Review Process

The editorial workflow of Biosciences and Health is managed electronically through the Open Journal Systems (OJS).

Initial Assessment
After a manuscript is submitted through the electronic system, the editorial team conducts an initial assessment to ensure compliance with the Author Guidelines, particularly with regard to formal, documentation, and presentation requirements.
At this stage, a similarity check is also performed to identify potential text overlap and instances that may constitute plagiarism. If similarities requiring correction are identified, the authors will be asked to revise the manuscript. If the required corrections are not satisfactorily addressed, the manuscript may be rejected.
For manuscripts submitted in English by authors whose first language is not English, a certificate issued by a translator specializing in the English language must be provided at the time of submission, confirming that the manuscript has been professionally translated and reviewed. Authors remain responsible for the scientific and linguistic accuracy of the submitted content.

Editorial Assessment
Once the manuscript has been found to comply with the Author Guidelines and to fall within the scope of the journal, the Editor-in-Chief assigns a member of the Editorial Board with expertise in the relevant subject area to serve as the editor responsible for the review process.
The assigned editor conducts the editorial assessment of the manuscript and coordinates the subsequent stages of the review process.

Peer Review
Under the responsibility of the assigned editor, the manuscript is submitted for peer review. Biosciences and Health adopts the Double Anonymous Peer Review model, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process.
The assigned editor invites one external ad hoc reviewer, selected on the basis of their experience and expertise in the subject area of the study. Additional reviewer reports may be requested whenever the assigned editor considers them necessary to ensure an adequate evaluation of the manuscript.
If a potential conflict of interest is identified, the reviewer will be replaced by another independent reviewer.

Decision Following Peer Review
After receiving the reviewer’s report, the assigned editor evaluates the comments and recommendations and communicates the editorial decision to the authors. The decision may include a request for revisions and/or clarification or rejection of the manuscript following peer review.
When revisions are requested, the authors must resubmit the revised manuscript together with a detailed response letter, addressing point by point the comments and recommendations made by the assigned editor and the reviewer.
The revised manuscript and the response letter are evaluated by the assigned editor and, when necessary, resubmitted to the original reviewer to determine whether the recommendations and requested corrections have been adequately addressed.
The process may involve more than one round of revision, depending on the nature and extent of the modifications required.

Editorial Recommendation and Final Decision
For a manuscript to be recommended for publication, it must receive a favorable report from the ad hoc reviewer and a favorable recommendation from the assigned editor.
Once the review process has been completed, the assigned editor forwards the revised manuscript, the reviewer’s report, and, when applicable, the authors’ response letter to the Editor-in-Chief.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript, taking into consideration the reviewer’s report, the recommendation of the assigned editor, compliance with the journal’s editorial requirements, and the overall quality of the final manuscript.
The final decision is communicated to the authors through the journal’s electronic system. Following acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to copyediting and preparation of the final proof, which is sent to the authors for review. Once this stage has been completed and any necessary corrections have been made, the article proceeds to publication.

Summary of the Editorial Process
Submission → Initial Assessment → Editorial Assessment → Peer Review → Revisions and Corrections (when requested) → Editorial Recommendation → Final Decision by the Editor-in-Chief → Final Proof Check → Publication