Participants in the editorial process

a)    The author and the authorship contribution

The manuscript submitted to RMH shall state as authors those who have participated in the planning, research, writing and approval of the manuscript, and who are also responsible for the content of the publication. For a better identification of authorship, it is suggested to comply with the four criteria recommended by the ICMJE:

  • Contribute substantially to the conception or design of the manuscript, or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data.
  • Draft or critically review the content of the manuscript.
  • Approve the version to be published.
  • Assume responsibility for all aspects of the manuscript, ensuring that questions regarding the accuracy or completeness of any part of the paper are adequately investigated and resolved.

It is the collective responsibility of the authors to determine that all persons named as authors meet these criteria. The RMH will accept a maximum of 2 institutional affiliations per author, as long as they are not institutions in the same field (it is accepted for example: Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia; Hospital Edgardo Rebagliati). Those involved shall decide the order in which authors are listed in the manuscript; the journal shall not alter the order of authors, determine who qualifies as an author, or arbitrate possible authorship conflicts. The Revista Médica Herediana does not accept the inclusion or withdrawal of authors after the editorial process of the manuscripts has begun. Likewise, it does not accept the modification of institutional affiliation or degrees or titles.

The contribution that each author has had in the preparation of the manuscript shall be faithfully defined. This shall be stated in the section "Authorship contribution" and only the initials of the first and last names shall be used. The author in charge of communication with the journal is responsible for verifying that the authorship contribution is present in the final file. If necessary, immediately after the "Authorship contribution" section, an "Acknowledgements" section may be added, acknowledging any person important in the publication of the manuscript and who does not qualify as an author.

In addition, the existence of conflicts of interest shall be identified and declared, such as the following: financial, consulting, institutional, personal, ideological, academic and other types of relationships that may constitute a potential conflict of interest in relation to the article. If there is any conflict, the authors involved shall declare it in the manuscript; and if there is none, it shall be stated: "Each author declares that he/she has no ties that may pose a conflict of interest in relation to the article submitted". Moreover, along with the manuscript, a Declaration of Funding and Conflict of Interest letter shall be sent (see Guidelines for Authors).      

b)   Evaluators

RMH invite specialists to form their review committees, taking into consideration the subject matter addressed in the manuscript, in addition to assessing their professional and ethical background. They also ensure that no potential conflict of interest is generated and guarantee that reviewers have access to the complete manuscript in a timely manner, including complementary material (if any), whether figures or others, as well as an evaluation form where the reviewer will express his/her comments and verdict.

For their part, reviewers who accept the invitation of the RMH undertake to provide an objective, critical, and constructive evaluation within the agreed deadline, as well as to maintain the unpublished condition of the manuscripts. Therefore, they shall refrain from publicly exposing the information contained in it, uploading the manuscripts in software or other artificial intelligence technologies where their confidentiality cannot be assured, as well as to make personal use of the ideas of the authors of the manuscript before publication. Reviewers shall inform the Chief Editor of the detection of unethical practices in manuscripts, if they recognize the identity of the authors or if they detect a possible conflict of interest. In these cases, reviewers shall interrupt their evaluation.

In appreciation of the valuable work of the reviewers, RMH issues a document acknowledging their participation at the end of the editorial process of the issue in which they collaborated.

c)    The Chief Editor and the Associated Editors

Editorial decisions of RMH are based on the relevance of the manuscripts, their originality and their contribution to the national and international medical literature. At all times, impartiality in such decisions, without the influence of commercial interests, relationships, or personal agendas, is a priority. In the same way, editors seek to satisfy the informative needs of the academic community, assuring the editorial quality of the articles published. It also includes the improvement and innovation of RMH, and to keep their ethical policies and guidelines for authors updated.

The Chief Editor is responsible for making the final decision on the status of manuscripts, as well as for reviewing in the first instance that these do not present a potential conflict of interest according to what is stated in this document. Likewise, he/she refrains from issuing any decision that incurs a potential conflict of interest. To resolve this, he/she will rely on the members of the journal's Associated Editors.

The Chief Editor is committed to preserve the status of unpublished manuscript during the entire editorial process, without disclosing preliminary results, conclusions or any data, information or analysis; furthermore, he/she guarantees the confidentiality of the names of reviewers and authors during the peer review phase. The Chief Editor, together with the associated editors, coordinates on the manuscripts that will continue to the next phases of the editorial process; he/she is responsible for receiving all allegations of malpractice and socializing them with the council of science editors in the search for a fair resolution.

The members of the journal's council of science editors participate in editorial decisions and are responsible for safeguarding the different phases of the editorial process, taking care of ethical aspects and good editorial practices in coordination with the Chief Editor, in order to maintain the quality, integrity and credibility of the journal in the scientific community. They have the authority to request clarifications regarding a manuscript, to suggest its rejection or withdrawal, to publish rectifications and apologies, when necessary.

The council of science editors commits to maintain the unpublished condition of the manuscripts, to refrain from publicly exposing the information contained in them, to not upload the manuscripts in software or other artificial intelligence technologies where their confidentiality cannot be assured, as well as to not make personal use of the manuscript authors' ideas before publication or use the information in the manuscripts for personal gain. They also provide a current description of their professional relationships or activities to the Chief Editor in order to avoid potential conflicts of interest regarding their editorial judgments.

The Chief Editor or members of the editorial board who postulate a manuscript to the RMH will be removed from any discussion and decision regarding it, with another member of the journal assuming the administration of its editorial process.

Finally, guest editors agree to follow the same provisions.