Declaration of Publication Ethics

The following ethics statement for publication and good practices in the Rev Univ. Salud. Is based on the Code of Conduct and Good Practices defined by the Committee for Ethics in Publications (COPE) by editors of scientific journals, the Code of Ethics and Declaration of Good Practice established by the Barcelona Center For International Affairs (CIDOB) and the Singapore Declaration. All parties involved in the publication of the journal must accept and respect the ethical principles expressed in this document.

1. Publications and compliance with good practices

1.1 References and plagiarism. The author(s) is responsible for the accuracy of the content and citation of all references, in order to ensure that the article and the materials associated with it are original or do not infringe copyright. Plagiarism is absolutely prohibited and therefore, articles identified as plagiarized, during or after the editorial process, will be removed from the journal (regardless of whether they have already been published). Excessive self-citation is also considered a bad practice.

1.2 Evaluation of articles. Each article will be evaluated by the "peer review" method to determine its technical quality, originality, scientific contribution, among other relevant criteria. Peer review is governed by the “blinded experiment” method to ensure an evaluation process that is free from bias or conflict of interest. Final opinions, or approval, will be issued by the Editorial Committee of Rev. Univ. Salud. This implies that the article can not be replaced or withdrawn during the evaluation process if it is recommended for publication.

1.3 Selection of articles. Members of the journal editorial committee will select articles from the list of eligibles according to eligibility criteria. The selection sessions will be chaired by the director of the journal, to be legal the quorum will be composed of half plus one of its members.

1.4 Confidentiality. The editorial team, and the evaluators, commit to not disclose any information about any article submitted to the journal, aside from the participants themselves during the selection process of the articles.

1.5 Article duplication or concurrence. The submission of a manuscript to the journal implies that the author agrees with the evaluation method that will be applied to the article, declares that the article has not been sent for evaluation or published to another journal, and confirms that the article is not in the process of publication in another journal. For this reason, the author(s) agrees not to send the article to another journal while waiting for the evaluation report. In this case, the submission will be eliminated.

1.6 Acknowledgement. The recognition of financial sponsors for research will be indicated in an exclusive section, and will be respected in the publication.

1.7 Publication of Retractions and Manifestations of Concern. The procedures followed by the journal for the recording and publication of withdrawals and expressions of concern are based on the Guidelines on Best Practices for Publications and the Retraction Guidelines defined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for Scientific Journal Editors. Retraction is a public instrument used to register and/or correct problems of a published article or to communicate its cancellation, and is an integral part of the scientific communication system. When an author discovers a serious error in their work, they have the obligation to communicate it to those responsible for the journal as soon as possible in order to modify the error, retract it, publish a correction or errata. If a potential error is detected by any of the editorial team members, authors are required to defend their work, and prove that it is correct.

The procedure for recording an article's retraction begins after receiving formal communication of the author or researcher, requesting the retraction or manifestation of concern of the published article. The communication must be accompanied by the argument for retraction of the article. The retracted article will not be deleted from the volume where it was originally published. In the electronic version, a published message of the justification sent by the publisher will appear. The original PDF will be retained, but the retraction text added before the original full text, and watermark will prevent it from being read, or will make it difficult to read.

2. Obligations of the Editorial Committee

2.1 Article selection agreements. In the case of plagiarism or fraudulent information the Editor and the Editorial Committee will be guided by the publication policies of the journal, in order to maintain the quality of the journal, ensuring compliance with universal ethical principles in published articles. They will also be responsible for the selection of the articles, based on the following criteria:

• Originality of the work.
• Relevance of the article.
• Quality of the article.
• Presentation, writing, and clarity of the article structure.
• In no case will race, gender, sexual orientation, belief, origin, citizenship, academic affiliation, business or political orientation of the author(s) be taken into consideration.

2.2 Revision of articles. Ensure the confidentiality of authors and reviewers, guaranteeing compliance with the double-blind method. Follow up on evaluators’ comments to prevent overly rigorous or offensive evaluations of the authors. They may also propose modifications to the articles, based on the comments of the evaluators, or directives. It should be noted an article that they could rejected without submitting it to peer review if it does not meet the guidelines dictated by the directive or is incomplete.

2.3 Conflict of interest. The Editor and members of the Editorial Committee will refrain from participating in evaluations, publishing, and any editorial process that includes articles with which they may have a conflict of interest due to their academic relationship, or affiliation, with any of the authors. Confidentiality is maintained before any clarifications, claims, or complaints that the author(s) may wish to submit to the Editorial Committee of the journal.

Adicionalmente revisarán periódicamente los criterios editoriales de la Revista y gestionarán la indización y presencia de la Revista en bases de datos, repositorios e índices de impacto.

3. Obligations of the evaluators

3.1 Contributions to article selection agreements. The evaluators will provide significant input in selecting articles, and may also assist the author(s) in improving their work.

3.2 Availability. Evaluators who do not feel capable of revising the article, or who cannot do it within the established time must inform the journal, with reasonable time to assign the article to alternative evaluators.

3.3 Conflict of interest. The evaluators are not permitted to disclose any direct or indirect information of the article under consideration.

4. Obligations of the authors

4.1 Guidelines. The author(s) must accept the publication, presentation, and submission guidelines of the articles established by the journal on its website.

4.2 Commitment to the journal. The author(s) accept the process of peer review method, upon request by the Editorial Committee. In addition, the author(s) can only modify or withdraw the article before the date established for the reception cut. The author(s) is(are) responsible for the accuracy of the content, and citation of all references to ensure that the article and associated materials are original and with scientific basis and rigor.

4.3 Originality. The author(s) is(are) committed to provide, in writing, original results of a scientific investigation, with the aim of illustrating to readers, fundamental concepts of research in the areas of interest for the journal. The author(s) must accept and respect the standards adopted by the journal.

4.4 Corrections or errors in an article. The author(s) must inform the Editorial Committee in the event of an error or inaccuracy in the context of the article published in the journal. If necessary, the author(s) should collaborate with the Editorial Committee to carry out the correction in the publication, or an apology, as the case may be.

4.5 Conflict of interest. In the article, the author(s) shall publish any acknowledgment to sponsors, either for financial or logistical support provided for the investigation. “Attacking” other authors is unacceptable.

4.6 Institutional ethical approval. Authors must attach the institutional ethical endorsement that authorized the development of their research.