Editorial procedures and peer review

Initial reviews

All manuscripts sent and received by Ingenio Journal will be reviewed by the internal Editor to determine if they are adequately prepared and if they follow the ethical policies of the journal. Manuscripts that do not conform to the journal's ethics policy or that do not meet the journal's standards will be rejected prior to peer review. Manuscripts that are not properly prepared will be returned to the authors for review and forwarding. After these verifications, the Editor will determine if the manuscript is within the scope of the journal and if it is scientifically sound. No judgment will be made on the potential impact of the work at this stage. Rejection decisions at this stage will be verified by the Editor-in-Chief.

The authors´´´   number or signatories should not exceed five, considering the first as the main author of the article. This manuscript will be a formal, public, controlled document and must have key writing criteria.

Peer Review

Once a manuscript passes initial checks, at least two independent experts will be assigned for peer review. A double-blind review is applied, where the reviewers do not know the identities of the authors and vice versa. Peer review comments are confidential and will only be released with the express agreement of the reviewer.

In the case of regular presentations, the internal assistant editors will invite experts, according to the editor's recommendations. These experts may also include members of the editorial board and guest editors of the journal. Possible reviewers suggested by the authors can also be considered as long as they have not worked or collaborated with the authors or co-authors in the last 5 years.

Editorial decision and review

All articles, reviews and communications published at Ingenio Journal go through the peer review process and receive at least two rubrics. The editor will communicate the decision of the pairs, which will be one of the following:

Accept after minor corrections:

In principle, the document is accepted after review based on the reviewer's comments. Authors have 15 days for minor revisions.

Reconsider after making major corrections:

The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author should provide a point-by-point answer or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer's comments cannot be reviewed. Usually only one round of major reviews is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised article within an appropriate period of time, and the revised version will be returned to the reviewer for further comment.

Reject and promote forwarding:

If the method or additional experimental elements need to be reinforced to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected and the authors will be encouraged to resubmit the article once more experiments have been performed.

To refuse:

The article is seriously flawed and / or does not make a significant original contribution. No forwarding offer is offered to the  journal.

All comments from reviewers must be answered point by point. When the authors disagree with a reviewer, they should provide a clear answer.

Author's appeals

Authors can appeal a rejection by sending an email to Ingenio Journal. The appeal must provide detailed justification, including point-by-point responses to reviewers and / or editor's comments. The editorial board will be asked to give an advisory recommendation on the manuscript and may recommend acceptance, further peer review, or upholding the original rejection decision. A rejection decision at this stage is final and cannot be reversed.

Production and publication

Once accepted, the manuscript will undergo professional style correction, editing, review by the authors, final corrections, pagination and publication on the journal's website according to the periodicity.