Manuscripts submitted to the Journal Ciencias Básicas en Salud (CBS) are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers under a double-blind model. Your comments are essential to ensure scientific quality and support editorial decisions.

Reviewer Selection

To choose suitable reviewers, the following criteria are considered:

• Appropriate experience to evaluate the manuscript.
• Adequate academic training (ideally a doctoral degree).
• Specialization in the relevant thematic area.
• Absence of conflicts of interest with the authors.

Reviewer Responsibilities

• Declare potential conflicts of interest before starting the review.
• Promptly decline the invitation if unavailable and, if possible, suggest alternative reviewers.
• Submit the review within the established deadline.
• Evaluate the manuscript objectively and write a clear and detailed report.
• Report any suspicion of inappropriate conduct to the editors.
• Maintain absolute confidentiality of the received manuscript.

To ensure an efficient editorial process, we ask reviewers to carefully read the following guidelines.

The journal strictly follows the principles of COPE. It is recommended to consult the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers .

Response Punctuality

Timely communication is essential for a fair and consistent review. Reviewers are expected to:

• Accept or decline the invitation promptly, based on the manuscript's title and abstract.
• Submit the review within the agreed deadline or report immediately if an extension is needed.
• Suggest alternative reviewers if unable to perform the evaluation.

Conflicting Interests

Reviewers must declare any potential conflict of interest (personal, financial, academic, professional, political, or religious) before starting the review. If unsure about a potential conflict, communicate it to the journal for guidance.

Confidentiality

The assigned manuscript must be kept strictly confidential. It cannot be shared, cited, or used in whole or in part before its official publication. The reviewer's identity must also remain hidden from the authors.

Reviewers must prepare their own reports. If they wish to involve another person in the review, they must request prior permission from the editorial office.

Suspicions of Inappropriate Conduct

Any indication of plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other malpractice must be reported immediately to the journal to initiate a formal investigation.

Rigorous Evaluation for Reviewers

Reviewers must complete a form that evaluates the following key aspects:

1. Authenticity and Originality: Assessment of the original contribution, absence of plagiarism, and novel input.
2. Relevance and Impact: Degree to which the manuscript adds value to the field and the journal's audience.
3. Scientific Rigor: Methodological quality, data validity, and robustness of conclusions.
4. Research Ethics: Compliance with ethical standards, especially when involving humans or animals.
5. Language Quality: Clear, precise writing, free of errors in English.

Reviewers are invited to provide constructive comments that allow improving the quality of the manuscript. Editorial decisions are based on the joint assessment of all reports received.