Review Procedure
The editorial process is divided into three stages: document submission, peer review, and professional editing.
1. Initial Review
Upon receipt of the manuscript, the Editorial Committee verifies its compliance with the Author Guidelines of the Journal. Submissions may be rejected at this initial stage for various reasons, such as lack of thematic alignment with the areas covered by the Journal, absence of originality (verified through Turnitin), failure to comply with preparation and submission guidelines, as well as the relevance and scope of the research. Manuscripts that meet these criteria proceed to the Peer Review stage.
Ethics. The Journal @Limentech Ciencia y Tecnología Alimentaria adheres to the recommendations and core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and includes a set of ethical considerations within its policies. Finally, if a manuscript is deemed viable after the editorial review, the peer review process is initiated.
2. Peer Review
This process follows a “double-blind” model, preserving the anonymity of both authors and reviewers to ensure impartiality. Manuscripts accepted for peer review are sent to at least two external reviewers with recognized academic and research expertise in the relevant field. In the event of negative evaluations or lack of response after fifteen days, a third reviewer will be appointed. Possible decisions are: Accepted, Accepted with minor revisions, Resubmission and new evaluation, or Rejected. The average review time is up to six months, although it may be shorter if reviewers respond promptly.
Manuscript submission. The editorial assistant will send the manuscripts to the reviewers, together with the corresponding evaluation form, establishing a maximum deadline for the return of their assessment.
Outcomes. Once both reviews have been received, the following situations may occur:
- Accepted without revisions. Two reviewers approve the manuscript for publication without changes. In this case, the manuscript is submitted to the editorial team for final approval.
- Accepted subject to revisions. The reviewers’ reports are positive, but one or both suggest changes. In this case, the manuscript is returned to the corresponding author along with the reviewers’ recommendations for revision and correction.
- Both reviewers issue negative opinions regarding publication. In this case, the editorial assistant will inform the corresponding author that the manuscript has been rejected and will attach the reviewers’ reports.
- Reviewer disagreement. One reviewer approves publication while the other rejects it. In this case, the editorial team will appoint a third reviewer, whose decision will be final.
Approval. Manuscripts that have been accepted by the reviewers and revised by the authors will be considered by the Editorial Committee for publication. This decision will be communicated to the corresponding author.
“Double-blind” system. All manuscripts are evaluated anonymously by at least two reviewers under the so-called “double-blind” process. This mechanism ensures the anonymity of both authors and reviewers, who will never have direct contact with each other, communicating only through the editor. Any disputes arising during the evaluation process will be resolved by the Editorial Committee.
3. Editorial Decision
The Editor and the Editorial Committee, upon receiving the reviewers’ reports, communicate their editorial decision to the corresponding author with supporting arguments. If the manuscript is accepted with revisions, the Editor returns the manuscript with the reviewers’ recommendations, which must be implemented and resubmitted to the Editorial Committee within a maximum period of 15 days, together with a letter addressed to each reviewer responding to their comments.
Final Review and Publication: Once approved for publication, the manuscript enters the stages of copyediting, layout, and publication on the editorial management platform. This process may take up to one month. It should be noted that, due to the evaluation process, immediate publication of manuscripts cannot be guaranteed.
Authors’ responsibility. Authors must actively participate in the editing process as soon as requested by the editor. Failure to respond in order to complete or resolve issues arising during editing may result in delays in publication or even in the decision to withdraw the manuscript.
To facilitate this process, authors are asked to write with the highest rigor, checking spelling, using short and coherent paragraphs, and applying punctuation marks correctly, in addition to following the required editorial standards and conventions. The Editorial Committee reserves the right to modify the title of manuscripts and to make any editorial changes deemed necessary to ensure that texts are published in their clearest, most coherent, and most readable version.
