PROCESO DE REVISION POR PARES

Peer Review Process

Manuscript Evaluation in Sapiens in Health Sciences International Journal (SHSIJ)

The Sapiens in Health Sciences International Journal (SHSIJ), published by Sapiens Ediciones, is a multidisciplinary biannual journal founded in 2023. Its double-blind peer review process ensures the quality, originality, and impact of articles, guaranteeing an objective evaluation based on the relevance and scientific rigor of the manuscripts.

The review is conducted by highly regarded specialists with no conflicts of interest regarding the evaluated work. These reviewers, selected for their academic background and expertise, collaborate with the Editorial Committee in validating the originality, methodological robustness, and alignment of the article with the journal's standards.

SHSIJ 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 the opinion of additional specialists is required, authors will be notified in advance.

This rigorous evaluation system reflects SHSIJ's commitment to academic excellence and the dissemination of high-impact knowledge at a global level.

Initial Review

In the first stage, the editorial team of Sapiens in Health Sciences International Journal (SHSIJ) conducts a preliminary assessment of submitted manuscripts. Within a maximum of 72 hours, authors will 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, evaluating 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, exhibit structural deficiencies, lack clarity in their findings, or contain plagiarized content. In case of rejection, authors will be informed within the established timeframe. If necessary, editors may consult the scientific committee.

Manuscripts 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 forwarded to specialized reviewers, who may be members of the journal's review panel or external experts with knowledge in the field, usually researchers or faculty members of national and international graduate programs.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that advance to this stage undergo a double-blind peer review process. Each evaluator uses a detailed form that considers aspects such as:

  • The manuscript’s relevance 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 updated use of bibliographic sources.
  • Methodological robustness 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 adjustments, authors have between 8 and 15 days to make the modifications, as indicated by the editor.

Once revisions are completed, manuscripts undergo an editorial quality control process, which includes grammatical and orthographic review, verification of compliance with journal guidelines, and final editing. However, the 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 is responsible for the comprehensive supervision of the evaluation process, determining the need for additional reviews based on the quality and rigor of the manuscript. Once the task is assigned, reviewers have a maximum of eight days to submit their report. In case of delays, authors will be promptly informed about the status of the process.

Reviewer Confidentiality

The anonymity of reviewers must be maintained throughout the evaluation process, except in cases where they choose to disclose their identity.

Number of Assigned Reviewers

Manuscripts are generally evaluated by two subject-matter experts. However, when deemed necessary by the Academic Editor, additional reviews may be requested to ensure a more thorough assessment.

Monitoring Manuscript Status

The editorial system must 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 a final decision is made.

Editorial Decision Determination

The Academic Editor issues the final decision on the manuscript’s 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 is issued.