Peer Review
The RJTDH defines the following criteria for its editorial policy regarding the review process: alignment with the journal’s focus and scope, compliance with technical (ABNT), grammatical, and formal standards, relevance, content quality, textual coherence, and theoretical-methodological consistency.
The review process consists of two stages, namely:
- Preliminary evaluation (desk review) by the Assistant Editors, to verify the manuscript’s compliance with the general instructions set by the editorial policy and to check for similarity in all documents submitted through the CopySpider platform;
- Evaluation of technical-scientific merit (double-blind review).
After the preliminary evaluation (desk review), each submitted manuscript will be forwarded to a Chief Editor or an Assistant Editor for the assignment of two external reviewers, who are not part of the editorial team and who hold the same or a higher academic degree than the most highly qualified author of the submitted manuscript. The evaluation is conducted using a standard form, ensuring anonymity throughout the review process.
If there is significant divergence between the reviewers, the manuscript may be submitted for a third review to break the tie, at the discretion of one of the Chief Editors.
Nevertheless, up to 20% of the works published in a given issue may be approved solely by decision of the Chief Editors, due to outstanding scientific merit and relevance to the journal’s editorial policy.
Other exceptions to the double-blind review system will be decided on a case-by-case basis and publicly disclosed by the Editorial Team.
The final decision by the editors will be shared with the author(s), along with the anonymous reviews (suggestions and/or criticisms).
If modifications are requested, authors must upload the revised manuscript into OJS, incorporating the suggestions made by the reviewers, within the deadline set by the editors, which will never be less than 10 (ten) days.
To do this, authors must log into the journal platform, click on the “active submissions” link, and then select the option to upload a file under the “comments” field.
For a detailed description of each editorial step of a submission, including peer review, refer to the “Editorial Workflow” section on the “About” page.
