subject-matter experts. However, if deemed necessary by the Academic Editor, additional reviews may be requested to ensure a more comprehensive assessment.
Manuscript Status Monitoring
The editorial system will be updated to reflect the status "Required Revisions Completed" once authors have made the requested modifications. However, this status does not indicate the conclusion of the process, as further evaluations may be required before issuing a final decision.
Editorial Decision Determination
The Academic Editor issues the final decision on manuscript publication, based on the received reviews and their own technical judgment. The resolution is communicated to the authors through the submission system and via email. During this period, the manuscript status remains as "Decision in Process" until the final notification.
The possible decisions are:
- Acceptance for publication without modifications.
- Minor revisions, requiring small adjustments before acceptance.
- Major revisions, involving substantial changes before re-evaluation.
- Rejection, when the manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards.
This process ensures the scientific rigor and quality of the articles published in Sapiens Biotech International Journal (SBIJ), strengthening its impact in the international academic community.
