About the Journal

Focus and Scope

OFFICIAL EVALUATION FORMS FOR THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ARTICLES

Originals

Evaluation parameters

1. Relevance.

• Contributes to solve an important ongoing problem in the local, national, or international context.
• Opens up new perspectives to solve unresolved aspects.
• It is a contribution or an innovation.

Point out any other reason why you believe the results presented in the article are relevant.

2. TITLE

• Corresponds with the subject of the article
• Concise, understandable, and informative.
• Should not exceed 15 words.
• In Spanish and English.
• Must not include acronyms or abbreviations.
• If institutional names are used, they must be official and up to date.

3. SUMMARY

• Structured by sections.
• In Spanish and English.
• It has a maximum limit of 250 words.
• It includes main objectives, basic procedures used, results, and most important conclusions.
• It provides a proper idea of what the work is about.
• The writing is done in the third person.

4. KEYWORDS

• Concrete and representative of the semantic content of the document, both in the main and secondary contents.
• It should be ensured that they are between the limits of 3 to 10.
• In Spanish and English.

5. INTRODUCTION

• Presents brief, clear, and appropriate background information.
• Foundation of the problem.
• Clearly describes the objective of the work.

6. MATERIAL AND METHODS

• Define the type of research or study.
• Define the population or study group, as well as the criteria for inclusion, exclusion, and elimination.
• Describe the criteria and justification for sample selection if required.
• The analyzed variables are clearly described.
• Clearly exposes the methods of information collection and processing and analysis that were used.
• The statistical method is appropriate.
• The work can be reproduced by other researchers.
• State the specific ethical aspects for the study.

7. RESULTS

• Presentation aligned with the objectives of the work.
• Appropriate use of statistics (when required).
• Figures and tables highlight relevant results without repeating information between them.

8. DISCUSSION

• A critical review of the study results is carried out in light of the work published by the authors themselves or by other researchers in the national and international area.
• It explains the scope and limitations of the results.
• It describes the possible applicability and generalization of the results.

9. CONCLUSIONS

• They do not repeat results.
• They possess an appropriate degree of generalization.
• They respond to the objectives of the study and are consistent with the results and the discussion.

10. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

• It complies with the recommendations of the Association of Medical Journal Editors (Vancouver Style 2012).
• It is updated, with most corresponding to recently published works.
• A minimum of 75% of the last five years.
• Relevant national and international literature on the topic is represented.

11. TABLES

• The information they present justifies their existence.
• They do not repeat information already mentioned in the text.
• The title of the table corresponds appropriately to its content.

12. FIGURES

• They have an adequate quality.
• They are necessary and relevant.
• The figure captions correspond appropriately to them.

13. OTHER ASPECTS

• Quality of the presentation in terms of writing and spelling.
• It complies with accepted bioethical principles in our society.

Conclusions of the evaluation:

Title of the article:

Basis of the opinion:

Name and surname of the evaluator:

Date:

Review article

Evaluation parameters

1- TITLE

• Corresponds to the theme of the article.
• Concise and understandable.
• In Spanish and English.

2- SUMMARY

• Structured by sections.
• In Spanish and English.
• Includes main objectives, basic procedures used, results, and most important conclusions.
• Provides a proper idea of what the work is about.
• Has a maximum limit of 250 words.

3. KEY WORDS

• Concrete and representative.
• In Spanish and English.

4. INTRODUCTION

• Presents brief, clear, and appropriate background.
• Importance and relevance of the topic.
• Foundation of the scientific problem that originates the review.
• Clearly describes the objective of the work.
• Criteria and justification for the selection of the consulted sources.

5. DEVELOPMENT

• Presentation in accordance with the objectives of the work.
• Figures and tables highlight relevant aspects without repeating information.
• There is interpretation of the results indicated in the consulted literature.
• It contrasts the differences and similarities of the analyzed studies.
• Critique of the study's results is performed in light of the works published by the authors themselves or by other researchers.
• Describes the possible applicability and generalization of the results.Includes new aspects to consider.
• Points out or highlights the limitations or contributions of the review.

6. GLOBAL CONCLUSIONS

• They respond to the objectives of the study.
• It presents clear, concrete, and relevant conclusions.

7. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

• They follow the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (Vancouver Style 2012).
• It is up to date, and most corresponds to works published recently.
• Relevant national and international literature on the topic is represented.

8. TABLES AND FIGURES

• The information they present justifies their existence.
• The title of the table corresponds appropriately to its content.
• They have adequate quality.
• The figure captions correspond appropriately to them.
• Information is not repeated in tables and figures.

Article Title:

Conclusions of the evaluation:

Basis of the opinion:

Name and surname of the evaluator:

Date:

Clinical Case

Evaluation parameters

1. TITLE

• Corresponds to the topic of the article.
• Concise and understandable.
• In Spanish and English.

2. SUMMARY

• Structured by sections.
• Provides an adequate idea of what the topic is about.
• Indicates the reasons for presenting the case.
• Appropriately summarizes the clinical case.
• Has a limit of 250 words.
• In Spanish and English.

3. KEYWORDS

• Concrete and representative.
• In Spanish and English.

4. INTRODUCTION

• Brief, clear, and appropriate background.
• Describes the objective and the reasons for presenting the case.

5. DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE

• Adequately describes the background (family hereditary, personal pathological, non-pathological, surgical, gynecological-obstetric, etc.) related to the case.
• Indicates the onset, evolution, and current status of the condition.
• Summarizes the main clinical, laboratory, diagnostic, and imaging findings, highlighting those that make the case peculiar.
• Indicates the treatment employed.
• Notes the evolution of the case.

6. DISCUSSION

• Analyze and compare the main findings with those from other reported cases.
• Highlight the pathology/pathophysiology and its significance.
• Describe the difficulty in establishing the diagnosis and/or the treatment of the presented case.
• Discuss the differential diagnoses.
• Analyze the theories or hypotheses about the implications of the findings.

7. CONCLUSIONS

• The conclusions are clear.
• They justify the presentation of the case.

8. REFERENCES

• They are cited according to the guidelines for authors (Vancouver Style 2012).
• Relevant studies on the subject, both national and foreign, are cited.
• At least 40% of the last 5 years are presented.

9. TABLES

• A maximum of two tables.
• The information presented justifies their existence.
• If abbreviations or special symbols are used, their meaning is described.

10. FIGURES

• A maximum of three images.
• Quality of the figures.
• Need and relevance of the figures.
• Graphs and diagrams.
• The data presented do not repeat information already indicated in the text.
• They are adequate – what defines that?
• They protect the patient's identity and adhere to bioethical principles.
• The source from which the figures and photos were taken appears.

11. FIGURE CAPTIONS

• The description of the figure is appropriate.
• The captions correspond with the figures.
• The meaning of the abbreviations or symbols used in the figures is described.

12. GENERAL EVALUATION

• The topic is important.
• The article has scientific/practical/educational value.
• It complies with bioethical principles accepted in our society.

13. WRITING

• The use of abbreviations and acronyms is not excessive and does not hinder smooth reading or the understanding of the work.
• The meaning of the abbreviations, acronyms, and symbols used is described.
• There is clarity and coherence in the writing.
• The syntax and spelling are correct.

Article Title:

Conclusions of the evaluation:

Basis of the opinion:

Name and surname of the evaluator:

Date: