Author Guidelines

I. General Guidelines

Original and scientifically relevant manuscripts (clinical and experimental research, study protocols, randomized trials, systematic, integrative, scope reviews, e.g.), Narrative Reviews, and Case Reports/Series will be accepted for submission. Editorials will be accepted upon invitation by the Editorial Team. Supplements/Annals of events must be submitted under previous acceptance by the Editor-in-Chief. More information about the types of submissions can be read here.

All submissions must be made via the journal's online platform (link available on the Submit Submission button). Complete submissions or sending parts of documents directly by e-mail will not be accepted unless requested directly by the responsible Editor.

Every submission must include among its files the Title page, the Declaration of Originality, Authorship and Assignment of Copyright, the Declaration of Agreement in Translation into the English Language (in case of submission in Portuguese), and the Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest. The above document templates are available for download on the Links page.

Once the online submission of the mandatory files is completed, it will undergo a pre-assessment regarding uniformity, lack of documentation, scientific relevance, similarity and plagiarism index, and adequacy to the submission guidelines.

Papers published in preprint repositories may be accepted as long as they expressly declare the absence of peer review and have a unique identifier (DOI). The authors are responsible for communicating, at the time of submission, the existence of the work on a preprint server.

Reviewers and editors reserve the right to request, at any stage of the editorial flow, supplementary documents or raw data to complement the review process and make them available for public access and reproducibility.

These Submission Guidelines were last updated on Feb 11, 2023.

II. Formatting instruction.

All articles can be submitted for publication in Portuguese or English. Text revision by a language professional is recommended. The RCS is based on guidelines published in Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals ( http://www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf ).

III. Writing recommendations.

RCS requests that authors follow the recommendations for writing scientific articles in the health field as available on the EQUATOR Network Web site (or the page in Brazilian Portuguese ). Compliance with writing standards increases the quality of the article and peer review. The following guidelines (or their extensions) must be followed:

Types of study	Guideline
Observational studies	STROBE
Randomized clinical trials	CONSORT
Diagnostic and prognostic studies	STARD or TRIPOD
Systematic reviews	PRISMA
Systematic review protocol	PRISMA-P
Scope/integrative reviews	PRISMA-ScR
Case reports	CARE
Preclinical studies in animals	ARRIVE
Clinical practice guidelines/protocols	AGREE ou RIGHT
Clinical study protocols	SPIRIT
Qualitative research	SRQR or COREQ

All Original Articles, Case Reports, Systematic Reviews, or Scope/Integrative Reviews manuscript submissions must be accompanied by the duly completed checklist of each relevant guideline. It is requested that each Guideline item be marked with the page number it was written on in the body of the manuscript.

Authors must try to follow the topics contained in each guideline to facilitate writing itself and speed up the review work.

The Revista Ciências em Saúde makes the checklists available for download here.

Failure to follow basic writing principles will lead to rejection of the submission before the peer review process.

IV. Manuscript preparation

Different types of articles have additional requirements for writing, as follows:

Types of manuscripts	Components (in order)
Editorial	Title, Author(s) information. Free text References (if applicable)
Original Articles, Systematic Reviews, Integrative Reviews and Meta-analyses	Title Page Structured abstract and keywords Body of the manuscript (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion) Acknowledgments References Figures Tables Declaration of Originality, Authorship and Assignment of Copyright Declaration of Agreement in Translation into the English Language (for submissions in Portuguese) Checklist of Guidelines requirements (as per Equator Network) Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest Supplementary documents (raw data, spreadsheets, applied questionnaires, if any)
Case Reports	Title Page Unstructured abstract and keywords Body of the manuscript (Introduction, Case Description, Discussion, and Conclusion) Acknowledgments References Figures Tables Declaration of Originality, Authorship and Assignment of Copyright Declaration of Agreement in Translation into the English Language (for submissions in Portuguese) CARE Guidelines Checklist Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest Supplementary documents
Narrative reviews	Title Page Unstructured abstract and keywords Body of the manuscript (Introduction, Development, and Discussion) References Figures Tables Acknowledgments Declaration of Originality, Authorship and Assignment of Copyright Declaration of Agreement in Translation into the English Language (for submissions in Portuguese) Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest

Text files must be sent as MS Word® documents in Times News Roman font size 12, 1.5 spacing, justified. RCS does not accept publications with footnotes.

1) Title Page

It must be sent as a separate file and contain basic information about the article, the authors, and their institutions. See the example below. You can download the title page template (available in Portuguese and English versions here). At the end of the title page, there is a field for placing preferred or non-preferred reviewers to be indicated for the double-blind peer review. For more information, see item VIII below.

1. Number of characters with space in the title.
2. Number of words in the summary.
3. Number of words in the text.
4. Number of references.
5. The total number of tables plus figures.
6. Manuscript type (Original Article, Review, Case Report, etc.).
7. Title in Portuguese (only if there is an Abstract in Portuguese).
8. Title in English.
9. Full names of the authors, separated by a comma, in the order in which they should appear in the final version, with the indication of affiliation using superscript numbers.
10. Affiliation (Institution, city, state, country) of authors, preceded by corresponding superscript numbers.
11. Title (maximum postgraduate degree, relevant professional and/or academic activity, etc.), e-mail, and ORCID ID of each author.
12. The institution where the work was conducted.
13. Work reference as an integral part of the dissertation, thesis, or project (if applicable).
14. Correspondence information (corresponding author's name, full address, telephone, e-mail).
15. Information on work presentation at congresses, symposiums, and similar events.
16. Indication of the specific contributions of each author to the submitted work, following the model provided, inserting the initials of the authors involved in each of the tasks listed.
17. Funding information. Inform the receipt of a research grant, project funding, or similar, including the funding code.
18. Suggestion of preferred or non-preferred reviewers.

2) Title

It must be concise and accurately refer to the manuscript's content, containing up to 150 letters (including spaces). If possible, it should be declarative, defining the subject matter and the results. Titles in the form of questions should be avoided. Authors must ensure that the title:

• DO NOT be in question form.
• DO NOT INCLUDE "The first…" as such a statement is seldom possible to verify.
• DO NOT INCLUDE a comma or other punctuation that splits the sentence in two.
• DO NOT REPEAT the type of article: Clinical Research, Review, etc., except in cases of Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, or Case Report.
• DO NOT DEFINE the type of statistical analysis, e.g., multivariate analysis.
• DO NOT INCLUDE the name of your institution.
• DO NOT INCLUDE authors' names or the number of patients.

3) Abstract/ Unstructured Abstracts

Case reports and narrative reviews require unstructured abstracts that briefly and objectively describe the article, its clinical importance, outcomes, and summary conclusion. They must have a maximum of 150 words.

4) Abstract/Structured Abstract

Original articles and systematic reviews/meta-analyses must have abstracts that clearly define the objectives and results of the work. A structured abstract must contain:

1. Objective: exact definition of the question and, if applicable, the hypothesis.
2. Methods: design and location of the study (population, hospital center, outpatient clinic), selection method and the number of patients, eligibility criteria, and interventions or treatments instituted.
3. Results: main results, always accompanied by statistical significance (if applicable). Numerical data without statistical proof will not be accepted.
4. Conclusions: only research-related conclusions will be accepted.

Tables, figures, citations, and trademarks must not appear in the abstract.

5) Keywords

Three to six keywords in Portuguese and English must be provided right after the abstract and summary, respectively, in lowercase, separated by commas. Keywords must be obtained from the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS-BIREME) and the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) of the National Library of Medicine (NLM).

NLM offers a service (in English) for keyword suggestions based on informed text (abstract or body text) called MeSH on Demand.

6) Abbreviations

Do not use periods to separate letters in the abbreviation (e.g., AAA instead of AAA). The complete form of the word should be used the first time, followed by its abbreviated form. After that, only the abbreviated form should be mentioned. Abbreviations used in tables and figures must be explained in their footers, even if previously defined in the text.

7) Main Text

It should be divided into Subtitles (in bold) according to the type of article: Originals and Systematic Reviews (Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion), Case Reports (Introduction, Case Description, Discussion, and Conclusion), and Narrative Reviews (Introduction, Development, and Discussion). We recommend checking the guidelines collated on the EQUATOR Network website (or the Brazilian Portuguese page ).

Do not identify information about the authors and the institution they belong to in the body of the text to ensure a blind review. If necessary and possible, the Editor can suppress the institutional information before sending the manuscript to the reviewers.

Using generic names for drugs is mandatory, while their trade names must be inserted in parentheses below. Generic equipment names are also preferred, while trade names should be enclosed in parentheses along with the trademark symbol (™) and the manufacturer's city, state, and country. Measurements of weight, height, etc., must be written in metric units.

1. Introduction. Objective description of the foundations of the study, based on the literature, and highlighting the scientific gap that justified the study. We suggest not exceeding 4 paragraphs and 400 words. It should expose the fundamentals of the theme, the existing gaps, the hypothesis or purpose, and, finally, the proposed solution. The objectives and justification of the study must appear in the last paragraph of the Introduction.
2. Methods. Part of the manuscript that allows replication of the study and may be subdivided into sections. It must include a detailed description of the sample selection, including sex and age, the type of research, whether animal or experimental, including a control group, if any. The definition of race should be used whenever possible, and relevant to the topic addressed. Equipment and reagents must be identified (including manufacturer's name, trademark ™, city, state, and country of manufacture), giving details of the procedures and techniques used. Describe in detail the methods employed, including their limitations. Describe drugs and drugs used, doses, and routes of administration. Describe the protocol used (interventions, outcomes, allocation methods, blinding). Indicate the approval by the Research Ethics Committee or the Ethics Committee for Animal Use with your protocol number. Authors must identify that the work was carried out following CNS Resolution 466/2012 and the Singapore and Hong Kong Declarations on ethical integrity. Describe the statistical methods used. Systematic Reviews must contain the PROSPERO registration number, and Randomized Clinical Trials must preferably be registered with ReBEC.
3. Results. A clear display of data obtained from the work. It may be subdivided into sections (in italics), supported by a rational number of tables and figures. Depending on the manuscript, they should display the data obtained chronologically or from general to specific. Charts and organization charts will be named Figures. Data reported in tables and graphs should preferably not be mentioned in the body of the text and vice versa.
4. Discussion. Analysis of the proposed topic and results considering updated literature, emphasizing new and important aspects and their limitations. Results should not be repeated. In the Discussion, there must be an answer to the question formulated in the Introduction to validate the study, as well as its limitations. Comparison with data from the literature is fundamental to support the novelties of the research and its implications. The last paragraph should express conclusions and/or future recommendations.
5. Conclusion. One or two paragraphs that clearly and concisely answer(s) the purpose of the study. They should not repeat data and discussions. Conclusions not based on the presented results may lead to the non-acceptance of the article in the review phase.
6. Case Description (for Case Reports). There is no specific structure, but it should contain diagnostic hypotheses, a description of the methods, and a conclusion with the case's outcome and relevance, as described in the CARE Guidelines. The word limit must be respected.
7. Development (for Narrative Reviews). There is no specific structure. The word limit must be followed.

8) Tables

The maximum number of Tables allowed varies according to the publication type (see limits table). They must be inserted in the main text, after the references, together with their legends.

• They do not have vertical lines and must contain numeric and/or statistical data (see example below). They must have a white background and black lettering. Articles with a gray background or colored letters will not be accepted.
• They are numbered in order of appearance and adopted when necessary to understand the work.
• Tables should not contain data previously reported in the text.
• The table's title must be clear and explanatory and placed above it, in the upper left corner, right after the word "Table", followed by its numbering (Table 1, Table 2, etc.)
• Enter footer markers in the following order: *, †, ‡, §, //, ¶, #, **, ††, etc.
• Tables must be edited in MS Word ^® or a similar program and cannot be sent in figure format.
• They must be cited in the body of the text, writing only their corresponding number (Table 1, Table 2, etc.). Never write 'table below', 'table above', or 'table on page XX', as the numbering of the pages of the manuscript can be changed during formatting.
• They must contain a reference to the statistical test used and its significance value if applied.
• They do not need to contain the source in their footer (e.g., "Source: authors"), as it is understood that it includes data exclusive to the authors. These must be mentioned and referenced in tables or charts containing data from other sources.
• Simple tables without numerical information will be considered tables.

Table Example

9) Figures

Photographs, photomicrographs, illustrations, graphs, and diagrams are considered Figures. They must be sent in the main text, after the Tables, and as a separate file (in high resolution), via online submission.

• Figures in editable graphics format (e.g., MS Excel) can be inserted in the Main Text file, duly identified, after the References and Tables. It is also recommended to send a spreadsheet in MS Excel containing the graph and its data to allow future editing.
• The maximum number of figures allowed varies according to the publication type (see table below). Use high-resolution figures (minimum 300 dpi) in JPG or TIFF formats.
• The figure caption should explain it in a concise but discursive way so that the reader understands what it is about without the need to refer to the text. The list of figure captions should be placed at the end of the Main Text, after the References and Tables. It should be single-spaced, preceded by the word 'Figure', followed by the number that designates it (Figure 1; Figure 2; etc.). After the description, any other information necessary to clarify the figure should be added, such as, for example, measurement units, symbols, scales, abbreviations, and fonts. Note that there should be no title at the top of the figure. See the examples below.
• When citing figures in the body of the text, write only the number referring to the figure (Figure 1, Figure 2, etc.). The word 'Figure' must be presented with the first letter in capital letters. Never write 'figure below', 'figure above', or even 'figure on page XX', as the page numbering of the article can be changed during formatting. Do not use gridlines in charts.
• Column charts should be two-dimensional rather than three-dimensional to provide the described values accurately. An exception is made for graphs with 3 value axes.

figure example

10) Acknowledgments

In this section, acknowledge the work of people who have contributed to the manuscript but whose contribution does not justify co-authorship.

11) Citations and References

• References that are difficult for readers to access (theses, abstracts of papers presented at conferences, or other publications with restricted circulation) may not be accepted.
• Obsolete book chapters or publications from non-indexed or peer-reviewed journals will not be accepted. Websites and online material will only be accepted if they contain relevant government and/or institutional information.
• It is recommended to use references of up to 10 years of publication, and manuscripts whose references are considered outdated will be returned for correction.
• Do not use "personal communication" type references.
• All authors and works cited in the text must appear in the reference list and vice versa.
• Number the references in order of appearance in the text (and not in alphabetical order), using superscript numbers before punctuation, without spaces (Ex. According to Soares ³, (...); (...) as described by Lima et al.⁵.). If two or more references are cited in sequence, only the first and last must be typed, separated by a dash (example: ^5-8).
• References must follow the Vancouver style in accordance with the requirements of the ICMJE and the National Library of Medicine, available at Citing Medicine and US NLM. The Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the referenced article must be informed.
• References must be ordered in Hindu-Arabic numerals. When there are more than six authors, cite the first six followed by "et al." Cite all authors when there are up to six. Note that a period must be inserted after the journal name abbreviation.
• Journal abbreviations must conform to Index Medicus/Medline – either in the List of Journals Indexed in Index Medicus publication or via http://locatorplus.gov/.
• The maximum number of references indicated for each type of article can be found in the summary table.

Examples of references are described below:

Journal articles:

• Harvey J, Dardik H, Impeduglia T, Woo D, Debernardis F. Endovascular management of hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm hemorrhage complicating pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43(3):613-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2005.11.031
• The UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants. Mortality results for randomized controlled trial of early elective surgery or ultrasonographic surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms. Lancet. 1998;352:1649-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(98)10137-X
• Lin JJ, Salamon N, Lee AD, Dutton RA, Geaga JA, Hayashi KM, et al . Reduced neocortical thickness and complexity mapped in mesial temporal lobe epilepsy with hippocampal sclerosis. Cereb Cortex. 2007;17(9):2007-18. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhl109
• Vallancien G, Emberton M, Harving N, van Moorselaar RJ; Alf-One Study Group. Sexual dysfunction in 1,274 European men suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms. J Urol. 2003;169(6):2257-61. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ju.0000067940.76090.73

Article summary

• Lofwall MR, Strain EC, Brooner RK, Kindbom KA, Bigelow GE. Characteristics of older methadone maintenance (MM) patients [abstract]. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2002;66 Suppl 1:S105.

Article accepted and in press

• Yu WM, Hawley TS, Hawley RG, Qu CK. Immortalization of yolk sac-derived precursor cells. 2002;100(10):3828-31. Epub 2002 Jul 5.

Articles published on the Internet:

• Wantland DJ, Portillo CJ, Holzemer WL, Slaughter R, McGheeEM. The effectiveness of web-based vs. non-web-based interventions: a meta-analysis of behavioral change outcomes. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2019 Dec 07];6(4):e40. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6.4.e40 Available from: https://www.jmir.org/2004/4/e40/ .

Physical books

• Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Kobayashi GS, Pfaller MA. Medical microbiology. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002
• Meltzer PS, Kallioniemi A, Trent JM. Chromosome alterations in human solid tumors. In: Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, editors. The genetic basis of human cancer. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002. p. 93-113.

Electronic books

• Blossner M, de Onis M. Malnutrition: quantifying the health impact at national and local levels [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2005 [cited 2008 Jun 10]. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/43120/9241591870.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Dissertations, Theses, Monographs

• Machado, TAC. Identification of potential drug interactions with warfarin and pharmacist interventions for the management of patients admitted to a university hospital [Master's Dissertation]. Porto Alegre: Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Faculty of Pharmacy, Graduate Program in Pharmaceutical Sciences; 2011 [cited 2020 Apr 29]. Avaiable from: http://hdl.handle.net/10183/36115

Websites and online material:

• OncoLink [Internet site]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania; c1994-2006. [cited 2006 Mar 14]. Available from: https://www.oncolink.org/
• International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Recommendations on Biochemical & Organic Nomenclature, Symbols & Terminology etc. [Internet]. London: University of London, Queen Mary, Department of Chemistry; [updated 2006 Jul 24; cited 2007 Feb 22]. Avaiable from: http://www.chem.qmul.ac.uk/iubmb/

Institutional Authors

• Brazilian Society of Hypertension. III Guidelines for the Use of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring. I Guidelines for the use of home blood pressure monitoring III ABPM/IMRPA. Hypertension [Internet]. 2001[cited 2007 Jun 21];4(1):6-22. Available from: http://www.sbh.org.br/documentos/mapa_mrpa3.pdf

Legal documents

• Brazil, Ministry of Health. Ordinance No. 1884, of Nov 11, 1994. Elaboration of physical projects [for health care establishments]. Official Gazette [of] the Federative Republic of Brazil. 1994 Dec 15; Section 1.p 19523-49.
• Brazil, Presidency of the Republic, Deputy Head of Legal Affairs. Law No. 9605 of Feb 12, 1998. Provides for criminal and administrative sanctions derived from conduct and activities harmful to the environment, and other measures [Internet]. Brasilia DF; 1998. [cited 2020 May 1]. Available from: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/Leis/L9605.htm

12) Statistical Analysis

General guidelines regarding the presentation of data that have statistical treatment.

• About the sample: Summary details of the population of interest and the procedures used to define the study sample, when applicable.
• In the Methods section, it is suggested the creation of an exclusive sub-item for the description of the statistical analysis, containing the form of presentation of continuous and/or categorical variables (absolute numbers, mean, standard deviation, standard error of the mean, median, interquartile ranges, percentages, confidence intervals).
• Description of the statistical methods used. When using more complex statistical methods, reference literature for them should be provided. As a rule, statistical tests should always be two-sided rather than one-sided.
• Inform the level of statistical significance adopted.
• Specification of the software used in the statistical analyzes and its respective version.
• Presentation of results: described with their significance values (p-value) and/or confidence intervals.
• Instead of presenting very extensive tables, use graphics as an alternative to facilitate the reading and understanding of the content when possible.
• In tables, even if the p-value is not significant, present the respective value instead of "NS" (for example, p = 0.29 instead of NS).
• Editors can request raw data to check the statistical results presented.
• If possible, note the test value (Z, F, etc.) and the number of degrees of freedom.

13) Number and word limits for article types

Article Type	Authors	Title (max characters, with spaces)	Abstract (max words, no spaces)	Main text (max words)	Figures and/or Tables	References
Original article	8	150	250	3,500	8	30
Case report	6	150	150	1,500	5	20
Narrative review	6	150	150	5,000	8	100
Systematic review and meta-analysis*	8	150	250	5,000	8	100
Editorial	2	150	AT	1,200	NA	NA

*Extra authors may be accepted under request to the Editor.

V. Declaration of Originality, Authorship and Assignment of Copyright.

It must be sent digitally along with the other documents at the time of online submission, according to the model available here. The copyright assignment to Revista Ciência em Saúde applies only to the accepted manuscript, not to supplementary documents and/or raw data eventually made available for publication.

VI. Declaration of Agreement in Translation into the English Language

Valid only for manuscripts accepted for publication from 2021 and initially sent in Portuguese.

Online submission, according to the model available here.

VII. Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest

Document where the declaration of the Funding Source and the declaration of EACH author about potential conflicts of interest involving the submitted manuscript is made. Each author must sign the field corresponding to their statement. The template is available here.

VIII. Indication of Preferred or Non-Preferred Reviewers

The search and selection of external reviewers for the double-blind evaluation of a manuscript by the Editor is a generally difficult task and impacts the delay of the editorial flow. However, the quality of a suitable assessment depends on this process.

The RCS asks authors to suggest names of potential reviewers (maximum of three) and/or reviewers that should be avoided (maximum of two) when evaluating the submitted manuscript. It is crucial to indicate the full name, contact e-mail, and affiliation. Such names must be shown on the Title Page in a separate field. More information can be found on the Peer Review Process page.

Peer-review Process

All Health Sciences Journal review processess are double-blind and peer-reviewed. The entire editorial flow is conducted through the online platform, under the administration of the Editor-in-Chief. Each submission will be reviewed for at least two reviewers who are expert in the field.

Editorial Flow

Once the manuscript has been submitted, the Editorial Team will verify that all requirements mentioned in the Submission Guidelines have been met or that the content falls within the editorial policies. After that, the submission will be forwarded from the Editor-in-Chief to a Responsible Editor, who will assess the initial merit, perform the data blinding and send it to at least two external reviewers specialized in the area. After acceptance, the reviewers will have 14 days to return the revised manuscript with relevant information, comments, doubts, and opinion on acceptance, rejection, or resubmission. Authors will receive the peer-reviewed manuscript, proceed with correction, if any is to be done, and must return it within 14 days.

Any manuscript correction, whether by the reviewers or by the authors, must be carried out exclusively via the online platform, with the activation of the review tool of the text editor (preferably MS Word), with the marking of the altered text.

When sending the requested corrections, authors must attach a letter detailing the responses. The manuscript will be sent for further reading and evaluation if the external reviewer requests it.

The Responsible Editor will finally give his opinion to the Editor-in-Chief, who will give the final word of acceptance or rejection of the manuscript.

After acceptance, the submission will be sent to the Copyediting stage and, later, to the Proofreading phase (preparation of proofs). After proofreading and final acceptance by the correspondence author, the article will be ready for online publication. It is estimated that the average time between submission and acceptance for publication is around 4 to 6 months.

Below is the OJS Workflow Chart for better visualization of the review process:

Ensuring blind peer-review

To ensure the integrity of blind peer review for journal submissions, care should be taken not to disclose the identity of authors and reviewers among each other during the process. This requires authors, editors, and reviewers (likely to submit documents to the system as part of the evaluation process) to take some precautions with the text and document properties:

(a) document authors should exclude names, replacing with "Author" instead of author names, article title;

(b) In Microsoft Office documents, the author ID must be removed from the document properties (in the File > Properties menu) by starting from File in the main menu and clicking on the following:

File > Save As ...> Tools (or Options on Mac)> Security Options ...> Remove personal information from file when saving> OK> Save. 

In PDFs, author names should also be removed from Document Properties under File in the Adobe Acrobat main menu.

Additional care should be taken by authors and reviewers and will be checked by editors and the editor-in-chief regarding the following:

• All author information should be kept on the Title Page.
• Use the third person to refer to work that authors have previously published.
• Replace author's reference names by [e.g., Anonymous - details omitted for double-blind reviewing].
• Do not include acknowledgments that may reveal the institution in which the study was developed.

Indication of preferred and non-preferred reviewers

The peer-review process is often arduous for the editors responsible for the submission's editorial flow. Selecting and receiving a positive response from specialized reviewers to carry out a voluntary analysis of a study can take months and delay the editorial workflow. However, the proper analysis of the submissions by professionals in the field ensures the quality of the review and the final result.

The Health Sciences Journal requests that authors make suggestions from possible reviewers (preferred reviewers) or non-preferred reviewers (which should be avoided). It is important to remember that the suggestions do not guarantee the reviewer's choice or disposal but serve as a guide for the editorial team. According to the Title Page template, the name of up to three preferred and two non-preferred reviewers should be entered. Below are guidelines on the reviewers' suggestions.

Preferred reviewers

• Choose someone who can contribute constructively to the analysis of the manuscript.
• The potential reviewer must have experience in the area, if possible, with related publications.
• The choice should be made preferably with the other authors.
• Try to identify foreign authors in order not only to contribute with different views on research but to help in the dissemination of scientific knowledge.
• It is recommended not only to choose potential reviewers who are recognized names in the field but also researchers at the beginning of their careers who can express interest and carry out quality reviews in a short time.
• It is essential to avoid conflicts of interest. Suggesting friends, acquaintances, or researchers from the same department/laboratory is not recommended and will probably be avoided if identified by the responsible editor.

Non-preferred reviewers

• Here it should be included people with potential conflicts of interest in the revision of the manuscript (friends, colleagues in the department/laboratory, chiefs, or people who, for some reason, have an interest in publishing the manuscript).
• Researchers who have some form of personal disagreement with any of the authors.
• Researchers who have some harmful competition bias between institutions. In these cases, it is possible that the reviewer identifies the study's origin and makes a biased evaluation, even with a double-blind evaluation process.
• Researchers who have some commercial tie with the study content.
• Researchers likely to decline the review request.

Transparency of the review process

In order to allow the transparency of the review process, we provide below the items of the Evaluation Questionnaire delivered to the external/ad hoc reviewers.

1. Is the topic current and relevant? Does the manuscript present important new information that warrants publication?
2. Does the Abstract clearly and concisely describe the content of the manuscript?
3. Is the study question adequately described? Have the hypotheses been outlined?
4. Are the methods described understandably? Do they follow the writing guidelines regarding selection, criteria, outcomes, biases, and types of analyses? Is it detailed enough to allow replication of the study?
5. Are the results adequately displayed? Is there a repetition of information in the text and tables/figures? Are interpretations and conclusions based on the results? Is the discussion based on recent data from the literature? Is there a description of the limitations of the study?
6. Are the references in line with the theme? Are they current and following the Submission Guidelines? Are there book chapters or references difficult to access?
7. Does the writing present spelling errors that prevent the correct interpretation of the text? Does the manuscript conform to scientific language? Is the use of the passive voice limited? Are there paragraphs that are too long and difficult to read?
8. Is the structure and length of the manuscript in line with the Recommendations? Too short, too long, or just right? Is the number of figures and tables sufficient, insufficient, or too many?
9. Assign a value to the publication priority in the RCS (1 lowest priority, 10 highest priority).
10. Assign an overall rating to the submission (excellent, good, fair, below average, or poor).
11. Please let us know if you have any conflicts of interest regarding the revised manuscript. If not, enter "none".
12. Comments for Authors - Suggestions and Corrections.
13. Confidential comments to the Editor
14. Would you like to receive the corrected submission version for further review?