The Editorial Policies of the Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research |
The purpose of the Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research is to publish the results of original experimental research that contribute significantly to knowledge in medical and biological sciences. Major criteria for acceptance are scientific quality, originality, and conciseness. Preference will be given to manuscripts that develop new concepts or experimental approaches and are not merely repositories of data. Papers that report negative results require special justification for publication. Methodological papers shall be considered for publication provided they describe new principles or a significant improvement of an existing method. Papers that will not be accepted for publication
The Brazilian Journal is published monthly in an electronic version. Author's professional and ethical responsabilities Authorship 1. Conceived, planned and carried out the work that led to the paper or interpreted the evidence it presents, or both. 2. Wrote the paper, or reviewed successive versions. 3. Approved the final version. Holding positions of administrative leadership, contributing patients, and collecting and assembling data, however important to the research, are not, by themselves, criteria for authorship. Other persons who have made substantial, direct contributions to the work but cannot be considered authors should be cited in the acknowledgment section with their permission (see Authors' Form, below) and a description of their specific contributions should be given. Submission of a manuscript to Brazilian Journal implies that the data have not been published previously and will not be submitted for publication elsewhere while the manuscript is under review. The following are considered to represent "prior publication": any printed material in excess of 500 words describing results or methods of a submitted/in press manuscript; published tables or illustrations that duplicate the content of a manuscript; electronic manuscripts or posters available via the Internet. When part of the material has been presented in a preliminary communication or in an unrefereed symposium, this should be cited as a footnote on the title page and a copy should accompany the submitted manuscript. When appropriate, papers in the area of Clinical Investigation should include a statement indicating that the protocol has been approved by the Hospital Ethics Committee (Hospital with which at least one of the authors is associated) and that written informed consent was obtained from all participants. All manuscripts will be acknowledged and assigned a unique number. After a manuscript is received, it is assigned by the Editors to a specific Section Editor whose expertise is considered to be appropriate. The Section Editor prepares a list of expert reviewers, which may include some suggested by the Editors. The Brazilian Journal maintains a list of qualified primary reviewers who have agreed to review a limited number of manuscripts without the need for giving prior approval. All other potential reviewers are contacted individually to determine availability. A file with the manuscript is sent to at least two expert reviewers. Reviewers are asked to complete the review of the manuscript within 2 weeks; to assign a priority based on content, originality, quality, relevance, and interest; to send a short review form to the Section Editor by e-mail, by fax or mail. The Section Editor reconciles the opinions of the reviewers, providing an independent opinion when appropriate, and recommends a course of action and communicates the reviews and recommendations to the Editors by e-mail or fax.
Expectations regarding reviewers Selection of reviewers is the responsability of the Section Editor, although the Editors make recommendations to the Section Editor from the list of individuals who have reviewed manuscripts previously. This database of previous reviewers includes the self-identified areas of expertise as well as information about the perceived usefulness and timeliness of past reviews. Individuals who consistently have provided tardy reviews or reviews that have not been helpful are removed from the database. The intent is to identify individuals who are the most competent in the central issues being addressed in the manuscript and to ensure that the review process is completed in a timely fashion. Every effort is made to avoid both real and apparent conflicts of interest with respect to research activities or collaborative or personal interactions, and reviewers are asked to withdraw from considering any manuscript in which they identify a conflict that has escaped the attention of the Section Editor or Editors. Definition of conflict of interest is arbitrary, but for the purposes of the Brazilian Journal, it includes but is not limited to current or recent collaboration, institutional affiliation, and recent mentor-trainee relations. Information contained in manuscripts is considered confidential and should not be shared or distributed. If necessary, a reviewer can consult with others for an adequate evaluation of the research findings provided that all individuals involved maintain confidentiality, objectivity, and avoid conflict of interest. The Brazilian Journal is not responsible for acts and conduct by reviewers that are not in accordance with accepted professional standards. Reviewers must assure that their conduct before, during, and after a review meets the highest standards of ethical behavior. By accepting to perform a review, a reviewer holds the Brazilian Journal harmless from any and all liabilities that may be caused by unethical or unprofessional conduct. Reviewers are asked to be objective in their evaluations and to judge primarily the novelty and soundness of the information presented. Although reviews are anonymous, all comments should be capable of withstanding public scrutiny.
Final decision process and criteria for manuscript acceptance The Section Editor considers the comments made by the reviewers and their recommendation, selects those comments to be shared with the authors, makes a final decision concerning the manuscript, and prepares the decision letter for signature. If revisions of the manuscript are suggested, the Section Editor also recommends the process by which the revised manuscript will be reviewed again. The Section Editor signs all letters, and makes the final decision regarding the suitability of a manuscript for publication in the Brazilian Journal. The Editors and Section Editors try to meet in person at least once a year and communicate frequently by conference call or by e-mail in an attempt to ensure that the criteria used to evaluate manuscripts are applied as uniformly as possible. Personal interactions among Section Editors and the Editors are encouraged to resolve concerns about any individual manuscript. Authors are informed of the final decision by e-mail, fax or mail; appropriate comments from reviewers and editors are attached.
Revisions, rejections and rebuttals Occasionally manuscripts do not require changes. Some manuscripts are accepted provisionally, pending relatively minor revisions. For many manuscripts, authors are invited to resubmit if major criticisms can be addressed by revision and/or additional experimentation. All revised manuscripts are carefully re-examined, and ultimate acceptability is not guaranteed. To avoid prolonged disruptive negotiations, only one major revision of each manuscript is considered. A revised manuscript not returned within three weeks of the date of the decision letter will be considered to be a new manuscript and will be subjected to a complete review. A statement signed by the corresponding author must accompany revised manuscripts, indicating that all authors have approved the revisions and that no substantial part of the manuscript is under consideration (or already published) elsewhere. The author are asked to answer on separate sheets all the suggestions made by the reviewers, indicating those that were accepted and introduced in the text and justifying the decision when the author did not agree with a given suggestion. A list of all changes introduced in the new text and a copy of the revised manuscript must be included. In the case of minor revision, the Section Editor may conduct the review. In the case of major revisions, one or more reviewers may be asked to consider adequacy of the revisions. If the authors believe that a serious scientific error occurred during the review, a letter of rebuttal may be sent to the Editors, explaining the reasons why the decision should be reconsidered. When appropriate, the matter will be taken up with the Editors, Section Editor, and/or additional reviewers. Rebuttals that challenge rejections based upon priority alone are rarely successful, since the assignment of priority is necessarily a matter of opinion. A small proportion of rebuttals are successful in reversing the original decision. However, disposition of rebuttals cannot take precedence over the timely handling of manuscripts in review and therefore may take significant time to be resolved. If the authors of a rejected manuscript are able to make new advances that go far beyond the original submission, they may consider submitting the manuscript for a completely new review. A new submission form is required, and the manuscript will be assigned a new number.
Time from submission to decision and publication The Editorial Office strives to minimize the time from submission to first decision. However, this varies widely between individual manuscripts and delays can occur for many unforeseen reasons. The most common delay occurs when a reviewer takes an inordinately long time in reviewing the manuscript or decides not to carry out a review. The Brazilian Journal makes every effort to avoid these situations. However, authors must recognize that manuscript review is a completely voluntary service for the Journal. Therefore, the Editorial Office can only determine willingness to conduct a review, request a prompt review, and remind reviewers when they are tardy. However, if a reviewer does not respond after timely reminders, an additional review will be solicited or an independent review will be provided by the Section Editor. In such instances, the Editors will also review the manuscript. Once a paper is accepted, every effort is made to publish it as soon as possible. Manuscripts submitted from the institution of any of the Section Editors are handled by other Section Editors from outside that institution. The Editorial Office ensures confidentiality and makes certain that these manuscripts are handled in a similar manner to those from other authors.
Except in very unusual circumstances, the identity of the reviewers involved in the review of any given manuscript is kept confidential. Although arguments for an "open" review process can be made, the anonymous review process has sufficient merit to justify its continuation.
Policy regarding telephone calls Questions concerning manuscript status are best handled by the Brazilian Journal office staff by e-mail; the Journal requests that telephone calls should be avoided if possible. To minimize the possibility of misinterpretation and/or errors in verbal communication, the office staff will provide information only to the corresponding author and will not provide extensive details (e.g., exact status of review or a predicted time to final decision). Editors do not take calls from authors concerning decisions or other related matters. All such inquiries should be addressed to the Editors in writing. The issues will be discussed by the Editors and the Section Editor, who will then communicate with the authors as appropriate. Although the Editors are willing to discuss issues of concern to authors, verbal communication in the absence of prior written documentation of concerns (except for simple questions concerning manuscript status) is discouraged. This policy has been established to provide for uniformity and fairness in addressing concerns about the review process. It also provides a written record should other editors and/or office staff have to handle the manuscript later.
"Preapproval" of papers and selective "fast-track publishing" The Brazilian Journal does not provide for an advance determination of the acceptability of a particular manuscript for publication, nor does it promise expedited review of selected manuscripts. The Journal attempts to treat all manuscript submissions as fairly and uniformly as possible. While the editors make every attempt to expedite the overall speed of review, the process must be carried out without compromising the quality and fairness of the process. It should be recognized that decisions about important and novel work often are made expeditiously because the reviewers and editors are excited about evaluating such work and tend to do so quickly.
Legal status of submitted manuscripts Recent attempts by external entities to gain access to confidential work under review have made it necessary to define the legal status of manuscripts submitted to the Brazilian Journal. All manuscripts are considered to be the property of the submitting author(s) until such time as a decision is made and the copyright is officially assigned by the authors to the Brazilian Journal. However, by submitting the manuscript to Brazilian Journal, the authors agree to subject it to the confidential peer review process outlined in the foregoing pages; editors and reviewers are informed that the manuscript must be considered confidential.
More widespread publicity is legitimate for some articles published in the Brazilian Journal, as well as that the authors may benefit from such publicity if it is appropriate, accurate, and occurs at a suitable time. However, the public release of information should not precede the actual publication of the work (defined as the date the first copy is mailed from our publisher) for manuscripts approved for publication and considered to be "in press". This embargo policy protects the peer-review process, the newsworthiness of the scientific content of published articles, and minimizes the chance for the appearance in the lay press of misinformation relating to those articles. Importantly, this policy also ensures that scientists have access to all relevant information at the same time the general public is made aware of it. Obviously, these restrictions cannot apply to the presentation of the work at scientific conferences or symposia that precede the actual publication date. Although news reporters may be present at such meetings or symposia, information, tables, or illustrations that in any way duplicate the content of a manuscript submitted for publication or "in press" should not be provided to reporters by the authors. In particular, press conferences should not be held prior to the embargo date. The official release of videotape presentations and electronic prepublication of articles on the Internet should also adhere to the embargo policy. Violation of these policies are legitimate grounds for withdrawal of the manuscript from publication and/or other measures that the Brazilian Journal may choose to take. This policy will be modified, as needed, to adjust to the realities of electronic publication.
Duplicate publication and scientific fraud are uncommon events that have a very serious impact on the scientific community. In case of possible scientific misconduct, i.e., suspected fabrication or falsification of data, double publication, or plagiarism, the Editors will attempt to clarify the matter with each of the authors. Should that fail to resolve the situation satisfactorily, the Editors will contact the institution of the corresponding author. The institution should then make an inquiry and report back to the Editors. Until the matter is clarified, no papers by any authors on the disputed manuscript will be considered for publication. If scientific misconduct is confirmed by institutional review, the Section Editors will report this to the Editors. Appropriate action will be decided by the Editors in consultation with the Council of the ABDC. A lesser problem arises when a member of the scientific community disagrees strongly with the methodology and/or conclusions of an article that has been published in the Brazilian Journal but does not allege actual fraud. The Brazilian Journal does not have a forum to publish a communication regarding such issues; therefore, the concerned individual should either contact the authors directly to discuss the disagreement, or allow the natural corrective mechanisms of science to settle the issue with time. Clearly, the peer review process has its inherent flaws, and the outcome of a manuscript review may not always be equitable from the perspective of the author. However, in the absence of a better system, review of manuscripts by scientific peers appears to be the best method for maintaining standards of excellence for research publications by the scientific community. The Brazilian Journal is firmly committed to promoting the quality and fairness, as well as the speed and efficiency, of this process in every way possible. The Section Editors and the Editors welcome suggestions from the scientific community on ways to improve this process and to sustain the excellence of the Brazilian Journal.
Most of the provisions of the Copyright Act of 1976 became effective on Jan. 1, 1978. Therefore, all manuscripts must be accompanied by the following written statement, signed by each author: “The undersigned author(s) transfer all copyright ownership of the manuscript (title of article) to the Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, in the event the work is published. The undersigned warrant(s) that the article is original, does not infringe upon any copyright or other proprietary right of any third party, is not under consideration by another journal, and has not been previously published. The author(s) confirm that they have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.” |
