Evaluation Process

The Bioscience Journal adopts a rigorous evaluation process to ensure the quality and integrity of published articles. The editorial flow is managed electronically through the Open Journal System (OJS).

(1) Initial Verification (Desk Review)

After the article is submitted through the electronic system, the Editorial Office performs an initial verification (desk review) to ensure compliance with the journal's Author Guidelines, especially regarding format and documentary requirements.

At this stage, Similarity Evaluation is conducted for plagiarism identification. The Bioscience Journal uses free analysis software to conduct this verification. Texts presenting similarity (including self-plagiarism) will be carefully evaluated; if misconduct is identified, the article may be promptly rejected or returned to the authors for justification and/or rewriting.

Possible results:

Return to authors for minor format adjustments or completion of documents. Submissions that do not adequately meet journal standards will be summarily refused, with the possibility of an invitation for resubmission after proper adjustments.
Summary refusal for non-compliance with originality policies or for presenting unacceptable similarity.
Forwarding to the next stage if all initial requirements are met.
In case of suspicion or confirmation of misconduct, additional measures will be considered according to the journal's Ethics statements.

(2) Initial Editorial Evaluation

The Editor-in-Chief performs a preliminary evaluation of the manuscript's scope and thematic interest.

If the topic is considered pertinent, the Editor-in-Chief designates one of the Associate Editors from the manuscript's thematic area to act as the responsible editor and continue the process.

Possible results:

Summary refusal ("editorial rejection") for lack of adherence to the scope or for not presenting sufficient interest for the journal.
Forwarding to a responsible editor who will manage the peer review.

(3) Peer Review

For Initial Version

Under the responsibility of the designated editor, the manuscript is forwarded for peer review. The Bioscience Journal adopts the Double-blind Peer Review model, ensuring the confidentiality of both authors' and reviewers' identities.

The responsible editor invites external reviewers (ad hoc Reviewers) with recognized expertise in the area of the study. Reports from at least two independent reviewers are requested. In situations where there is a potential conflict of interest, new reviewers are designated.

After evaluation by the reviewers, the responsible editor analyzes the reports, consolidates suggestions and criticisms, and prepares the decision letter for the authors, requesting necessary corrections and/or clarifications.

Possible results:

Rejection after peer review.
Request for corrections and revisions from authors.
Preliminary acceptance, conditioned on minor changes or submission of supplementary documentation.

For Revised Versions

Authors must resubmit the revised manuscript accompanied by a detailed, point-by-point response letter to the reviewers' and responsible editor's comments.

The revised manuscript and response letter are then evaluated by the responsible editor and, if necessary, again by the original reviewers, who will verify if the suggestions and corrections were adequately addressed. This process may involve multiple revision rounds.

(4) Final Decision

For an article to be approved for publication, it must receive favorable reports from at least two ad hoc reviewers and the responsible editor.

The responsible editor forwards the revised manuscript, reviewer reports, and the authors' response letter to the Editor-in-Chief.

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript based on the responsible editor's recommendation and the final quality of the work.

Possible results:

Definitive acceptance.
Final rejection.

It is important to emphasize that the opinions and concepts expressed in published articles are the sole responsibility of their authors.

Internal Submissions

Manuscripts submitted by members of the Editorial Board of the Bioscience Journal follow a rigorous evaluation process to avoid conflicts of interest. The submission is always handled by editors (or designated members of the Editorial Board, when necessary) who have no relationship with the manuscript's authors. The peer-review process is conducted completely independently, ensuring that the editorial decision is based solely on the scientific merit of the work, just like any other submission.

Appealing Decisions

Authors wishing to contest an editorial decision must send a formal letter to the Editor-in-Chief, through the Editorial Office, detailing the reasons for their appeal and providing evidence justifying a new analysis. The decision to re-evaluate the manuscript or maintain the original decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, possibly in consultation with the responsible editor and, if appropriate, additional members of the Editorial Board, ensuring a fair and transparent process. Any suspicion of misconduct during evaluation must also be formally communicated to the Editorial Office or the Editor-in-Chief for investigation, following the journal's ethics statements.