Sobre a Revista
Editorial policies
Focus and scope
The Revista Colombiana de Bioética Journal publishes research articles, with an empirical or theoretical focus, and literature review articles that are of interest to the international scientific community of Bioethics. Its purpose is to validate and disseminate scientific knowledge relevant to current discussions in Bioethics, with a special emphasis on the relationships between technological developments and Bioethics, Bioethics and health, Bioethics and education, Bioethics and the environment, and Bioethics and its foundations, from an interdisciplinary perspective.
The journal selects its articles through a "double-blind" peer review process; its publication frequency is continuous (in Spanish, English and Portuguese) with two issues per year, in digital format, under an open access model (creative commons BY-NC-ND), with no APC's. The journal is fully supported by the Department of Bioethics and its PhD in Bioethics at the Universidad El Bosque (Bogota, Colombia).
Publication process
The RCB publication process is composed of three different stages:
• Submission and peer review
• Editorial production
• Post-Publication
Each stage will be detailed below:
Submission and peer review
This stage includes the call for papers for special issues, the regular submission of manuscripts, desk rejection and peer review decisions. The process ends with the final editorial decision about the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts. Here are some aspects that authors should consider regarding the submission of manuscripts and their evaluation:
Preliminary conditions
There are some preliminary conditions that the authors should be aware of before summitting a manuscript to the RBC. The conditions are originality of the manuscripts, cession and licenses agreements used by the journal, official languages of publication and scientific integrity.
Originality of the manuscripts. Manuscripts submitted to the journal publication process must be an original creation of their authors and must not have been previously published, in whole or in part, in other formal media such as journals, books, or online publications. If a previous version of the manuscript has been published in institutional or scientific repositories, academic networks, personal websites, or some other kind of online repository, authors will be asked to remove that version of their text before submitting it to the RCB. This kind of previous publication may jeopardize the “double-blind” peer review process. All tables, figures and images taken from other sources must have proper permissions in order to be reproduced in the manuscript. The journal will not process such permissions and will not process manuscripts that do not have the respective permissions. The authors are directly responsible for this process. Authors are invited to produce their own tables, figures and images. Finally, it is not in the journal’s interest to publish translations.
Cession agreement and reuse. The RCB request the cession of rights of the manuscripts approved for publication. However, the journal allows reuses for scientific, academic or educational purposes, after consultation with the editor. The only condition is to grant full reference to the published text in the journal, including its DOI.
Also, the journal publishes its contents under the open access model and protects all its manuscripts with a Creative Commons 4.0 license of attribution, non-commercial and no derivative works (BY-NC-ND).
Languages. The journal receives submissions of manuscripts originally written in English, Spanish and Portuguese. The metadata of each manuscript published in the journal will be presented in these three languages.
Publication ethics and scientific integrity. The editorial team, with the support of the editorial board, promotes scientific integrity in all journal contributors by adhering to the policies of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), its principles of transparency and good editorial practices, and to the recommendations for resolving ethical concerns or suspected misconduct, improper handling of images, improper handling of the publication process, conflicts of authorship, data fabrication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, plagiarism, misuse of unpublished information by reviewers, simultaneous submission, among others.
The procedures (flow charts) for dealing with cases that represent potential ethical problems can be found here:
https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.2.37
Also, we give some recommendations to the authors and reviewers related to the scientific integrity and expectations the RCB has about each role in the publication process.
Authors
Authors should consider the following aspects before submitting a manuscript to the Journal:
Authorship. Only an individual who participated creatively in writing and organization of contents of a manuscript should be considered as an author. It is not recommended to include authors who did not have a direct role in the project, such as advisors or tutors, or authors who contributed in a previous phase of the elaboration of the manuscript but did not have any direct and real participation in the writing and reviewing of the manuscript in its different versions. Also, all authors must agree with the contents of the manuscript and must be able to respond individually about the content.
Conflict of interest. Authors are required to submit a written statement regarding the funding of their research and whether there is any potential conflict of interest that could bias their results, the interpretation of those results, or the peer review process of their manuscript. The statement should be submitted on the form the journal has for said purpose.
Transparency. Each manuscript submitted to the RCB is expected to come from a genuine interest in its publication. Submitting manuscripts to the journal for the purpose of getting a submission certificate or as an assignment for an undergraduate or graduate course is not acceptable. Each submission to the journal involves human and financial resources, hours of editorial work, and the usual thorough peer review process.
Quality of the contents. Authors are expected to submit only definitive versions of their manuscripts to the RCB. It is not acceptable to submit manuscripts in progress or unfinished versions from an ongoing investigation.
Scientific quality. Original manuscripts submitted to the RCB are expected to be the product of rigorous scientific research and must be done under ethical conditions. The journal will reject all manuscripts with manipulated or fabricated information, or manuscripts that make improper use of other works or content protected by copyright. In case problems are detected or gaps exist in scientific quality, including ethical issues, the journal will follow the procedures established by COPE.
Originality. Recycled texts and self-plagiarism are not permitted. The journal will review all manuscripts through anti-plagiarism software and if evidence is detected, the manuscript will be rejected immediately.
Reviewers
The reviewer’s role ensures the scientific quality of the RCB. Also, this role is central in the scientific quality of the international discussions in the scientific community. For this reason, we ask the reviewers to consider the following recommendations:
Conflict of interest. If, after receiving a manuscript, the reviewer identifies any professional, scientific, or personal impediment to providing an unbiased perspective of the article, we ask the reviewer to immediately notify the editor and refrain from further actions.
Focus. It is expected that concepts about the manuscripts will be issued with rigor and following a scientific approach. The concepts must not make personal attacks, nor should deviate towards opinions or recommendations without scientific basis. The RCB reviews manuscripts, not people.
Impersonation. The journal invite its reviewers based on a comprehensive analysis of their curriculum vitae. This involves a review of their academic background, their current lines of research and their most recent publications. Thus, if the reviewer accepts reading a manuscript, it is not acceptable that he or she transfers that responsibility to a research assistant, a PhD student or another colleague.
Improper use of the contents. The RCB entrust reviewers with unpublished manuscripts which generally contain results of research, novel approaches or valued findings to science and the development of knowledge. In this regard, we ask for special care protecting the data and contents of all manuscripts that the reviewers agree to read. Any unauthorized use of such information will be considered a serious fault.
Timeliness. The editor relies on the reviewers’ comments to decide about publishing a manuscript, on almost every process. The excessive delay delivering a concept generates an overload on the peer review system of the journal and can affect the validity of the contents of a manuscript, among other undesirable effects. For this reason, we ask reviewers to meet the deadlines for concept submission that were initially agreed with the editor. In case of a delay, it is important that the reviewer notifies the editor so a decision can be made about extending the deadline or reassigning the paper to a new reviewer.
Retractions and corrections. The RCB follows COPE guidelines to proceed in cases that are likely to involve a correction or retraction of a published article. We should point out that withdrawals will be made when serious ethical and quality gaps are identified in a manuscript. These cases include data fabrication, plagiarism, among other problems that compromise originality, reliability, and results. Also, authors can request a correction if they notice an unintentional error that could affect the interpretation of their results or if they identify an error in the article’s metadata. Corrections will be made when there are fundamental issues affecting the understanding or interpretation of the published manuscript; minor errors will not imply correction (e.g., spelling).
Requests or complaints. If a contributor has any request or issue about any journal process, or suspects misconduct in a published manuscript, they should contact the editor directly to the official mailbox: revistacolombianadebioetica@unbosque.edu.co. The RCB Editorial Team will review such request and get in touch with you for further inquiry, analysis, solution, or action on the case.
Types of manuscripts
The RCB publishes original research and literature review articles. It also publishes book reviews on Bioethics and has a place for short articles (notes), in which a discussion or perspective on a current issue or situation for Bioethics is proposed. Below are some details about each type of manuscript:
Research article. The maximum length of research articles is ten thousand (10,000) words without references. Research articles should be written according to the usual structure: introduction, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions.
Review article. The maximum length of review articles is ten thousand (10,000) words without references. The Journal accepts systematic reviews with a qualitative or quantitative approach (meta-analysis). The purpose of reviews is to review and synthesize the most important literature on a research topic, theory or methodology. In order to establish its current status in the area. The structure of the reviews should follow the usual structure: introduction, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions.
Short article (notes). The maximum length of the short articles is three thousand (3,000) words without references. The focus of these articles is critical and should provide an analysis or new perspective on current controversial issues or juncture topics of current discussions in Bioethics. Their structure is flexible, but must always have an introduction, development of contents in the body of the text, and conclusions. Also, they must include references.
Book review. The maximum length of a review is one thousand and five hundred (1,500) words without references. The journal is interested in book reviews in the field of Bioethics which have been published in the current year (the one to be submitted) or in the preceding year. Each review will be read by an editor or reviewer to establish its quality and argumentation, its relevance to the area and the validity of the book reviewed. The focus of the review should be critical: the author should explain his or her perspective and an analysis of the book’s contributions. The journal is not interested in publishing descriptive reviews of the book’s contents. Finally, the journal considers the publisher of the book.
Free format submission
To facilitate the submission of manuscripts to the Journal, we enable authors to submit texts without adapting them to a strict style and citation guidelines. Once the manuscripts are approved for publication, the editor will request the formatting of the text according to the rules of the Journal. However, unformatted submission does not imply manuscripts should be sent without structure. In this regard we ask authors to consider the following:
Metadata. Manuscripts should have an abstract not longer that two hundred (200) words. It should state the purpose and describe the main contents of each section. Also, it should contain appropriate keywords, said keywords should preferably be terms between two or three words, and there should be between four to six unique terms.
Structure of the articles. Research and review articles should follow the classic structure: introduction, methodology, results, discussion and conclusions. Its length should not exceed ten thousand (10,000) words without references.
Other manuscript structures. Short articles and reviews should ensure a coherent structure, preferably with an introduction, a development of its contents, and conclusions. Short articles should not exceed three thousand (3,000) words without references. Book reviews should not exceed one thousand and five hundred (1,500) words without references.
Tables and figures. All tables, figures and images should be mentioned in the body of text and inserted in the place closest to their mention. They must have a title and indicate the source from which they come or specify if they are self-made. Authors are responsible for the permissions to use tables, figures or images published by other media.
Citation style. Rules of citation must be consistent throughout the text.
Submissions. Manuscripts must be submitted through the journal’s publishing platform (Open Journal System). Declaration of conflict of interest and a release form must be uploaded with the text. Templates for said documents can be downloaded here:
https://revistas.unbosque.edu.co/index.php/RCB/about/submissions
If the author is unable to make the submission on his/her own or wishes to clarify any aspect of it, he or she can send his/her manuscript and attachment directly to the journal’s e-mail:
revistacolombianadebioetica@unbosque.edu.co
Review process
The journal has a comprehensive review process. First, there is an editorial review (desk rejection). Then, a thorough content review by external reviewers in a “double-blind” peer review system. Detailed explanation of the main aspects of the process is given below:
Editorial review (desk rejection). Each manuscript will be reviewed by the editors and, if necessary, adjustments will be requested before the manuscript is sent to peers. There may be cases in which it is decided not to accept the submission of a manuscript because of problems with its originality. Also, the manuscript will be rejected if there is any ethical issue or its topic escapes the scope of the journal.
Review system. The journal has a “double-blind” peer review system. This means the identity of authors and reviewers is reserved throughout the process, and the editor will be responsible for preventing probable conflicts of interest and auditing the quality of the concepts.
Peer review process. The peer review process consists of three stages. The first one is the assignment of reviewers, usually two for each manuscript. The journal selects reviewers according to their academic degrees, their current lines of research and their most recent publications. The second stage is the review and consolidation of concepts by the editor. Manuscripts can be accepted without modifications, accepted with minor modifications, accepted with substantial modifications (revise and resubmit) or rejected. In case of contradictory concepts, where one reviewer approves with minor modifications and another approves with substantial modifications or rejects, a third reviewer will be requested to read the manuscript. The third stage is communicating the official peer review results. This may involve closing the manuscript process when the manuscript is rejected or when is approved without adjustments (this occurs in very rare cases); another case is when there are adjustments to make and they have to be verify in detail. Manuscripts which receive concepts where substantial modifications are recommended may be rejected by editorial decision or their final approval will depend on the success of the corrections of the identified problems. The verification of the adjustments will be done by the same peers or with the help of an editor or a member of the journal’s Scientific board.
If authors fail to make the modifications or if the changes aren’t deemed complete enough to make the manuscript publishable, they will have one more opportunity to make a new revision. If the problems of a manuscript have not been solved by the second verification, the final decision will be to reject the manuscript.
Peer review average time. The review of a manuscript can last three months on average. This is since its submission until the final decision about its publication. There is also a chance that the editor notifies authors of the decision to not accept their manuscript submission (desk rejection) if some major problems are detected in its quality, originality or ethical conditions or if the manuscript escapes the journal’s focus and scope. The desk rejection usually takes from a few days to a couple of weeks.
Editorial production
Editorial production is the professional editing process to which manuscripts that have been approved by peers are submitted. It includes proofreading, design, layout, proofreading, spelling check, metadata translation and markup or technical interventions of the texts in HTML or XML, or in the formats to be determined.
The following is a description of some aspects that authors should consider regarding the editorial production process and its particularities in the RCB.
Continuous publication
The journal has a continuous frequency of publication with two issues per year. That means the accepted articles are quickly sent to editorial production with the purpose of being edited and published online as soon as possible. The speed of the production process depends on several factors. Those include the commitment of the authors to review the originals at each stage of the process. The editor will ask the authors to check their texts at several points of the process (preparation, copyediting, proofreading and final corrections) with the expectation that each revision will be made within a time frame. The main stages of editorial production are described below:
Preparation of accepted manuscripts. Along with the final acceptance of a manuscript (i.e. once the peer review process and verification of corrections have been completed), the editor will notify the authors of the start of the production phase and its format preparation. At this point, the editor may request some format corrections from the authors about metadata, author information, tables and figures, or the citation system, according to the guidelines of the journal.
Changes in the manuscript must adhere to format requirements and will be handled with the Word track changes tool. Adding new information or paragraphs to the text that were not included in the original version that was peer-reviewed is not admissible. If any addition is detected without consulting the editor, it will cause the rejection of the article in spite of peer approval.
Copyediting. Copyediting is the process where prose writing is intervened, its syntax and spelling. The purpose of this process is minimizing errors and optimizing the coherence of the texts. The copyeditor, the editor and the authors interact in this process to verify the corrections and resolve inconsistencies or doubts about the content. No manuscript will be published without going through the copyediting stage. Authors should facilitate the process with their quick responses and flexibility.
Typesetting. Typesetting is the process of arranging texts in the layout of the journal. This ensures the contents fulfill editorial conventions so they can be presented to the readers in an organized and easy way to read.
Proofreading and collation. Once texts have been corrected and designed, a new reading is done to check that contents are complete and to check if all the problems were resolved. Proofreading and spelling checking are performed to ensure that any overlooked errors in spelling, typing, layout, design of tables and figures or in spacing and interpolation of the text, are corrected. In this stage authors could make additional observations about the manuscripts.
Revised proofs and final corrections. In the last stage of production, the editor will ask the authors to verify for the last time the contents of their manuscript. If necessary, final corrections will be made. Then, the final version of the manuscript is approved for publication. There will not be further opportunities to make corrections, except those involving a retraction or public correction of the text in accordance with the journal’s ethics policy.
Production times. The expected duration of a publication process for a manuscript, once it has been accepted, is three to four weeks. On average, authors will be given two to three days, in each requested revision, to submit their clarification to the editor or their corrections.
Manuscript submission essentials
Metadata. Abstracts have a maximum length of two hundred (200) words. Its structure should follow the indications given below. In the case of papers, the structure will be:
1. Statement of purpose
2. Introduction
3. Methodology
4. Results
5. Discussion and conclusions
The journal recommends that keywords should be terms of two to three words and there should be between five to six terms for each manuscript. For example, instead of writing “care” and “elder adult” as to different keywords, we recommend writing “care of the elder adult” as one keyword.
Heading levels
Level Format
1 Centered, boldface
2 Flush left, boldface
3 Flush left, boldface italic
4 Indented, boldface, ending with a period.
5 Indented, boldface italic, ending with a period.
Tables and figures (images). Here are some recommendations on the tables and figures of the manuscripts:
1. Tables and figures should always be mentioned in the body of the text, either as part of the narrative thread of the manuscript or in parentheses.
2. Tables and figures shall be numbered in Arabic numerals. The title of the table or figure will be headed by its numbering, in bold, and will be placed at the top of each one, and without a full stop:
“Table 1. Number of cases reported monthly by 2020"
The source should be indicated at the bottom of the table or figure, with a colon, and with a full stop:
“Source: own elaboration.”
3. Images, photographs and other graphic material will be considered as figures and should be named and numbered as such within the manuscript.
4. Authors are encouraged to make their own tables and figures. Those tables and figures that come from other sources must have the proper authorization to be reproduced. These authorizations must be processed and submitted to the journal by the authors. Manuscripts that include such graphic elements, without their proper authorizations or licenses, will not be processed. This is in order to avoid probable inconvenience due to misuse of protected or copyrighted material.
Citation norms. Approved manuscripts must adjust to Chicago citation style author-date. This means sources are cited in the body of the text by using parentheses, including surnames of the authors, the year and page number (when the mentioned quotation is textual). A list of references should be included at the end of the manuscript. The correspondence between the list and the quotations in the body of the text must be equal.
The journal recommends consulting the Chicago manual’s quick guide to get used to the structure of the Chicago author-date style. Authors can visit the quick guide at the following link:
https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-2.html
Post-publication
Post-publication begins the moment each text edited by the RCB is published. It includes the model of publication of the journal and its policies on the use of contents, distribution strategies, diffusion among the academic community, the dissemination among the general public of the most interesting research or situation, and all actions associated to the indexation of contents in citation indexes, bibliographic bases, databases, directories and catalogues, in order to reach the greatest number of researchers and readers possible.
Open access
The RCB publishes all its contents in immediate open access through the Open Journal Systems platform. The contents are protected by a Creative Commons 4.0. license of attribution, non-commercial and no derivative works (BY-NC-ND).
Reuses of our content are permitted under these conditions. We request in all cases where a reuse is requested that the full reference to our journal be included, with the DOI of the published article.
Resources and publication costs. The journal is entirely funded by the Department of Bioethics at Universidad El Bosque. It has no stipulated costs for authors in any of its processes.
Self-archiving. The journal allows self-archiving the papers or texts it publishes and calls its self-archiving policy blue, according to Sherpa-Romeo’s classification. That means authors can self-archive the final version of the published manuscript or the publisher’s version.
However, it is important that there is the DOI as link to the original publication of the article, when this one is catalogued or registered in a repository.
Digital preservation. The website where the RCB is published follows the information security protocols of the institutional repository of Universidad El Bosque. This facilitates access and ensure digital preservation over time. Similarly, all published texts are given a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) to ensure their online location and retrieval.
Indexing. The RCB frequently carries out indexing and updating processes of its volumes in bibliographic bases, databases, repositories, directories and catalogues. It is made to provide the greatest possible access to its contents to the specialized community of Bioethics in the world and to readers interested in the most relevant scientific discussions in the journal’s topics.
It is also part of the essential purpose of the journal to consolidate and maintain itself as a reliable repository of peer-reviewed scientific knowledge, easily accessible, in order to promote an impact on the solution of problems, to contribute to more responsible and conscious professional and social practices and to raise awareness on key bioethical issues.
