The scientific arbitration in search of the quality of Edumecentro publications
EDITORIAL

 

The scientific arbitration in search of the quality of EDUMECENTRO publications

 

El arbitraje científico en busca de la calidad de las publicaciones en EDUMECENTRO

 

 

EDUMECENTRO, the journal of medical education in the central region of Cuba, has already gone beyond its territorial limits; it has authors from various regions of the country and the rest of the world and works to achieve excellence in scientific publishing; it has a prestigious and qualified editorial board that has achieved quality products which satisfy the demand of the teaching learning process and the continuous improvement of medical education.

Within the work carried out in scientific journals is the so-called scientific arbitration, peer review, is the "... critical review of the results of a scientific paper by peers ...", 1 includes the activity of the reviewers and editors and is responsible for determining whether a work deserves publication or not. This process of peer review is vital to ensure and control the quality of articles prior to publication, and like all human work, it is subject to errors and therefore requires constant improvement.2,3

The initial moment of this institutionalized practice called peer review is in 1665, when the Royal Society instituted a system whereby the submission of works for publication in Philisophical Transactions was to be done with the favorable report of a Member of the Royal Society; it emerged as a system of quality control.4 This process continued to evolve from its initial stage, until the twentieth century the evaluation was associated with the scientific method and began to expand its field of action.

The importance attached to the peer review process and to the correct performance of the reviewers during the issuance of value judgments on the decision on whether to publish an article or not is essential, 5 it is necessary to count for it with the criterion of expert reviewers, who, while performing their role in reviewing the quality of articles, advise the director on the functions of the editorial policy outlined.

The EDUMECENTRO journal, in order to perfect its editions, proposes for this year 2017, a resizing of its arbitration process and a deep preparation of its arbiters to obtain more quality in the scientific publications, which at the same time results in the effectiveness of the Educational process of medical education, when applying its contents in daily practice. But we do not want to start this new year of work without recognizing the work developed by its group of arbiters who have systematically contributed to increase the role of the journal as a source of knowledge of the special didactics of the medical sciences. Among them deserve to be mentioned by the systematicness and quality of their work:

  • Ph D. Oscar Cañizares Luna.
  • MD. María Elena Cobas Vilches.
  • B of E. Delia Sosa Morales.
  • Ph D. Orestes González Capdevila.

Editorial Board.
EDUMECENTRO Journal.

 

Declaration of interests:

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

1. Silva Ayçaguer LC. El arbitraje de las revistas médicas, la gestión editorial en red y la calidad de la publicación científica. Rev Cubana de Salud Pública [Internet]. 2011 [citado 4 enero de 2017];38(1):[aprox. 3 p.]. Disponible en: http://www.scielosp.org/pdf/rcsp/v38n1/spu01112.pdf

2. Rodríguez Ernesto G. La revisión editorial por pares: roles y procesos. Rev. Cuba Inf Cienc Salud [Internet]. 2013 [citado 10 Ene 2017];24(2):[aprox. 16 p.]. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2307-21132013000200006&lng=es

3. Rodríguez Ernesto G. La revisión editorial por pares: rechazo del manuscrito, deficiencias del proceso de revisión, sistemas para su gestión y uso como indicador científico. Rev Cuba Inf Cienc Salud [Internet]. 2013 [citado 10 Ene 2017];24(3):[aprox. 16 p.]. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2307-21132013000300008&lng=es

4. Sanz Menéndez L. La evaluación de la ciencia y la investigación. Rev Española de Sociología [Internet]. 2014 [citado 10 Ene 2014];(21):[aprox. 12 p.]. Disponible en: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Luis_Sanz-Menendez/publication /268504077_Sanz-Menendez_Luis_2014_La_evaluacion_de_la_ciencia_y_la_investigacion_Evaluation_of_science_and_research_REVISTA_ESPANOLA_DE_SOCIOLOGIA_21_pp_137 -148/links/546cb5aa0cf284dbf190ea82.pdf

5. Díaz Velis Martínez E. El arbitraje y la preparación del árbitro, aspectos esenciales del quehacer editorial. EDUMECENTRO [Internet]. 2013 [citado 5 Ene 2017];5(2):[aprox. 6 p.]. Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2077 -28742013000200001&lng=es

 

 

Submitted: January 10 2017
Accepted: January 20 2017

 

 

MD. Maritza Franco Pérez. Villa Clara University of Medical Sciences. Cuba. E-mail: maritzafranco@infomed.sld.cu

Añadir comentario