ISSN 1688-8375 printed version
ISSN 2393-6606  online version

INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS

Submission Preparation Checklist 

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

Review process

·         Manuscript reception and first-phase evaluation

The contributions of the authors are managed by the Scientific Editor and the Technical Editor under the advice of the Associate Editors. Once compliance with the formal requirements of the publication has been verified, it is analyzed in the first phase by the editorial team, who can: a) accept it for external review; b) suggest modifications; or c) reject the submission in the first instance.

This first phase takes 1-3 months, depending on the volume of articles received by the journal.

·         Second phase evaluation, double-blind pairs

The articles are sent for evaluation to expert judges in the area, at the rate of two per work. When it comes to a border area in a science field, the manuscript is sent to the necessary amount of evaluators. In the evaluation process, extreme care is taken to maintain the confidentiality of authors-arbitrators (double-blind system). The journal has an article evaluation form, as a guideline for arbitration. Three outcomes can emerge from this phase: a) Publishable without changes; b) Publishable with changes; and c) Not publishable.

In all cases, the evaluators prepare a report that bases their opinion. The Editorial Board may ask for other assessments, in cases in which the conclusions of the designated evaluators are incompatible with each other or doubts arise regarding methodological aspects.

The evaluation process of each article takes an average of three months, which may vary depending on the content of the considerations or the need to consult with other experts.

The assessment of the evaluators is analyzed by the Scientific Editor, who prepares a communication to the authors about the result of the evaluation. They must make the requested modifications within approximately one month. Ultimately, the Scientific Editor is responsible for the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the articles. This decision is final.

·         Translation and publication

Once the final version of the manuscript is accepted, authors are requested to provide an English translated version. The translation must be done by an expert translator who guarantees the quality of the work.

The Technical Team is responsible for the editing and layout of the manuscript and, if necessary, they will communicate with the authors to make adjustments prior to publication.

Once a manuscript has been accepted for publication, the Editorial Team reserves the right to decide in which order, number and volume it will be published.

The rejection rate for 2023 was 62 %.

Author Guidelines 

Enfermería: Cuidados Humanizados journal receives manuscripts throughout the year. All applications must be made through the OJS platform.

The journal only accepts original papers that have not been published elsewhere or are in the process of being evaluated in another journal. Since 2024, the journal accepts preprints. In addition, the work will not be published elsewhere in the same form, even electronically, without the written consent of the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.

Preparation of the manuscript

The manuscript must follow the Vancouver system guidelines for writing, citations and the bibliographic reference system (see summary).

I. General Guidelines

All articles, regardless of the section to which they are submitted, should take into account the following points:

1. Title. Brief and informative, clear and precise, it must contain the research variables. The title must be in Spanish, Portuguese and English.
2. Author names and affiliations. The first names and last names of each author —respecting the order of the first author and co-authors— must be clearly indicated along with their ORCID number. In addition, the institutional affiliation of each one is indicated along with their email and country. The list of authors must include all those who can legitimately claim authorship (see Authorship Responsibility Statement).
3. Abstract. It is a structured abstract, which must include the sections on objective, methodology, results (3-4 most important) and conclusions (1-2 most important). It is presented as a single paragraph with a maximum of 250 words. It must be in: Spanish, Portuguese and English.
4. Keywords. Immediately after the abstract, a minimum of three and a maximum of five keywords are provided. These keywords will be used for indexing purposes. Terms from the MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) thesaurus should be used, as well as consulting a Spanish edition of the MeSH prepared by Bireme Descriptores de Ciencias de la Salud (DeSC). Keywords must be in: Spanish, Portuguese and English.
5. Tables and figures. Tables and figures must be in editable text, except for those that can only be sent as images. Integrate tables and figures in the body of the text and not at the end. Tables are numbered in the order in which they appear, as are figures.
6. Bibliographic references. Refers to the sources used to carry out the research. No less than 15 references are suggested. It is recommended that the average of the referenced bibliography does not exceed the last five years, while including references from prestigious journals. All citations in the text must appear in the list of bibliographical references. Citations and bibliographic references must follow the Vancouver system (see summary). In the manuscript, parenthetical citations should be in superscript format.
7. Data availability. For articles resulting from original research, authors must explain whether their data is available in an open repository and where to access it. This information is completed in the Authorship Responsibility Statement document. Possible open data repositories are: SciELO Data, Mendeley Data, Zenodo, DANS, DataHub, FigShare.

II. Structure for quantitative articles

The structure of quantitative articles may vary depending on the case, but must contain at least:

1. Introduction. It must include: i) specific problem of study, approach and justification; ii) review of background information that supports the research work, with citations that recognize previous studies specifically related to the topic addressed; iii) objective or formal statement of the end pursued. The objective must indicate unequivocally what it is that the researcher intends to observe and measure, written as affirmations.
2. Methodology. Design of the study, place and time in which it was carried out, population studied and relevant characteristics for the interpretation of the results. Universe, selection and type of sample, instruments, materials and information collection strategy, procedures. The variables that have been analyzed should be described. If it is an experimental study, describe the intervention performed and the follow-up time. If measuring instruments were used, the manufacturer’s name should be specified. Describe the subjects or participants, including eligibility and exclusion criteria, as well as a description of the source population. Describe observations, statistical methods used, and the level of statistical significance previously established to attribute to the results. Indicate type of analysis and software used. It is made explicit who, how, when and where the information was compiled. Likewise, the difficulties encountered will be reported; will be informed if there were collaborations. Indicate (if applicable) the obtaining of the informed consent of the participants. You must submit a statement of approval of the project, or if it is exempt from the need for review by an Ethics Committee (as in the case of the Brief originals section).
3. Results. They should be presented in a logical order and have a satisfactory statistical analysis (if applicable). Only the most important results should be included, according to the objectives and the statistical analysis proposed in the Method section. The results should respond to the objectives that have been set and should clarify whether or not they certify the working hypotheses. Tables and graphs will be included, which should be numbered and titled concisely and clearly expressing their content. Tables or figures should complement the information in the text, not duplicate it.
4. Discussion. Based on the results and with the background and established concepts, carry out a dialogue, interpreting and comparing the phenomena and data found in light of what has been proposed in other studies (background).
5. Conclusions, suggestions and recommendations. Based on the objectives, the conclusions assess their scope and the degree of compliance throughout the process. Add the new aspects of the study, elaborating projections or new hypotheses if you consider it important. Establish some degree of generalization and recommendations as you consider pertinent. Indicate the possible limitations of the study that may condition the interpretation of the results.

III. Structure for qualitative articles

Original manuscripts based on qualitative methodology may have a different structure and length than original articles based on quantitative methodology. The structure is as follows: Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion and Conclusions. If required by the type and content of the study, the number of words in the body of the manuscript may be increased up to 8,000 words, and the number of references up to 45.

1. Methodology. Indicate all the necessary information so that the readers know how the study has been carried out. Thus, the starting theoretical approach must be explained, the type of design used must be described and justified. The procedure for selecting the participants must be explained, reporting the saturation in the sampling, the possible contrast of the results with the participants/informants, the search for negative cases, the mechanisms to guarantee information saturation, etc. The data collection techniques used should be described.
2. Results and Discussion. These must be based on the rigor of the collected empirical data. It must be clearly differentiated where the results obtained from the participants are indicated and the opinion of the authors, which must be based on the information of the participants. The most relevant data must be selected and identified with the initials of the groups or participants, for example G1, G2, ACM, etc.
3. Conclusions. These must specify the answer to the research question posed, indicating the contribution that is made to understanding the phenomenon studied and the relevance for health professionals and the participants.

Authorship Responsibility Statement

All authors of the article must read, complete and sign the following Authorship Responsibility Statement. This must be included in the submission, together with the manuscript and the anonymous version.

How to prepare the anonymous file for review

To ensure double-blind review, authors should prepare a file that does not contain any information that could reveal their identity to potential reviewers.

Authors must take into account the following aspects:

• The document must be classified as an “anonymous version” when uploaded to the platform, and must not contain information about the authors in the file name.
• The anonymous file will not contain the names of the authors or their institutional affiliations, or acknowledgments or financing information revealed by the institution to which they belong.
• In those passages where institutions or specific geographic coordinates —that allow the identification of the authors— are mentioned, the text will be replaced by crosses or, if necessary for understanding, by a description of the deleted element, between brackets.
  Examples: “The study was conducted among XXX students”; “The study was carried out among the students of the [study center]”.
• Citations to previous works by any of the authors of the manuscript should be replaced by the word “Author”.  In the list of references, entries only identified with the word “Author” and the year in parentheses will be placed at the beginning, all the other data must be deleted.
  Example: 1. Author. (2019).
• Authors should check in the word processor that there is no metadata in the file that identifies any user by name or surname. In Word for Windows, you can check and delete this information in the menu “Information > Inspect Document”. In Word for MacOS, it can be done in “Protect document > Delete personal information when saving”.

Editorial

This section includes comments and reflections on a novel topic related to care or health sciences in general. Editorials are usually written by order of the journal’s editorial team, although the journal is open to proposals on topics and authors who can develop them.

Original articles

Research papers carried out with qualitative, quantitative or both methodologies, systematic reviews and integrative reviews that deal with any aspect related to care and other health issues are published in this section. The manuscript must not exceed 7,500 words (excluding bibliography and figures or tables). Up to 30 bibliographic references and up to six tables or figures are allowed. In the case of qualitative works and others, whose type and content of the study requires it, the number of words may be increased up to 8,000, and the number of references up to 45. Up to six authors are allowed in this type of article. Peer-reviewed section in a double-blind system.

Brief originals

In this section, case reports and/or case series are published, with an extension of 3,000 words (excluding tables, figures and references). It should be structured in: title, abstract, keywords, introduction, case description, discussion, conclusion and recommendations, and bibliographical references. Peer-reviewed section in a double-blind system.