Revista Pediatria SOPERJ adopts the peer review process as an essential criterion for the evaluation and selection of submitted manuscripts, aiming to ensure the scientific quality, methodological rigor, and clinical relevance of the publications.

1. Initial screening

Every manuscript received undergoes a preliminary assessment by the Editor-in-Chief, who verifies its suitability for the journal's scope, compliance with submission guidelines, completeness of the required documentation, available on the website and in the Guidelines for Authors: (https://revistadepediatriasoperj.org.br/rps/Instrucoes_para_os_Autores), and originality (via a plagiarism check).

If the article falls within the scope but is structurally inadequate, it will be returned to the authors for revisions within 10 days. After this period, it will be removed from the system.

Articles found to contain plagiarism, significant methodological errors, or that do not fit the Journal’s editorial scope will be rejected outright by the Editorial Board, with no right to appeal.

2. Distribution of the manuscript

Manuscripts approved during the initial screening are forwarded to an Associate Editor with expertise in the relevant subject area, who is responsible for managing the review process and selecting appropriate reviewers.

3. Review template

The journal adopts the double-blind peer review model as its standard, in which authors and reviewers do not have access to each other's identities, ensuring greater impartiality in the evaluation. Authors and/or reviewers may opt for open review, in which identities are revealed during the process.

4. Selection and performance of reviewers

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two reviewers - either members of the permanent review board or ad hoc reviewers invited based on their specific expertise in the subject matter. Reviewers are selected based on technical competence and the absence of conflicts of interest with the authors. The evaluation considers criteria such as originality, scientific and clinical relevance, methodological adequacy, clarity in the presentation of results, and ethical compliance.

The updated list of the Journal’s editorial board and ad hoc reviewers - including their respective areas of expertise, institutions, and ORCID identifiers - is available on the Journal's official website. (https://revistadepediatriasoperj.org.br/rps/about/editorialTeam).

5. Issuing opinions

Reviewers submit their opinions on a standardized form, recommending one of the following decisions: acceptance without changes, need for revision, or rejection of the manuscript. In the event of a significant discrepancy between the reports, the Associate Editor may call upon a third reviewer (ad hoc) to assist in the decision-making process.

6. Editorial decision

Based on the reviews received, the Associate Editor formulates a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief. Cases of greater complexity or controversy may be submitted to the Editorial Board for consideration prior to the final decision.

7. Return to the authors

The authors receive the consolidated reviews anonymously (except in cases of open review) and are given a set deadline to respond to each point raised by submitting a response letter and the revised version of the manuscript.

8. Revaluation

The revised manuscript is resubmitted to the original reviewers - or to the Associate Editor in cases of minor changes - to verify the adequacy of the proposed modifications.

9. Final decision

Following validation of the revised version, the Editor-in-Chief formalizes the final editorial decision, authorizing the manuscript to proceed to the editing and publication stages.

10. Article publication process

After approval, the article proceeds to the stages of technical review, layout, and publication.

• Final technical review: The article is sent by the journal’s Editor-in-Chief to the copyeditor, enabling the final technical review. At this stage, should any outstanding technical issues be identified, the author may be contacted again.
• Layout: Once the technical review is complete, the article is sent by the journal's Editor-in-Chief to the layout stage.
• Publication: Approved articles are initially published in the "Ahead of Print" format on the journal's website, with the assignment of a DOI (Digital Object Identifier), enabling immediate scientific dissemination and academic citation.

11. Confidentiality and ethical conduct

All those involved in the process - editors, reviewers, and ad hoc reviewers - commit to maintaining confidentiality regarding the content of the manuscripts under evaluation and to declaring any potential conflicts of interest, declining to evaluate works when appropriate.

12. Rejected manuscripts

If the article was rejected, it may be resubmitted by citing the article number previously generated by the system. Resubmission will only be accepted at least two months after the rejection date and must be accompanied by a letter to the Editor specifying the suggested and implemented changes, as well as the reasons why any suggestions were not accepted. Bibliographic references must be up to date.