Reviewers

The title should accurately, clearly, and concisely reflect the emphasis and content of the paper.

Both, Resumen and the Abstract must be consistent in in both languages (English and Spanish), they must clearly describe the importance of the work, methodology, results and conclusions. Also in the Resumen and in the Abstract it is recommended the use of Thesaurus and terms different to those used in the title to expand the possibilities of retrieving the paper through searches in databases or open internet.

The Journal expects the papers to contribute to the state-of-the-art in the field.

If the reviewer can verify that the paper is unpublished and not a copy or slight modification of previously published works, it must be notified to the journal. Likewise, if the reviewer finds that the methodology and results presented are previously published, or there is a similar report, it must be declared to the editor of the journal to request an evaluation of the paper.

The methodology presented must be sufficiently clear and descriptive, so that any reader can easily understand it, both the materials (purity, brand, origin, etc.) and methods and equipment must be well specified (standards, protocols, models, resolution of measurement of equipment, etc.).

The results must be presented logically reflecting a thematic or methodological order. They must indicate the respective standard deviations and must be interpreted and explained. Do not repeat the presentation of results in tables and figures, authors should use only one of the two options. The papers to be published in this Journal should present a good structure, be clear and easy to understand even for readers who are not experts in the subject. It should ensure the use of technical terms and not the common jargon; The abbreviations, acronyms, and terms of equations must be defined at least the first time they are mentioned in the document. It is recommended to use the international system of units, including equations and calculations when the papers contain them. Check the figures and tables are presented in the text correctly. The conclusions should be based on the observations and results already discussed, and must be coherent clear, objective and conclusive, not a summary of the results.

Regarding bibliographic references, it is important to verify that they are updated, sufficient, that are not redundant, coming from reliable information sources, and verifiy that no more than 20% self-citations are used in the paper.

Every Review will select the type of papers according to the following definitions:

  • Scientific and technological research papers: This kind of paper presents original results of research projects. The structure of the paper generally contains four excerpts: introduction, methodology, findings and conclusions.
  • Review paper: This paper is the result of a research study which analyzes, systematizes and integrates published or unpublished research findings, within science and technology fields, in order to summarize its current state, progress and development trends. It is characterized by the presentation of a careful literature review of at least 50 references.
  • Case report: A document that presents the results of a study on a specific situation in order to report the technical and methodological experiences considered in a particular case. It includes a systematic review of literature on similar cases.

Every review will include a recommendation to the Editor. This recommendation will be one of the following:

  • The paper is accepted in its present form.
  • The paper is acceptable with minor revisions and no further review is requested.
  • The paper may be acceptable with major revisions. Acceptable pending another review following significant revisions.
  • The paper is rejected and no recommendations are provided.

Once the reviewer submits the evaluations to the journal through the OJS, the thematic editor of the journal, based on the evaluations and the arguments presented in them, makes the decision regarding the publication of the paper in the journal. In some special situations, the final decision of the journal may not coincide with the recommendation of some evaluator, because there are papers that have up to 3 and 4 evaluations that may present contradictions. The final decision is taken by the Editorial Board based on the joint analysis of all evaluations received.