Español / English

The work of reviewers is essential to achieve the quality standards expected of the publication and desired by both authors and readers. However, it is necessary to ensure alignment between the reviewers' criteria and the editorial policy of Revista de Neurología. In this regard, the goal of the review process is not solely to make the final decision on whether or not to publish the work but also to improve certain aspects of the manuscript, through technical suggestions, enhancing its significance and, consequently, its subsequent dissemination.

To help achieve this goal, the editorial team has prepared a series of recommendations as a guide to aid reviewers of manuscripts for Revista de Neurología. These recommendations have a dual purpose: to standardize the criteria of various experts while respecting their individual perspectives and to align them with the journal's editorial policy.

General Recommendations

• Reviewers are considered "Experts" by Revista de Neurología. We understand if a reviewer feels they are not in a position to review a particular manuscript, do not consider themselves an expert on the specific subject, or do not have the necessary time. In any case, we appreciate the time taken to evaluate our invitation.
• In the acceptance form for the review, reviewers are asked to indicate if there are any potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscript under review and to specify them. This does not preclude the reviewer from conducting the review if they believe that such potential conflicts will not interfere with their decisions; however, this information may be used by the editorial board when making a final decision.
• Manuscripts are confidential documents and should not be discussed outside the strict editorial scope. Any consultation made by the reviewer should be communicated to the journal with the same commitment to confidentiality. After completing the review, the copy of the manuscript must be destroyed.
• Revista de Neurología ensures the anonymity of the reviewer throughout the process.
• The final decision to publish or not a paper is the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief of Revista de Neurología or their editorial board members, so the reviewer’s suggestion cannot appear in the information provided to the author, which must always include contributions aimed at improving the work. The reviewer’s opinion on the work, in terms of its publication, should be limited to the information provided to the Editor.
• In the case of manuscripts that may be of interest but could be published in shorter formats, Revista de Neurología appreciates if reviewers consider this possibility and provide relevant suggestions to the Editor.
• The review process is aimed not only at selection but also at improving the work. The review should strive to highlight the contributions of interest within the manuscripts.

Specific Recommendations

• The reviewer should assess whether the work aligns with the scope of the journal, within the field of neurological sciences. In this regard, reviewers should strive to balance aspects of originality with criteria of interest for the reader.
• The following sections should be analyzed separately:
  • Design
  • Sample and Methodology
  • Results
  • Discussion and Conclusions
  • References
• Abbreviations should be avoided in titles, even if they are well-recognized. Any abbreviations used within the manuscript should be defined beforehand.
• Units of paraclinical and laboratory parameters should conform to international standards.
• Special consideration should be given to adherence to the journal's publication guidelines, particularly in relation to references.
• The bibliography should be up-to-date, which can be checked by the publication years cited. The reviewer may suggest additional citations to the author if they are deemed relevant.
• Particular attention should be given to the Abstract, which must be informative and structured according to the journal’s guidelines. It is important to keep in mind that many readers will only have access to information about the work through the abstract available on MEDLINE/Index Medicus, SciSearch/Science Citation Index Expanded, and EMBASE/Excerpta Medica.
• Figures should be clear and relevant, without repeating data already presented in the text. Reviewers should consider suggesting changes in design to improve readability and comprehension of the work.
• The reviewer should assess ethical aspects and adherence to the international ethical codes to which Revista de Neurología.
• Reviewers are encouraged to assess the suitability of the keywords.
• There is no need to worry about style or spelling errors, as Revista de Neurología has dedicated style reviewers.
• Reviewers play an essential role in the functioning of Revista de Neurología. Their work is acknowledged by the journal through appropriate certifications, and they are regarded as part of the journal's trusted team. During the review process, the reviewer may contact the Editorial Office (secretaria@neurologia.com) to request any clarification regarding the journal's editorial criteria, as well as a certificate verifying the completion of the review.