Abstract

Open peer review provides greater transparency in the peer review process by allowing authors and readers to see who has been involved in the process and how they have influenced the work. It can also help to avoid bias and bias in the review. On the other hand, post-publication peer review (PPR) is conducted similarly to pre-publication peer review, in which experts evaluate as well as provide feedback on the quality and contribution to scientific knowledge of the corresponding manuscript. However, unlike pre-publication review, PPR does not aim to decide whether a paper should be published or not, but to provide feedback and improvements to already published work. This article aims to clarify a set of doubts about the editorial process of the journal Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología. Any change is a dynamic learning process, and we hope to live up to a high level of open science and editorial standards. As an editorial team, we consider the journal Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología to be "a wrong journal on the right track", for this reason we thank the authors, reviewers and readers for their trust and dedication.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call