Double-blind peer review policy

• Authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the manuscript evaluation process.
• Impartiality is guaranteed and conflicts of interest are avoided throughout the manuscript evaluation process.
• Publication of peer review policies on the website.
• Report of the review process, number of reviewers and editorial decisions.
• Access to review reports for authors, maintaining the anonymity of reviewers.
• DOI registration and complete metadata for international indexing.

Average review time

• The average timeframe is 02 to 04 weeks to complete the review.
• Automated tracking through the OJS platform to ensure compliance with deadlines.
• In case of delays, the reviewer and author are contacted.

Editorial Flow

• Manuscript submission via the OJS platform and the journal's email.
• Initial review by the editor (scope, formats, subject matter, form, ethics and relevance of the article).
• Assignment of two expert reviewers on the subject.
• Double-blind peer review.
• Editorial decision: accepted, accepted with specific changes, and rejected
• Notification to authors with comments at each stage of the evaluation process.
• Corrections and second evaluation if applicable.
• Final acceptance and preparation for publication.
• Online and print publication.

Reviewers' Guide 
- Evaluation Criteria:

• Originality and significant contribution to knowledge.
• Methodological rigor and validity of results.
• Clarity, structure and coherence of writing.
• Relevance and currency of bibliographic references.
• Quality of analysis, discussion and conclusions.
• Compliance with ethical standards in research (plagiarism, consent, confidentiality).

- Actions for reviewers:

• Complete the evaluation on the OJS platform and attach the article evaluation form.
• Suggest specific improvements.
• Indicate recommended editorial decision.

Acceptance Criteria

• Originality and significant contribution.
• Coherent and clear content, free of plagiarism, with relevant references from the last 10 years.
• Compliance with style standards.
• Positive evaluation from at least two reviewers.
• Compliance with ethical criteria.