About the Journal
The Angolan Journal of Health Sciences follows a rigorous process of peer review, in the double blind modality, i.e. both the author/s and the reviewer/s are not identified between them, thus complying with the principle of Editorial impartiality, safeguarding the traffic of influences. The
corresponding author will receive notification of the reception of the manuscript and the editorial decisions by email.
All incoming manuscripts are submitted to a prior evaluation by the Director and/or Chief Editors.
These are evaluated according to the following criteria:
• Clarity of writing;
• Appropriate study method;
• Valid data;
• Conclusions appropriate and supported by the data;
• Significance and
• Scientific contribution to the knowledge of the area.
The evaluation process of the articles goes through four phases, i.e. the evaluation obeys a cascade of four evaluators called Evaluators A, B, C and D. The Journal Director and/or the Editor(s) are thus designated as evaluator(s) A, responsible for: deciding at the entrance door if the original has potentiality (attending to the observance of the Editorial Norms), is original and has not been published in other journals (detention of plagiarism), to follow or not for the evaluation by the peers (peer review) with the purpose of publication. The articles accepted by the reviewers team (designated A reviewers), will be forwarded to the members of the Co - editorial team, these in coordination with the Director of the journal and/or the members of the Editorial Team will designate rapporteurs responsible for the evaluation of the articles.
As a minimum, only articles positively evaluated by two members of the National Editorial Team designated as evaluators B and C respectively and a fourth member of the international team designated as evaluator D will be published.
The criteria established for the evaluation of the work are:
• Accepted without changes,
• Accepted subject to minor or major changes,
Reasons for immediate rejection without peer review are:
• Lack of originality,
• Limited interest to the Editors of the Rev. Ang. de Agropecuária,
• Contain serious scientific or methodological flaws,
• Topic is not covered in the necessary depth,
• It is too preliminary and/or speculative,
• Outdated information.
In case of rejection of the submission, within a maximum of 4 weeks, depending on the demand for manuscripts and the availability of the Editorial Team, the original will be returned via email to the corresponding author, with the necessary clarifications that were the basis for rejection. The Editorial Team reserves the right to adapt the manuscripts to the style of the Journal and to correct any grammar, spelling, typing, bibliographic and graphic norms errors, in uniterms and key words, without altering the content of the articles. * For this process, a time plan of two months is
stipulated for the editors to give their opinion after submission. The following time schedule is stipulated for this process:
Immediately after receiving the communication of acceptance of publication by the corresponding author, the author should send immediately, by e-mail, the form of sharing of copyrights that is on the website of Rev. Ang. de Ciênc. da Saúde, duly completed and signed by all the Authors. The Editorial team will take, within 15 days, a first decision that may include the acceptance of the article without modifications, the sending of the reviewers' comments for the Authors to proceed as indicated, or the rejection of the article. The Authors have 20 days to submit a new revised version of the manuscript, including the changes recommended by the experts and the Editorial Board. When changes are proposed, the author must send, within a maximum of twenty days, an e-mail to the editor answering all the questions raised and attaching a revised version of the article with the changes inserted highlighted in a different colour.
Within a maximum of four weeks, the reviewer must reply to the Editor giving his/her comments on the manuscript under review and his/her suggestion as to the acceptance or rejection of the work.
The Main Editor has 15 days to make a decision on the new version: reject or accept the article in the new version or submit it to one or more external reviewers whose opinion may or may not coincide with those resulting from the first revision. If the manuscript is sent back for external review, the experts have four weeks to send their comments and their suggestion as to whether the manuscript should be accepted or refused for publication.
Taking into account the suggestions of the reviewers, the Main Editor may accept the article in this new version, reject it or request modifications again. In the latter case, the Authors have one month to submit a revised version, which may, if the Principal Editor so determines, undergo a further revision process by external experts.
In case of acceptance at any of the above stages, the Main Author will be notified. In a period of less than one month, the Editorial Team will send the article for revision by the Authors already with the final format, but without the definitive numbering. The Authors have five days to revise the text and communicate any typographical errors. At this stage Authors cannot make any substantive changes to the article, apart from corrections of typographical errors and/or minor spelling mistakes. In particular, changes to data in tables or graphs, changes to the background of the text, etc. are not allowed. After the Author(s); reply, or in the absence of a reply, after five days have elapsed, the article is considered closed.
During the proofreading stage, substantive changes to articles will not be accepted and may lead to their subsequent rejection by decision of the Principal Editor/s. Please note that the transcription of images, tables or graphs from other publications must have the prior authorization of the respective authors in order to comply with the rules governing copyright.
All elements involved in the peer review process must act according to the highest ethical standards. All parties involved in the peer review process should declare any potential conflict of interest and request excuses to review manuscripts that they feel they will not be able to review objectively.
The Rev. Ang. de Cienc. da Saúde has the Fast-Track publication system for urgent and important manuscripts as long as they meet the journal's requirements for Fast-Track.
Authors to apply for fast-track publication must submit their manuscript clearly indicating in an optional document (available in the submission section of the journal's website) to be filled in at the moment of submission why they consider that the manuscript is suitable for fast-track publication. The Editorial Board will make the decision on whether the manuscript is suitable for a fast-track or regular submission;
The Journal Director and/or the Editor/s may consider and select for fast track if applicable, better manuscripts that result from the refereeing based on the prior evaluation.
The Journal Director and/or Editor/s upon receipt of notification, will communicate within 48 hours, whether the manuscript is suitable for fast-track
evaluation. If the same is not eligible for fast-track evaluation, the manuscript may be considered for normal review process. Authors will also have the opportunity to withdraw their submission. For manuscripts that are accepted for fast-track evaluation, the Editorial decision will be made within 10 working days.
If the manuscript is accepted for publication, the aim will be to publish it, online, no later than 3 weeks after acceptance. It is clarified that the accepted papers for fast-track automatically conclude the complete evaluation process in a shorter period of time. It is worth mentioning that submitting a manuscript via fast-track does not mean that the article is automatically approved for publication, but that it should continue in the evaluation process according to the criteria of each journal.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
This journal publishes biannually.