About the Journal
- Frequency of publication
- Intellectual property
- Editorial freedom
- Peer Review
- ICMJE Statement regarding Conflicts of Interest
- Privacy and Confidentiality
- Protection of Human Subjects and Animals in Research
(updated on May 30th 2023)
To spread relevant Latinamerican scientific research worldwide.
Revista Estomatologia (e-ISNN 2248-7220) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal dedicated to the dissemination of new knowledge and information developed from scientific researches on all areas of oral and systemic medicine of the human being. It addresses itself primarily to researchers in the field of health sciences, university professors, undergraduate and postgraduate students, dental clinicians and specialized practitioners in the field of health sciences.
Articles published in Revista Estomatologia (e-ISNN 2248-7220) are summarized and indexed in the following indexes, repositories and catalogs: ICMJE, DOAJ, EBSCO-Fuente Académica, REDIB, LILACs, BIREME, LATINDEX, SHERPA/RoMEO, GALE - Informe Academico, Dialnet, ROAD, MIAR, BASE, AmeliCA and Google Schoolar.
This journal was founded in 1991 is owned by a non-profit organization, Universidad del Valle, and serves the scientific community strictly following the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) on publication ethics policies for medical journals. In addition, we declared to have signed DORA's principles as well as having a position in favor of the responsible use of metrics but not the use of impact factor (IF) to evaluate the journals and researchers.
FREQUENCY OF PUBLICATION
Revista Estomatología is an open access publication in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI). The edition model of manuscripts will be in the form of continuous edition and continuous publication. Therefore, the articles will be published in one volume with two issues per year. The first issue will be closed in June and the second in December respectively.
All manuscripts are published online and free of charge, on the Revista Estomatología website and on the EBSCO website, LILACs, BIREME, LATINDEX and Google Schoolar. In addition, the full-text version online is freely available in both PDF and XML.
All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship according to the ICMJE criteria. Each author should have sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content. Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to:
- Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data; and
- To drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and on
- Final approval of the version to be published.
These three conditions must be met. Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the collection of data does not justify authorship. General supervision of the research group is not sufficient for authorship. Any part of an article critical to its main conclusions must be the responsibility of at least one author. Authors should provide a brief description of their individual contributions in the section Authorship and Disclosures. Authors should consider that Revista Estomatología publishes scientific papers under the assumption that they have been drafted and written by persons as authors, and that the data presented have been collected and analyzed by the authors themselves. The Editors believe that, while editing may benefit a paper, ghost writing is unacceptable in scientific publishing.
All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support. Editors should ask corresponding authors to declare whether they had assistance with study design, data collection, data analysis, or manuscript preparation. If such assistance was available, the authors should disclose the identity of the individuals who provided this assistance and the entity that supported it in the published article. Financial and material support should also be acknowledged.
Groups of persons who have contributed materially to the paper but whose contributions do not justify authorship may be listed under such headings as "clinical investigators" or "participating investigators," and their function or contribution should be described-for example, "served as scientific advisors", "critically reviewed the study proposal", "collected data", or "provided and cared for study patients." Because readers may infer their endorsement of the data and conclusions, these people must give written permission to be acknowledged.
Revista Estomatología is fully compliant with open access mandates, by publishing its articles under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY NC ND) license. Funder mandates such as those by the Wellcome Trust (UK), National Institutes of Health (USA) and the Australian Research Council (Australia) are fully compatible with publishing in Colombia Médica. Authors retain copyright of their work and can deposit their publication in any repository. The work can be freely shared and adapted provided that appropriate credit is given and any changes specified.
The ICMJE adopts the World Association of Medical Editors' definition of editorial freedom. According to this definition, editorial freedom, or independence, is the concept that editors-in-chief have full authority over the editorial content of their journal and the timing of publication of that content. Journal owners should not interfere in the evaluation, selection, or editing of individual articles either directly or by creating an environment that strongly influences decisions. Editors should base decisions on the validity of the work and its importance to the journal's readers not on the commercial success of the journal. Editors should be free to express critical but responsible views about all aspects of medicine without fear of retribution, even if these views conflict with the commercial goals of the publisher. Editors and editors' organizations have the obligation to support the concept of editorial freedom and to draw major transgressions of such freedom to the attention of the international medical, academic, and lay communities.
All manuscript submitted to Revista Estomatología are critically assessed by external and / or inhouse experts in accordance with the principles of Peer Review, which is fundamental to the scientific publication process and the dissemination of sound science. Each paper is first assigned by the Editors to an appropriate Associate Editor who has knowledge of the field discussed in the manuscript. The first step of manuscript selection takes place entirely inhouse and has two major objectives: a) to establish the article's appropriateness for Revista Estomatología's readership; b) to define the manuscript's priority ranking relative to other manuscripts under consideration, since the number of papers that the journal receives is much greater than that it can publish. If a manuscript does not receive a sufficiently high priority score to warrant publication, the editors will proceed to a quick rejection. The remaining articles were reviewed by at least two different external referees (second step or classical peer-review). Revista Estomatologia guarantees a double blind peer review process.
In addition, Revista Estomatologia declare that we already signed and that Revista Estomatologia is applying DORA´'s principles for the responsible use of metrics.
Policies of the journal for the publication of articles:
1. The submitted articles must be unpublished, for which the author (s) must guarantee that their article is not being considered simultaneously by another journal or has not been published totally or partially in any printed or electronic media and that, in addition, in case of being accepted, it will not be published in any other medium, unless expressly authorized by the Editorial Committee.
2. The journal makes an open call at national and international level. The announcements will be published in the web page of the journal https://revistas.univalle.edu.co/index.php/revista_estomatologia/index
3. Revista Estomatología declared that starting the volume 29 issue 1 onwards, the edition model of manuscripts will be in the form of continuous edition and continuous publication. Therefore, the articles will be published in one volume with two issues per year. The first issue will be closed in June and the second in December respectively.
4. The Editorial Committee of the Journal reserves the right to accept or reject the submitted articles, as well as to request clarifications, corrections or modifications to them.
5. The journal will acknowledge receipt of the documents sent within a period not exceeding eight (8) business days.
6. It is assumed that all persons listed as authors have given their consent and that any person cited as a source of personal communication has accepted the reference.
7. Economics, Management and Development in a peer-reviewed journal. For its publication, all articles will be submitted for evaluation by anonymous academic peers. The result of the evaluation will be communicated to the author (s). If an article is rejected by the pair, the journal will communicate to the author (s) the decision; The journal reserves the right to evaluate the pair.
8. If the article is accepted for publication, the rights of printing and reproduction by any means and means are from the Journal.
9. All the articles received will be submitted to the Editorial Committee, which will take the decision to send them to the respective evaluators and, later, based on the peer's evaluation, it will decide on its publication.
ICMJE STATEMENT REGARDING CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Revista Estomatolgía strictly follows the ICMJE Ethical Considerations in the Conduct and Reporting of Research, which are reported below with a few modifications of the original text available in the ICMJE website. Public trust in the peer-review process and the credibility of published articles depend on how well conflict of interest is handled during writing, peer review, and editorial decision making.
Conflict of interest exists when an author (or the author's institution), reviewer, or publisher has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) his or her actions (such as those related to dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties) . These relationships vary from negligible to great potential for influencing judgment. Not all relationships represent true conflict of interest. On the other hand, the potential for conflict of interest can exist regardless of whether an individual believes that the relationship affects his or her scientific judgment. Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honorarium, and paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and of science itself. However, conflicts can occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion.
All participants in the peer-review and publication process must disclose all that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest. Disclosure of such relationships is also important in connection with editorials and review articles, because it can be more difficult to detect biases in these types of publications than in reports of original research. Editors may use information disclosed in conflict-of-interest and financial-interest statements as a basis for editorial decisions.
When authors submit a manuscript, if an article or a letter, they are responsible for disclosing all of the financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly if potential conflicts do not exist. Authors should do so in the manuscript on a conflict-of-interest notification page, providing additional detail, if necessary, in a cover letter that accompanies the manuscript. Revista Estomatología now adopts the ICMJE uniform format for disclosure of competing interests. The ICMJE Uniform Disclosure Form for Potential Conflicts of Interest must be used, and each author should prepare a separate form. The corresponding authors will be invited to submit all forms during the peer-review process.
Increasingly, individual studies receive funding from commercial firms, private foundations, and government. The conditions of this funding have the potential to bias and otherwise discredit the research.
Scientists have an ethical obligation to submit creditable research results for publication. Moreover, as the persons directly responsible for their work, they should intercede with their access to the data and their ability to analyze them independently, and to prepare and publish manuscripts. Authors should describe the role of the sponsoring study, if any, in study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing the report; and the decision to submit the report for publication. If the supporting source had no such involvement, the authors should be state. Biases potentially introduced when sponsors are directly involved in research are analogous to methodological biases.
Editors may request that authors of a study funded by an agency with a proprietary or financial interest in the outcome sign a statement, such as "I had full access to all of the data in this study and I take complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. " Editors should be encouraged to review copies of the protocol and / or contracts associated with project-specific studies before accepting such studies for publication. Editors may choose not to consider an article if a sponsor has asserted control over the authors' right to publish.
Reviewers must disclose to editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their opinions of the manuscript, and they should recuse themselves from reviewing specific manuscripts if the potential for bias exists. As in the case of authors, silence on the part of the authors about potential conflicts may mean either that conflicts exist and the reviewer has failed to disclose them or conflicts do not exist. Reviewers must therefore be asked to state explicitly if conflicts do not exist. Reviewers must not use knowledge of the work, before its publication, to further their own interests.
Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts must have no personal, professional, or financial involvement in any of the issues they might judge. Other members of the editorial staff, if they participate in editorial decisions, must provide editors with a current description of their financial interests (as they may relate to editorial judgments) and recuse themselves from any decisions in which a conflict of interest exists.
Privacy and Confidentiality
Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. When informed consent has been obtained, editors may request authors to provide a copy before making the editorial decision.
Manuscripts must be reviewed with respect for authors' confidentiality. In submitting their manuscripts for review, authors entrust editors with the results of their scientific work and creative effort, on which their reputation and career may depend. Authors' rights may be violated by disclosure of the confidential details during their manuscript review. Reviewers also have rights to confidentiality, which must be respected by the editor. Confidentiality may have to be breached if dishonesty or fraud is alleged but otherwise must be honored.
Editors must not disclose information about manuscripts (including their receipt, content, status in the reviewing process, criticism by reviewers, or ultimate fate) to anyone other than the authors and reviewers. This includes requests to use the materials for legal proceedings.
Protection of Human Subjects and Animals in Research
When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2013. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate if the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.
PRINCIPLES OF TRANSPARENCY AND BEST PRACTICE
- Image integrity and standards
- Communication with the Media
- Correction and retraction Policy
- Corrections to the online versions peer-reviewed content
Plagiarism is when an author attempts to represent someone else's work as his or her own. Duplicate publication, sometimes called self-plagiarism, occurs when an author reuses substantial parts of his or her own published work without providing the appropriate references. This can range from getting an identical paper published in multiple journals, to 'salami-slicing', where authors add small amounts of new data to a previous paper. Plagiarism can be said to have clearly occurred when large chunks of text have been cut-and-pasted. Such manuscripts would not be considered for publication in Medical Colombia. But minor plagiarism without dishonest intent is relatively frequent, for example, when an author reuses parts of an introduction from an earlier paper. The journal editors judge any case of which they become aware (either by their own knowledge of and reading about the literature, or when alerted by referees) on its own merits. If a case of plagiarism comes to light after a paper is published, the journal will conduct a preliminary investigation. If plagiarism is found, the journal will contact the author's institute and funding agencies. A determination of misconduct will lead the journal to run a statement, bidirectionally linked to and from the original paper, to note the plagiarism and to provide a reference to the plagiarized material. The paper containing the plagiarism will have been marked on each page of the PDF. Depending on the extent of the plagiarism, the paper may also be formally retracted.All manuscripts submitted to Revista Estomatología are reviewed with the Turnitin software.
Image integrity and standards
Images submitted with a manuscript for review should be minimally processed (for instance, to add arrows to a micrograph). Authors should retain their unprocessed data and metadata files, as editors may request them to aid in manuscript evaluation. If unprocessed data are unavailable, manuscript evaluation may be stalled until the issue is resolved. A certain degree of image processing is acceptable for publication (and for some experiments, fields and techniques is unavoidable), but the final image must represent the original data and conform to community standards. The guidelines below will aid in accurate data presentation at the image processing level; authors must also take care to exercise prudence during data acquisition, where misrepresentation must equally be avoided. Authors should list all image acquisition tools and image processing software packages used. Authors should document key image gathering and processing manipulations in the Methods. Images gathered at different times or from different locations should not be combined into a single image, unless it is stated that the resultant image is a product of time-averaged data or a time-lapse sequence. If juxtaposing images is essential, the borders should be clearly demarcated in the figure and described in the legend. The use of touch-up tools, such as cloning and healing tools in Photoshop, or any feature that deliberately obscures manipulations, is to be avoided. Processing (such as changing brightness and contrast) is appropriate only when applied to the entire image and is applied equally to controls. Contrast should not be adjusted so that data disappear. Excessive manipulations, such as processing of the region in the cost of others (for example, through the use of a biased choice of threshold settings), is inappropriate, as is emphasizing experimental data relative to the control. When submitting revised final figures, authors may be asked to submit original, unprocessed images.
Revista Estomatología editors and editorial staff keep confidential all about about submitted manuscript and do not comment to any outside organization about manuscripts under consideration by the journal while they are under consideration or if they are rejected. The journal editors may comment publicly on published material, but their comments are restricted to the content itself and their evaluation of it. After a manuscript is submitted, correspondence with the journal, referees' reports and other confidential material, whether or not the submission is eventually published, must be published on any website or otherwise published without prior permission from the editors. The editors themselves are not allowed to discuss manuscripts with third parties or to reveal information about correspondence and other interactions with authors and referees. Referees agree to maintain confidentiality of all manuscripts under consideration.
Communication with Media
Authors must not discuss contributions with the media (including other scientific journals) until the publication date. The only exception is in the week before publication, during which contributions may be discussed with the media if authors and their representatives (institutions, funders) clearly indicate that their contents must not be publicized until the journal's press has elapsed. Authors will be informed of embargo dates and timings after acceptance for publication of their articles. We reserve the right to the consideration or publication of a paper if this condition is broken. From time to time Revista Estomatologíal will distribute to a registered list to press release summarizing selected content of the next issue's publication. Journalists are encouraged to read the full version of any papers they wish to cover, and are given the names of corresponding authors, together with phone and fax numbers and email addresses. They receive access to the full text of papers about a week before publication on a password-protected website, together with other relevant material (for example, an accompanying News and Views article, and any extra illustrations provided by the authors). The content of the press release and papers is embargoed until the time and date clearly stated on the press release. Authors may therefore receive calls or emails from the media during this time; We encourage them to cooperate with journalists so that their coverage is accurate and balanced. Authors whose papers are scheduled for publication may also arrange their own publicity (for instance through their institutional press offices), but they must strictly adhere to our press embargo.
Correction and retraction Policy
We recognize our responsibility to correct errors that we have previously published. Our policy is to consider refutations (readers' criticisms) of primary research papers, and to publish them (in concise form) if and only if the author provides compelling evidence that a major claim of the original paper was incorrect. Corrections are published for significant errors at the discretion of the editors. Readers who have identified such an error should send an email to the editorial office of the journal, clearly stating the publication reference, title, author and section of the article, and briefly explaining the error.
Corrections to the online versions of peer-reviewed content
Publishable amendments requested by the authors of the publication are represented by a formal online notice in the journal because they affect the publication record and/or the scientific accuracy of published information. Where these amendments concern peer-reviewed material, they fall into one of four categories: erratum, corrigendum, retraction, or addendum, described here.
Erratum Notification of an important error made by the journal that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the paper, or the reputation of the authors or the journal.
Corrigendum Notification of an important error made by the author(s) that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the paper, or the reputation of the authors or the journal. All authors must sign corrigenda submitted for publication. In cases where coauthors disagree, the editors will take advice from independent peer-reviewers and impose the appropriate amendment, noting the dissenting author(s) in the text of the published version.
Retraction Notification of invalid results. All coauthors must sign a retraction specifying the error and stating briefly how the conclusions are affected, and submit it for publication. In cases where coauthors disagree, the editors will seek advice from independent peer reviewers and impose the type of amendment that seems most appropriate, noting the dissenting author(s) in the text of the published version.
Addendum Notification of a peer-reviewed addition of information to a paper, usually in response to readers’ request for clarification. Addenda are published only rarely and only when the editors decide that the addendum is crucial to the reader’s understanding of a significant part of the published contribution.
(updated on May 30th 2023)