Peer review evaluation forms

The journal provides peer review evaluation forms structured in accordance with the editorial and scientific guidelines established by the editorial board. These instruments include specific criteria for the academic, methodological, ethical, and formal validation of submitted manuscripts, ensuring objective and transparent peer-review processes aligned with the scientific quality standards of the publication.

Reviewers’ Curriculum Vitae

Full name
ID type	ID number
Country of birth
Nationality
Undergraduate academic degree
Highest postgraduate level
Institution from postgraduate
Institutional affiliation (workplace)
City and country
E-mail
Cellular phone
ORCID and Google Scholar
Publications (Full references of articles in journals (last two years)

REVIEWER GUIDE

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

SECTION I

Reviewer Full name
Institution:
E-Mail:
Manuscript number
Manuscript title
Date sent to reviewer
Expected return date by reviewer

FOR REVIEWER

SECTION II: Please comment on each section of the article.

General comment
Resumen y abstract
Introduction
Materials and methods
Results (should be separate from the discussion)
Discussion:

SECTION II (Cont.)

Referencias:
Otros

SECTION III – Please use the following scale to evaluate: (4 = Excellent) (3 = Good) (2 = Fair) (1 = Poor).

Originality
Contribution to the field
Technical quality
Clarity of writing
Depth of the investigation
Total

SECTION IV – Recommendation: (Please mark with an X)

Accepted
Accepted with minor corrections
Accepted with moderate revisions
It requires a thorough review before being accepted:
Rejected (please justify your answer)

SECTION V: additional comments

Please add any comments or suggestions not covered in the previous sections.

You can also do them in the manuscript that was sent to you.