Peer review process
Fisioterapia em Movimento journal uses single blind peer review. The review process takes around 4-8 months. After acceptance, it currently takes 2 months for the article to be published.
If meeting the established standards, the papers are sent to two or more reviewers for peer review. Reviewers are chosen according to their knowledge and experience.
The editorial assistant coordinates the exchange of information between authors, reviewers and editors. It is up to the editor-in-chief which articles will be accepted for publication, based on the recommendations made by the reviewers and the associate editors.
Workflow
1. Author submits.
2. Editorial Assistant verifies if the manuscript follows all the guidelines. If so, the manuscript is sent to the Editor-in-Chief.
3. Once the established criteria are met, the Editor-in-Chief appoints an Associate Editor. Associate editors, experts in their fields, are designated according to the theme of the manuscript.
4. The Associate Editor makes an initial evaluation of the article and designates two or more reviewers. A message containing the title and the summary of the submission is sent to the reviewers, as well as an invitation to access the system and inform their availability or unavailability in evaluating the manuscript.
ATTENTION: Both the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors verify the originality, clinical relevance and methodology of the works received. The Editor-in-Chief can reject an article immediately, in the same way that Associate Editors can recommend the rejection of a manuscript without prior submission for evaluation.
5. Reviewers score. In case of divergence of opinions, the manuscript is sent to a third reviewer.
6. Associate Editor recommends decision.
7. Editor-in-Chief makes final decision and notifies the authors.
8. Editorial Assistant enters in contact with the authors to inform the following steps: publication fee.
Evaluation guidelines
Before you accept or decline an invitation to review, consider the following questions:
• Does the article match your area of expertise? Only accept if you feel you can provide a quality review.
• Do you have a potential conflict of interest? Disclose this to the editor when you respond.
• Reviewing can be a lot of work; before you commit, make sure you can meet the deadline.
• Respond to the invitation as soon as you can. Delay in your decision slows down the whole process, whether you agree to review or not. If you decline the invitation, provide suggestions for alternative reviewers.
• If you accept, materials you receive must be treated as confidential documents. You can’t share them with anyone without prior authorization from the editor. Since peer review is confidential, you must not share information about the review with anyone without permission from the editors and authors. Check COPE guidelines for more information.
• Your review will help the editor decide whether or not to publish the article. Therefore, your opinion and general observations of the article are essential. Your comments should be constructive, and should not include any personal details.
When evaluating an article, carefully complete the evaluation form, which has the following structure:
Questionnaire
• Does the manuscript contain new and significant information to justify publication?
• Does the Abstract (Summary) clearly and accurately describe the content of the article and are the keywords listed on Decs/Mesh?
• Is the problem significant and concisely stated?
• Are the methods described comprehensively and are the statistical analysis accurately described?
• Are the interpretations and conclusions justified by the results?
• Is adequate reference made to other work in the field?
Manuscript structure
• Is the length of the manuscript adequate?
• Is the number of tables and figures adequate?
Rating
• Are the interest, quality and originality of the manuscript excellent, good, average, below average, poor?
Recommendation
• Accept
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject and resubmit
• Reject
