Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Author Guidelines

INSTRUCTIONS TO MEDEST 2024 AUTHORS

MedEst Magazine is the official scientific dissemination organ of the University Student Federation (FEU) of the University of Medical Sciences of Matanzas, in the Republic of Cuba. It is aimed at students of any branch of health or linked to this sector in the country and other parts of the world.

GENERAL ASPECTS AND INSTRUCTIONS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN PRESENTING THE ARTICLE

The instructions are based on the recommendations contained in the uniformity requirements of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors for preparing manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. In addition, it uses the Vancouver style. All submissions must conform to the publication standards set forth herein. Otherwise, they may be rejected without peer review.

METADATA

The metadata of each of the authors, as well as those referring to the article, must appear on the journal's website (www.revmedest.sld.cu):

Full name(s): Example: (Juan Antonio) and not (Juan A.).

Surnames.

Individual email: It must be a functional email and reviewed periodically.

ORCID Identifier: It is not enough to have a registration number, but the specialty, master's degree, institution where you work, province and country must also appear, in addition to the publications and events in which you have participated.

Institution: Your institutional affiliation, which will include: University; Faculty; Hospital, Polyclinic or other institutions; Province; and Country to which the work should be attributed, in this order. The university must have the leading role, as the main source of management of research activity.

Conflict of interest: Declare that there is no conflict of interest. Conflicts of interest include financial, personal, political, religious interests, among others.

GENERAL FORMAT FOR ALL MANUSCRIPTS

Sheet type: letter (21.59x27.94 centimeters).

Margins: Default (bottom and top: 2.5 cm; left and right: 3 cm).

Font: Verdana.

Font size: 12 points.

Line spacing: Simple.

Alignment: Justified on both sides.

Space between paragraphs: 1 Enter.

The sections of the manuscript (SUMMARY, INTRODUCTION, METHODS...) must be appropriately headed and aligned to the left, using SHARP CAPITAL LETTERS and bold. Page breaks should not be used. Italics will be used exclusively for words or phrases in other languages, scientific names of medicines and scientific names of animals and plants. The subsections will be indicated in bold.

GENERAL DATA PAGE

Article Type (Right-aligned, bold capitalized).

Title in Spanish and English, with up to 15 words. It should be concise, understandable and informative. It should not include acronyms or abbreviations. If names of institutions are used, they must be official ones. Do not use the word “Title”. Do not write in sustained capital letters. Do not use quotes or put a full stop. The Spanish title should be placed in bold and the English translation in italics.

Full names and surnames of the authors, placed one below the other and ordered according to their participation. The ORCID identifier will be placed after each name as a mandatory element (www.orcid.org). Said identifier must have the author's data incorporated.

Institutional affiliations of each author (except for teaching or scientific positions and categories), following the scheme: University; Faculty; Hospital, Polyclinic or other institutions; Province; and Country. Ex: University of Medical Sciences of Matanzas. Faculty of Medical Sciences “Dr. “Juan Guiteras Gener.” “Samuel Fernández” Polyclinic. Matanzas, Cuba. Note that the institutions are separated by period and followed; not the province and the country, where the comma is used.

Number of words in the summary: up to 250.

Length in pages of the article (without bibliographic references).

Declaration of authorship, according to CRediT taxonomy.

Declaration of conflict of interest (if they exist or not).

Declaration of financing sources.

Statement of agreement or disagreement with conducting an open peer review process.

Corresponding author, full postal address, email. The telephone is optional and facilitates contact by the editors (via messaging service).

If the research is a clinical trial, the registration number must be stated and where it can be verified.

SECTIONS OF THE MAGAZINE

  • Editorial
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Letters from the Director
  • Original article
  • Review article
  • Case Presentation
  • Humanities Article
  • Opinion Article

TAXONOMY OF CONTRIBUTOR ROLES

Each article must be accompanied by a letter expressing the contribution of each author to the study. Each role is defined as follows:

  1. Conceptualization: Ideas. Formulation or evolution of the general objectives and goals of the research.
  2. Data curation: Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), cleanse and maintain research data (including software code, where this is necessary to interpret the data itself); for initial use and subsequent reuse.
  3. Formal analysis: Application of statistical, mathematical, computational or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data.
  4. Acquisition of funds: Acquisition of financial support for the project leading to the work in question.
  5. Research: Development of research, specifically carrying out experiments or collecting data/evidence.
  6. Methodology: Development or design of the methodology. Model creation.
  7. Project administration: Planning management and coordination. Execution of the research activity.
  8. Resources: Supply of study or other materials, reagents, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources or other analysis tools.
  9. Software: Programming, software development. Computer program design. Implementation of computer code and supporting algorithms. Test existing code components.
  10. Supervision: Supervision and leadership of the planning and execution of research activities, including external mentoring to the core team.
  11. Validation: Verification – either as part of the activity or separately – of the general replicability/reproduction of the results/experiments and other research products.
  12. Visualization: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of published work, specifically the visualization/presentation of data.
  13. Writing―Original Draft: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically the writing of the initial draft (including substantive translation).
  14. Writing―Review and Editing: Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work by the members of the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary or revision, including the pre- or post-publication stages.

Note: The authorship contribution for all articles will be established according to the previous taxonomy. The authorship roles will be identified in the order that appears below, including each author in the role that corresponds to them and omitting the roles that do not apply in each case

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 6*.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 5000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: 20 to 30 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 6.

*There may be more than 6, depending on the scope of the research, and it is the responsibility of the Editorial Committee to accept it or not. It is necessary to declare the contribution of each one according to CREdiT taxonomy

It constitutes the highest priority modality for publication in MedEst. It is a written report that communicates for the first time the results of a scientific investigation. It must contain sufficient information and be available so that researchers can evaluate the results and reproduce the experimentation.

The structure of the articles is as follows: Title (Spanish and English); Summary (Spanish and English) and Keywords (Spanish and English); Introduction that ends with the Objectives; Methodological design; Results (including images, figures and tables); Discussion; Conclusions; and Bibliographic References.

Conduct OBSERVATIONAL studies per the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement.

Articles of systematic review or that contain meta-analyses must be developed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) declaration format.

For health economic evaluations use the CHEERS guide, and for clinical trials use the CONSORT guidelines.

If the authors consider it pertinent, they may include the Acknowledgments and/or Annexes sections. The first ones will be placed after the conclusions and before the bibliographical references, while the annexes will be placed after the bibliographical references as the last section of the manuscript.

Introduction: it presents the background and current context of the problem. The research problem (scientific-practical) must be explicitly stated, as well as the justification, making the importance of carrying out the study clear. It should not contain tables or figures. You should give only the necessary references and should not address data from the study or its conclusions. It is characterized by being brief and providing only the necessary explanation so that the reader can understand the development of the research and the entire text of the article. In the last paragraph the objective of the research must appear clearly, always using the appropriate verbs for its writing.

Methodological design: in this section the place and period in which our study is framed, as well as its design, must appear. The universe, the sample (if the latter is used), inclusion and exclusion criteria, and sampling method used will be defined; The variables used in the study and the methods of data collection are declared.

The procedures, techniques and statistical-mathematical analysis carried out on the variables will be presented and explained, which must be adequate and sufficient to achieve the objectives. It must contain the ethical aspects of the study. In general, sufficient details should be provided for the research to be replicable based on this information.

Describe the new or substantially modified methods, stating the reasons why they were used and evaluating their limitations. Accurately identify the medications and chemicals used, without forgetting generic names, doses and routes of administration.

When reporting experiments on human subjects, laboratory animals, or others, indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki or the ethical standards of the committee (institutional or regional) that oversees experimentation on human subjects. State the approval by any Ethics Committee and Scientific Council.

If it is a clinical trial, these must carry their appropriate registration number, obtained from a Clinical Trials Registry. This number must be verifiable, so the source will appear. In addition, they must comply with the evaluation parameters expressed in the international CONSORT guide.

Results: they must be presented in a clear and coherent manner, following a logical sequence (text, table and graph). The text will be presented in the past tense and in a mainly impersonal way, using tables and graphs as support (no more than six in total). Not all the data in the tables should be repeated in the text; only the most important observations. The results communicated must be all those necessary to meet the objectives of the work and must be consistent with the announced methods. It is a common mistake to place the tables in the annexes, when they should invariably be in this section.

Discussion: the novel and important aspects of the study, as well as its limitations, must be highlighted. The results should not be repeated, but used to support the authors' interpretations, in addition to comparing/contrasting the results with those of other relevant studies and assessing implications in clinical practice and/or in future research, always issuing the evaluations of the authorship. This section must appear independently of the results. It should be avoided that the discussion becomes a review of the topic, or that concepts that have appeared in the introduction are repeated.

Conclusions: they must be a synthesis and abstraction of the knowledge presented, reflecting the answer to the question that gave rise to the study. The conclusion(s) must be related to the objective(s) of the study. On the other hand, priorities should not be established or premature conclusions drawn from work still in progress. They must have an adequate degree of generalization. They respond to the objectives of the study and are in correspondence with the results and the discussion. Do not repeat results.

Acknowledgments: When it is considered necessary, the people, centers or entities that have collaborated or supported the completion of the work will be cited.

Annexes: They may be photos and illustrations that enrich the manuscript from a visual and didactic point of view.

Bibliographic references: 20 to 30 references will be accepted. 60% or more must correspond to the last five years, and 30% to the last two years. The MedEst Student Scientific Journal accepts the standards described in the recommendations for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals (Vancouver style).

REVIEW ARTICLES 

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 4.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 5000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: 20 to 40 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 6.

They refer to already published material. They compile, analyze and synthesize the current state of research on a specific topic. 

It is structured as follows: Title (Spanish and English); Summary (Spanish and English), including Keywords; Introduction with an objective at the end; Methodological design; Development; Conclusions and Bibliographic References. If the authors consider it pertinent to include the Acknowledgments and/or Annexes sections, the first ones will be placed after the conclusions and before the bibliographic references; while the annexes will be placed after the bibliographic references, as the last section of the manuscript. Optionally, the work may include tables and figures.

Note: Review articles must be prepared with the most up-to-date bibliography possible on the topic being addressed, as well as its access on networks.

Introduction: present brief, clear and appropriate background information, with its bibliographical foundation. It must be a topic of importance and relevance for science. Substantiate the scientific problem that gives rise to the review. Clearly describe the objectives of the work.

Methodological Design: criteria and justification for the selection of the sources consulted. Used search engines, databases and search strategies; as well as the criteria used for the selection of the cited articles. It does not require results, but it must expand in development, as a secondary article that it is. Period taken for review.

Development: exposition in accordance with the objectives of the work. Figures and tables that highlight the relevant aspects, without incurring repetitions of information. Interpretation of the results indicated in the literature consulted. Contrast the differences and coincidences of the studies analyzed. Carry out criticism of the results of the study in light of the works published by other researchers. Describe the possible applicability and generalization of the results. Include new aspects to consider (if necessary). Point out or highlight the limitations or contributions of the review.

Conclusions: they respond to the objectives of the study. Present clear, concrete and relevant conclusions.

Bibliographic references: they must be those necessary and well delimited (with superscript and after the punctuation mark). 60% must correspond to the last 5 years, and of these 75% to the last 3 years. Relevant national and international literature on the topic must be represented. The number of bibliographic citations used should not be less than 20 nor more than 40.

CASE PRESENTATION

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 4.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 3000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 15 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 4.

They are articles that describe one or several clinical cases (up to 10) of exceptional observation and novel aspect of a previously known disease or syndrome, which represents a contribution of special interest to the knowledge of the topic at present worldwide. Before writing a report or case presentation, one should check the international literature to see if it has value as a publication. Brevity will be the fundamental characteristic of this type of article.

Note: In its basic content the Material and Methods section is omitted. The results are included in the presentation of the clinical case or cases.

All articles submitted to this section must comply with the provisions of the CARE guidelines.

Title: the title must be clear, considering its contribution to scientific knowledge as a single case or diagnosis, prognosis, therapy or damage; Likewise, it must include indexing (descriptors or keywords that allow electronic tracking).

Summary: briefly describes the entire clinical case, indicating its importance and the educational message that motivates its communication. It must be written in Spanish and English. Structured (Introduction, Objectives, Case Presentation, Conclusions), with a maximum of 250 words.

Keywords: these will be the terms and phrases relevant to the content of the manuscript and obtained from the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS). Consult at: https://decs.bvsalud.org/es/

Introduction: allows you to put the clinical case in context with the terms of frequency and severity of the symptoms/signs/disease. It shows its importance for the reader to whom it is oriented.

Case Presentation: allows the foundation and support that gives credibility to the clinical case. To do this, the author(s) must evoke and succinctly point out the literature review of other similar cases, describing how this case is different. The process will be described in such a way that it allows us to assert that the diagnosis is correct and, when appropriate, highlight all the possible therapeutic options that justify the chosen option. It must contain images (of any type) that motivate/contribute to the presentation of the clinical case. These will be cited in the text and placed in a logical and coherent order, in relation to the evolution of the manuscript.

Discussion: this section highlights why the clinical case is important, and discussable aspects are explained or clarified. The lessons that can be learned from the clinical case must be included, specifying that the educational message is practical for imitation, that it alerts and avoids errors, diagnostic implications or prognoses that may be questioned in light of the experience of the clinical case presented or published.

Conclusions: the content of this section will succinctly describe the message that should remain from reading it, the recommendations for the management of similar patients or the lines of research that could arise from this clinical case. The conclusion(s) must be cautious, as treatments cannot be recommended or conclusions extrapolated from just one particular clinical case.

Bibliographic references: should be limited to those pertinent to support the discussion, highlight a clinical concept, remember the infrequent/important nature of a condition or support the need to change certain clinical practices. Up to 15 will be accepted.

If the authors consider it pertinent to include the Acknowledgments section, this will be placed after the conclusions and before the bibliographical references.

MEDICAL HUMANITIES

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 4.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 5000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 40 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 6.

This section will present review articles related to the teaching-learning process in all its stages (the pedagogical activity itself, the particular didactics in the different subjects, the teaching methods and means, the study techniques, the teaching styles and the instructive/educational aspects in the student-teacher relationship).

Studies about the material and spiritual life of social groups and human beings in society will also be taken into consideration, as well as results of studies in the field of individual and social psychology, sociology, anthropology, among others.

From a historical point of view, paradigms, personalities, institutions, diseases, instruments, specialties, etc., that have a link to human health will be addressed. They must reflect the result of an investigative process or the experiences of the author.

It is recommended to only include images and figures when necessary, in a rational way. They will be correctly cited in the text and will be presented in the Annexes section, after the conclusions and before the bibliographical references. Their title and necessary explanations will be placed in the caption of the figure or image, as well as the source. If you use images or figures from other bibliographies, you must request the corresponding permission from the owners (authors) and present said permission along with the complementary files of the submission.

Note: the general aspects of each section will be similar to those raised in the bibliographic reviews.

OPINION ARTICLE

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 3.
  • Summary: Unstructured (250 words).
  • Length: 2500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 15 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 4.

This type of article opens the opportunity for the authors to express and argue their opinions about a problem, fact or circumstance of scientific interest in the field of medical sciences and public health. It may cover aspects of healthcare, educational and research services, which extend to issues of promotion, prevention, diagnosis, therapy, prognosis and others of clinical-epidemiological and administrative interest. It may also contain topics of pedagogy and didactics in the field of medical science education, as well as aspects of the development of research in its different ontological, epistemological and methodological approaches, and the development and introduction of technologies and products.

They are short works, which must be written following the logical order of introduction, development and conclusions - without separating the sections -, and bibliographic references (this section is important to be made on the most up-to-date bibliography on the topic in question; 60% or more of the bibliography used must be from the last 5 years). The number of bibliographic citations used should be between 10 and 15.

The introduction must contain the contextualization of the problem, fact or characteristic that generates the opinion of the author or authors, the importance of the aspects on which the opinion is expressed, as well as the justification for the production of the article, closing this section with the objective of the work. The development will be written in a concise but appropriate manner, exposing the main theoretical and empirical argumentation on the aspects and issues that generate the opinion of the author or authors, in accordance with the ideas presented and argued by them. Finally, in the conclusions, the essential aspects that give rise to the objective are generalized. The author or authors must show power of analysis, synthesis and induce reflection and debate.

EDITORIAL

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 3.
  • Summary: Not required.
  • Length: 1500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 10 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 3.

With few exceptions, it will be written at the request of the Editorial Committee, on a current topic. This is a custom section. Only editors can submit to this section.

Scientific editorials: they represent a rigorous update or an interesting clarification on a certain topic.

Opinion editorials: they collect socio-scientific points of view or positions from the scientific community on a certain topic of common interest to researchers and health professionals.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 2.
  • Summary: Not required.
  • Length: 1500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 10 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 2.

They constitute a brief comment, in agreement or disagreement, where the ideas, positions or disagreements of the authors are expressed (no more than 3) with aspects contained in works published in the journal and that may be related to concepts, methodologies, interpretations, results. or other aspects.

Letter writing rules:

The title must be informative and concessions not accepted in other original articles are allowed. They can be striking, in an interrogative, exclamatory way or through the use of wordplay. It must begin with an explicit and clear reference in relation to the fact that motivates it, whether it is the article that appeared in the magazine or another cause related to it; and from there an expositional scheme and in a progressive way.

The following paragraphs should present the argument for or against; or additional comments regarding the reason for the letter. If original data are to be presented, the main characteristics of the methodology must be explained in a very summary manner (more summarized than in the original article). The following paragraphs should include a discussion of the reasoning or data provided, and end with a final paragraph as conclusions. Its length will not exceed 1,500 words, not including bibliographic references (which will not exceed 10, with 75% updating).

LETTERS FROM THE DIRECTOR

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: 1.
  • Summary: Not required.
  • Length: 1500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 10 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 2.

The Director responds to the letters addressed to him by the authors, referring to topics addressed by articles published in MedEst. In addition, it may refer to relevant and current topics that have not yet been published, to invite the scientific community to investigate. Topics for debate, scientifically based, are also proposed to be inserted into the magazine's communication system.

COMMON REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL TYPES OF ARTICLES

SUMMARY

Its extension and structure depends on the type of article. If structured, it will have: Introduction, Objective, Methodological Design, Development/Results and Conclusions; and will have a maximum length of 250 words. If it is unstructured, it will have a maximum length of 150 words. It is written in the past tense.

KEYWORDS

They must be related to the semantic content of the document. It is recommended to use a minimum of 3 key words or phrases, a maximum of 6. At least one of the key words or phrases must appear in the title. They must be obtained from the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS). Link: https://decs.bvsalud.org/es/ 

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

This journal complies with the regulations described in the Recommendations for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals (Vancouver Style), available at: https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/guibib/60727/mvancouver_a2014iSPA.pdf

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_Style

http://recursosuvs.sld.cu/index.php?P=DownloadFile&Id=147

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7256/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK7256.pdf

The number of bibliographic citations to include, as well as their timeliness, will depend on the type of article. As a common rule, the use of the superscript is established after the punctuation mark.

THANKS

When it is considered necessary, the people, centers or entities that have collaborated or supported the completion of the work will be cited. If there are commercial implications, they should also appear in this section. A statement must also be included that each of the people mentioned in the “Acknowledgments” section authorizes being mentioned.

BOARDS

They collect information in a summarized way and present it efficiently. They also allow information to be displayed with the desired level of detail and precision. The comments made on the data offered will always be referred to in the text and must precede its presentation. They should not be presented in the form of images and will always be placed within the bulk of the manuscript, where appropriate due to the logical order of its writing.

All of them must be numbered consecutively, in the same order in which they are cited for the first time in the text that comments on them. Each table must be accompanied by a short title that will be placed above the body of the table. They must not contain colors and must conform to the orientation of the text, respecting the default right and left margins. Each column in the table should contain a short or abbreviated heading, in bold.

In the footer of the table, the font to be used will be Verdana 10 and the legend, asterisk, note and source will be included (in this order, without putting the word legend, and all its elements are separated by a comma or semicolon). In the case of primary data (surveys, medical records), these do not have sources. For table footnotes, the following symbols must be used, following the same order presented: *, †, ‡, §, ||, ¶, **, ††, ‡‡.

If data from other sources, published or not, are presented, appropriate permissions must be obtained and the sources in question publicly acknowledged. Decimal numbers must be separated by commas and not periods. The percentages are expressed as follows: 25.2%. The size of the tables must be 800 pixels as a maximum length; although it may be higher, depending on the information it offers.

FIGURES

The figures must be made and photographed with professional quality, or sent to digital reproductions of photographic quality, in JPEG or GIF format. Figures should be self-explanatory as much as possible, since many will be reproduced directly as slides for scientific presentations. However, titles and detailed explanations should be included in the legends, not in the body of the figures. You should check the maximum number of figures according to the type of article. As with tables, the dimensions of the figures must be less than 800 pixels.

X-RAYS, ULTRASOUNDS OR OTHER IMAGES

Produced by diagnostic imaging techniques, as well as photographs of pathological specimens or photomicrographs. Clear photographic reproductions should be used, generally sized 127 × 173 mm and up to 580 pixels. Letters, numbers, and symbols included in figures must be clear, uniform, and of sufficient size so that each character remains legible in the reduced version of the published article. Photomicrographs must contain scale markers. Symbols, arrows or letters included in photomicrographs must stand out clearly against the background.

PHOTOGRAPHS OF PEOPLE

The people included in the photograph must not be identifiable, or must be accompanied by the corresponding written authorization allowing the use of the photograph. Whenever possible, specific permission should be obtained for the publication of these materials.

FIGURE CAPTION

It will appear at the end, as a closing. This must be brief and will not exceed the extension line. The word figure will be written abbreviated (Fig.), in bold and centered at the bottom of the figure. The text of the figure will be in Verdana 10 font. If the figure has a legend, it must be placed at the bottom of the figure, aligned to the center and using Verdana 9 font. The figure font will be placed below the number and title of the figure. the figure, centered and with Verdana 9 font. Both the numbering and title and the source must be included in the image of the figure itself.

If a previously published figure is used, the original source must be identified and written permission from the copyright owner to reproduce the material must be submitted with the manuscript. Unless it is a document in the public domain, this authorization is required regardless of who the authors or publishing company are. All figures will be referred to in the text and will be numbered consecutively according to the Arabic system. If it is a single figure, no number is given.

When symbols, arrows, numbers or letters are used to identify parts of the figure, the meaning of all of them must be clearly identified and explained in the legend. The internal scale of the image must also be explained. The staining method used should be described in the photomicrographs.

UNITS OF MEASUREMENT

Units included in the International System of Units (SIU) (meters, kilograms or liters), or their decimal multiples, must be used for measurements of length, height, weight and volume. The temperature must be expressed in degrees Celsius. Blood pressure should be measured in millimeters of mercury (mmHg). All clinical laboratory results will be reported in SIU or SIU-permitted units. If you wish to add traditional units, these will be written in parentheses. Example: blood glucose: 5.55 mmol/L (100 mg/100 mL).

ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

Only common abbreviations should be used; Using unusual abbreviations can be extremely confusing for readers. Authors should avoid using abbreviations in the title and abstract of the work. The first time an abbreviation appears in the text, it must be preceded by the full term to which it refers. If the abbreviation or acronym is in another language, it must be clarified in the display of the term that is the Spanish translation of said language. Common units of measurement are excepted.

SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF LIVING THINGS

When it is necessary to write the scientific name of a living being (bacteria, plant, insect, etc.). The writing of these names must be done according to a specific nomenclature or “taxonomic name”.

SCIENTIFIC NAMES OF DISEASES

They also have a standardized international name. This precise classification and nomenclature is useful for diagnostic and treatment studies, standardizing causes of illness or death, and other statistical uses. This nomenclature is known as the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, and is published and periodically updated by the World Health Organization (WHO).

DRUG NAMES

An International Nonproprietary Name is used that is compiled and updated by the WHO. It can be consulted in a database called MedNet, which includes the official generic names of all drugs.

EDITORIAL

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 3.
  • Summary: Not required.
  • Length: 1500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 10 (75% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 3.

Scientific Editorials: Constitute a rigorous update or an interesting clarification on a specific topic.

Opinion Editorials: Present viewpoints or socio-scientific positions of the scientific community on a specific topic of common interest to health researchers and professionals.

These are solicited by the Editorial Committee. This is a section by invitation of the Editorial Committee.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 3.
  • Summary: Not required.
  • Length: 1500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 10 (75% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 2.

This section provides readers with a space to make brief comments, in agreement or disagreement, regarding aspects contained in works published in the MedEst Journal in the last two years. These comments can relate to interpretations, concepts, methodologies, results, etc.

Letters to the Editor facilitate the exchange of ideas and opinions between authors and journal readers. This activity can be as interesting as the article that triggered the correspondence exchange.

Letter Writing Guidelines:

  • Title: Must be informative and directly related to the letter's content. While certain stylistic concessions not typical of original articles are permitted—such as the use of interrogative or exclamatory forms or wordplay—these must maintain thematic relevance, avoid generating interpretative ambiguity, and preserve the academic tone of the text.

  • Content: The letter should begin with an explicit and precise reference to the event that motivates it, whether it is a recently published article in the MedEst Journal or another event directly linked to its content (for example, an institutional statement, a relevant report, or a recent scientific controversy related to a published article). Starting from this reference, the development should follow a clear, logical, and progressive expository scheme.

  • Argumentation: Subsequent paragraphs must contain a well-founded argument—for or against—the topic in question, or alternatively, critical, complementary, or reflective comments. If original data is included, it must be presented in summary form, accompanied by a very brief but explicit description of the methodological design (e.g., observational study, sampling type, collection context, or analysis type), sufficient to guarantee the transparency, reproducibility, and ethical rigor of the approach, albeit in a more condensed manner than in a research article.

  • Discussion: Following this, a discussion should be developed that critically interprets the reasoning or data provided, relating it to existing evidence or the implications of the work that originated the letter.

  • Conclusions: The text must close with a paragraph of conclusions that directly responds to the purpose stated at the beginning, without introducing new information and maintaining conciseness and coherence.

  • Length: The maximum allowed length is 1500 words, including the body text, references, and any footnotes.

  • References: Up to 10 bibliographic references are accepted, numbered consecutively in the order of appearance and cited according to the Vancouver style.

Letters will not be accepted whose content corresponds to: annals, institutional announcements, event calendars, calls for papers, lists of books received, journalistic news, reprints, meeting reports, undeveloped summaries, obituaries, extended abstracts, thesis abstracts, reviews of commercial products, or translations of already published articles.

LETTERS FROM THE DIRECTOR

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: 1.
  • Summary: Not required.
  • Length: 1500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 10 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 2.

The Director responds to the letters addressed to him by the authors, referring to topics addressed by articles published in MedEst. In addition, it may refer to relevant and current topics that have not yet been published, to invite the scientific community to investigate. Topics for debate, scientifically based, are also proposed to be inserted into the magazine's communication system.

RESEARCH ARTICLE

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 6*.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 5000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: 15 to 30 (75% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 8.

  • Declare each author's contribution according to the CRediT taxonomy. This constitutes the highest priority work for scientific publication in the MedEst Journal.

Its length will not exceed 5000 words, excluding bibliographic references and abstracts. It shall follow this order: (1) title page, (2) abstract and keywords (both in the original language of the article and in English), (3) introduction, which concludes with the objective, (4) methods, (5) results, (6) discussion, (7) conclusions (which may be included as the final paragraph of the discussion), and (8) bibliographic references.

Observational studies must adhere to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. Systematic review articles or those containing meta-analyses must be developed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) format. For health economic evaluations, use the CHEERS guidelines, and for clinical trials, the CONSORT guidelines.

Introduction: Should be brief and provide only the necessary explanation for the reader to understand the development of the research and the article's text. It provides the context and background of the addressed problem and the scientific problem that originated the research. It must also contain sufficient elements that justify conducting the study, expressing its importance, benefits, and value. It must not contain tables or figures. It must include a final paragraph clearly stating the objective of the work.

Methods: Must express the context where the research was conducted, the duration period, the adopted classification for it, the detailed description of its population and the selection and type of sampling, the description of the criteria and justification for sample selection, as well as the inclusion, exclusion, and elimination criteria, if required. It should also mention the studied variables, the study design, the mode of data collection, and the techniques used, both experimental—if it is that type of research—and statistical. It must also include the ethical aspects of the study. In general, sufficient details should be provided so that the research can be replicated based on this information.

Provide references for accredited methods, including statistical ones (only when the method is not widely known by readers) and briefly explain methods that have been published but are not well known. Describe new or substantially modified methods, stating the reasons for their use and evaluating their limitations. Precisely identify all drugs and chemicals used, including generic names, doses, and routes of administration. It is unnecessary to state in the text if Word was used for processing, nor that tables and graphs were made in Excel or another spreadsheet; it is also unnecessary to write that tables and graphs were used for better comprehension.

When reporting on experiments involving humans, laboratory animals, or others, indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the committee (institutional or regional) overseeing human experimentation or with the Declaration of Helsinki. State the approval by an Ethics Committee and Scientific Council.

Results: This is the fundamental section of the article. It should be written in the past tense, using impersonal constructions (e.g., 'predominance was found'). It describes, without interpretation, the observations made with the employed method. These data will be presented in the text, complemented by the use of tables and figures. It is not necessary to repeat all the data in the text, only the elements of interest that will later be subjected to discussion, although reference must be made to the corresponding number of the tables being described. It is important that comments on the results are presented before the placement of tables, figures, or images, maintaining a logical sequence of the text with them. In the Results section, bibliographic references are not cited; if contrasting is needed, it should be done in the Discussion.

Discussion: The novel and relevant aspects of the study and the conclusions derived from them are presented. Authors must state their own opinions on the subject. The following should be highlighted here: 1) the meaning and practical application of the results; 2) considerations about a possible inconsistency in the methodology (study limitations) and the reasons why the results may be valid; 3) the relationship with similar publications and comparison between areas of agreement and disagreement; 4) indications and guidelines for future research. It should be avoided that the discussion becomes a review of the topic and that concepts already appearing in the introduction are repeated. The results of the research should also not be repeated.

Conclusions: These are not mandatory, although they can be presented as part of the discussion, at the end, and are only presented as a section in the article's abstract. The conclusion(s) should be related to the study objective(s). Furthermore, priorities should not be established, nor premature conclusions drawn from work still in progress. They must possess an adequate degree of generalization. They respond to the study objectives and are consistent with the results and discussion; results are not repeated. Conclusions are presented as part of the discussion, usually at the end, and are only presented as a section in the abstract at the beginning of the article.

Bibliographic references: It is important that they are based on the most current bibliography on the subject; 75% or more of the bibliography used should be from the last 5 years. The number of bibliographic citations used should be between 15 and 30. They must be superscripted and placed after the punctuation mark.

Appendices: Appendices are accepted, especially when they contain essential complementary information that is not central to the main message (e.g., validated questionnaires, detailed statistical algorithms, genetic sequences, additional model data).

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW ARTICLES

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 6*.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 8000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: 20 to 40***
  • Figures or Tables: up to 6.

  • Declare each author's contribution according to the CRediT taxonomy.

** A larger number of references may be accepted, subject to the editors' discretion.

These pertain to systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Their length shall not exceed 8000 words, excluding bibliographic references, and may have 6 or more authors, with each author's contribution declared according to the CRediT taxonomy. This type of article offers a critical evaluation of published works, as it compiles, analyzes, and synthesizes the current state of a specific topic relevant to science. The purpose of the review, sources, and methods for searching references must be indicated. We recommend using the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as well as the Guide for Developing a Systematic Review in the Health Sciences from the Universitat de València. Other methodologies or guidelines may be used depending on the field or purpose, such as: Cochrane Handbook, JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute), Campbell Collaboration, Realist reviews, or Scoping reviews (e.g., using the PRISMA-ScR framework).

The article must include: title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusions (which may be included as the final part of the discussion), and bibliographic references. The work may include tables and figures. Review articles must be prepared with the most current bibliography on the addressed topic and their accessibility on networks.

Introduction: Must present brief and clear background with its bibliographic foundation, state the scientific problem that originated the review, and describe the objectives of the work.

Methods: Must include the criteria and justification for selecting the consulted sources, search engines used, databases, search strategies, as well as the criteria employed for selecting the cited articles. It does not require a separate "Results" section, but the discussion should be expanded as it is a secondary article.

It can be guided by the following aspects:

  • Search Database(s): (e.g., "Scopus" and/or "Web of Science") can be defined based on justified evidence (e.g., being the two largest scientific databases of academic articles that can provide bibliographic data or records on demand). To avoid biased results due to the scope covered by the selected database, researchers might use two or more different databases.

  • Search Keywords: Can be developed by reading academic documents and subsequently brainstorming with experts. Using a keyword finder like Decsfinder is recommended. The growing number of databases, journals, publications, automated approaches, and semi-automatic procedures using text mining and machine learning can offer researchers the ability to search for new and relevant research and forecast citations of influential studies.

  • Boolean Operators: (e.g., AND, OR) should be used strategically when developing the search keyword string (e.g., "environmental causes" AND "congenital malformations" OR "congenital anomalies" OR "congenital diseases"). Furthermore, the correct and precise application of quotation marks is important but often overlooked, leading to incorrect selection processes and differentiated results.

  • Search Period: (e.g., between a specific period [e.g., 2010 to 2020] or up to the last full year at the time of writing) can be defined based on the justified scope of the study (e.g., contemporary evolution versus historical trajectory).

  • Search Field: (e.g., "article title, abstract, keywords") can be defined based on justified assumptions (e.g., it is assumed the focus of relevant documents will be mentioned in the article title, abstract, and/or keywords).

  • Subject Area: (e.g., "embryology and genetics") can be defined based on justified principles.

  • Document Type: (e.g., "article" and/or "review"), which reflects the type of scientific/practical contributions (e.g., empirical, synthesis, thought), can be defined based on justified grounds (e.g., articles selected because they are peer-reviewed; editorials not selected because they are not peer-reviewed).

  • Source Type: (e.g., "scientific journal") can be defined based on justified reasons (e.g., journals selected because they publish finished work; conference proceedings not selected because they are work in progress and not considered "full" publications).

  • Language: (e.g., "English") can be determined based on justified limitations (e.g., nowadays, there is little reason to use a language other than the academic lingua franca, English). Truncation and the use of wildcards in searches are recommended to capture different spellings.

  • Quality Filtering: (e.g., "A" and "A" or "4", "4" and "3") can be defined based on justified motivations (e.g., the aim is to unpack knowledge produced more originally and rigorously, the hallmark of top-tier journals).

  • Document Relevance: (i.e., within the focus of the review) can be defined based on a justified judgment (e.g., for a review focused on client participation, articles mentioning client participation in passing without actually investigating it would be excluded).

  • Selection Process: Must be carried out starting with the deduction of duplicate results from other databases, screening abstracts to exclude ineligible studies, and ending with the full-text selection of remaining documents.

  • Interpretation of Exclusion-Inclusion Criteria: For abstracts/articles is mandatory when deciding if articles address the topic or not. This step could involve removing a huge percentage of initially identified articles.

Results: The number of reviewed titles and abstracts, the number of full-text studies retrieved, and the number of excluded studies and the reasons for exclusion will be indicated. This information can be presented in a figure or flowchart. Bibliographic references are not cited (not superscripted) in the Results section.

Discussion: This is the exposition according to the work's objectives. Figures and tables highlighting relevant aspects can be included without incurring information repetition. It will contain the systematization and interpretation of the results noted in the consulted literature: contrasting differences and similarities with analyzed studies, critiquing the study's results in light of works published by other researchers, describing the possible applicability and generalization of the results, including new aspects to consider (if necessary), and noting or highlighting the limitations or contributions of the review.

Conclusions: Must respond to the study's objectives. They should be clear, concrete, and relevant.

Bibliographic References: Must represent the relevant literature on the subject, be well-cited (with superscript and after the punctuation mark). The nature of the study requires an exhaustive search of all relevant literature. The number of bibliographic citations used should not be less than 20, although it may be greater than 30.

Update/Currency: The focus is not only on recent articles, but on all available evidence since the field's inception. Foundational studies are included without time limitation. The PRISMA protocol requires reporting the full date range searched. Any relevant article used in the discussion must be cited as a bibliographic reference. If a larger number of references is required, a greater number will be accepted, subject to the editors' discretion.

Appendices: May include appendices with complete lists of selected studies, database search strategies, detailed risk of bias assessments, or sensitivity analyses.

BRIEF COMMUNICATION

Tipo de

artículo

Características del artículo

Título

(palabras)

Autores

Resumen

Extensión

(palabras)*

Referencias bibliográficas

Figuras

+

tablas

Comunicación breve

15

Hasta 4

Estructurado

(250 palabras)

2500

hasta 15

75 % o más de los últimos 5 años

Hasta 4

Las comunicaciones breves, llamados también “artículos cortos”, presentan los resultados parciales, preliminares o definitivos de una investigación, los avances sobre técnicas de diagnóstico o tratamiento u otras observaciones de interés que justifiquen su publicación con mayor rapidez. Se caracterizan por incluir resumen, introducción (donde se incluye el objetivo), métodos, resultados precisos, una bien argumentada discusión, conclusiones y referencias bibliográficas (Ver orientaciones para Artículo de investigación).

CASE PRESENTATION

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 4.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 3000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 20 (75% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 5.

These articles are characterized by the discussion of one or more cases of interest. This interest stems from:

  • A clinical syndrome or hereditary/congenital alteration, not previously described.

  • The case is known but its frequency is rare, leading to diagnostic challenges.

  • Identification of unusual clinical manifestations.

  • Use of new and more precise diagnostic procedures compared to previously referenced ones.

  • Use of useful therapeutic procedures not previously described.

  • Use of new medications in accordance with published literature.

The above must be adequately argued in the presentation text.

In its basic content, the Methods section is omitted, and the Results are included within the presentation of the clinical case(s).

They will have the following structure: Introduction (includes the objective); Case Presentation (presented in chronological order, from the patient's first consultation to the outcome), Discussion, and Bibliographic References (between 10 and 15).

To publish personal data or photographs of patients in a case report, see the section Patient Data or Photographs in Revista MedEst, with the obtaining of written Informed Consent being essential.

These will be short works, with no more than 3000 words, excluding bibliographic references. They must have a structured abstract, with a maximum of 250 words. Only three authors will be permitted.

All articles submitted to this section must comply with the stipulations in the CARE guidelines.

We ask you to pay special attention to the guidelines regarding the use of Patient Data or Photographs in Revista MedEst.

MEDICAL HUMANITIES

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 4.
  • Summary: Structured (250 words).
  • Length: 5000 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 40 (60% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 6.

This section will present review articles related to the teaching-learning process in all its stages (the pedagogical activity itself, the particular didactics in the different subjects, the teaching methods and means, the study techniques, the teaching styles and the instructive/educational aspects in the student-teacher relationship).

Studies about the material and spiritual life of social groups and human beings in society will also be taken into consideration, as well as results of studies in the field of individual and social psychology, sociology, anthropology, among others.

From a historical point of view, paradigms, personalities, institutions, diseases, instruments, specialties, etc., that have a link to human health will be addressed. They must reflect the result of an investigative process or the experiences of the author.

It is recommended to only include images and figures when necessary, in a rational way. They will be correctly cited in the text and will be presented in the Annexes section, after the conclusions and before the bibliographical references. Their title and necessary explanations will be placed in the caption of the figure or image, as well as the source. If you use images or figures from other bibliographies, you must request the corresponding permission from the owners (authors) and present said permission along with the complementary files of the submission.

Note: the general aspects of each section will be similar to those raised in the bibliographic reviews.

OPINION ARTICLE

  • Title (total words): 15 words
  • Authors: up to 3.
  • Summary: Unstructured (250 words).
  • Length: 2500 words.
  • Bibliographic References: up to 20 (75% or more from the last 5 years)
  • Figures or Tables: up to 4.

This type of article opens the opportunity for the authors to express and argue their opinions about a problem, fact or circumstance of scientific interest in the field of medical sciences and public health. It may cover aspects of healthcare, educational and research services, which extend to issues of promotion, prevention, diagnosis, therapy, prognosis and others of clinical-epidemiological and administrative interest. It may also contain topics of pedagogy and didactics in the field of medical science education, as well as aspects of the development of research in its different ontological, epistemological and methodological approaches, and the development and introduction of technologies and products.

They are short works, which must be written following the logical order of introduction, development and conclusions - without separating the sections -, and bibliographic references (this section is important to be made on the most up-to-date bibliography on the topic in question; 60% or more of the bibliography used must be from the last 5 years). The number of bibliographic citations used should be between 10 and 15.

The introduction must contain the contextualization of the problem, fact or characteristic that generates the opinion of the author or authors, the importance of the aspects on which the opinion is expressed, as well as the justification for the production of the article, closing this section with the objective of the work. The development will be written in a concise but appropriate manner, exposing the main theoretical and empirical argumentation on the aspects and issues that generate the opinion of the author or authors, in accordance with the ideas presented and argued by them. Finally, in the conclusions, the essential aspects that give rise to the objective are generalized. The author or authors must show power of analysis, synthesis and induce reflection and debate.

Narrative Review Article

TÍTULO

  • Se corresponde con el tema de la revisión.
  • Es conciso y comprensible.
  • No excede las 15 palabras.
  • No incluye siglas ni abreviaturas.
  • Debe reflejar claramente que se trata de una revisión narrativa (ej. "Revisión narrativa sobre...").

 

RESUMEN

  • Es estructurado por secciones: Introducción, Objetivo, Métodos de selección bibliográfica, Principales hallazgos, Conclusiones.
  • Tiene un máximo de 250 palabras.
  • Incluye los objetivos principales, los criterios de selección de fuentes utilizados, los hallazgos más relevantes y las conclusiones.
  • Ofrece una idea adecuada del alcance y enfoque de la revisión.

 

INTRODUCCIÓN

  • Presenta antecedentes breves, claros y apropiados que contextualizan el tema.
  • Destaca la importancia, pertinencia y actualidad del tema.
  • Identifica lagunas o controversias en el conocimiento actual que justifican la necesidad de una síntesis narrativa.
  • Describe con claridad el objetivo y el alcance de la revisión (¿qué aspectos se abordarán y cuáles se excluyen?).
  • Justifica por qué una revisión narrativa (y no sistemática) es el enfoque apropiado para el tema.

 

MÉTODOS DE SELECCIÓN BIBLIOGRÁFICA

  • Objetivo y alcance definidos: descripción clara del tema, población, período y contexto abordados.
  • Estrategia de búsqueda descriptiva:
    • Bases de datos consultadas (ej. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, SciELO).
    • Período cubierto (fechas de inicio y fin) y justificación del período seleccionado.
    • Términos de búsqueda principales (no requiere ecuación de búsqueda completa, pero sí transparencia en los descriptores utilizados).
    • Idiomas considerados y justificación.
  • Criterios de selección de fuentes:
    • Tipo de estudios prioritarios (ensayos clínicos, cohortes, series de casos, guías clínicas, revisiones previas).
    • Criterios de jerarquización de la evidencia (ej. prioridad a metaanálisis y ECA, luego estudios observacionales).
    • Justificación de la inclusión de literatura clásica o fundacional.
  • Proceso de selección:
    • Número de revisores y rol del autor experto.
    • Método para la resolución de desacuerdos (si aplica).
  • Extracción y síntesis de la información:
    • Variables temáticas organizadas por categorías o subgrupos.
    • Enfoque descriptivo, analítico o crítico de la síntesis.

Nota: A diferencia de una revisión sistemática, no se requiere diagrama PRISMA, registro en PROSPERO, evaluación formal del riesgo de sesgo ni metanálisis. Sin embargo, debe existir transparencia metodológica en cómo se seleccionaron y analizaron las fuentes.

 

DESARROLLO / CUERPO DE LA REVISIÓN

  • Organización lógica y temática: los hallazgos se presentan por subtemas, categorías clínicas, cronología o mecanismos, según corresponda al objetivo.
  • Síntesis crítica y no meramente descriptiva: se analizan las evidencias, se identifican patrones, contradicciones y evolución del conocimiento.
  • Jerarquización de la evidencia: se distingue explícitamente entre evidencia de alta calidad (metaanálisis, ECA) y evidencia de menor rigor (series de casos, opiniones de expertos).
  • Integración coherente: cada sección conecta con el objetivo general y con las secciones adyacentes.
  • Uso de tablas resumen: para comparar estudios clave, características de poblaciones, intervenciones o resultados principales (ver sección Tablas).

 

DISCUSIÓN

  • Interpretación de los hallazgos principales: en relación con el objetivo y el alcance de la revisión.
  • Comparación crítica con otras revisiones o estudios relevantes: indica si los resultados concuerdan o difieren y propone explicaciones.
  • Calidad y limitaciones de la evidencia revisada: analiza el riesgo de sesgo, heterogeneidad o imprecisión de los estudios primarios citados.
  • Limitaciones de la propia revisión narrativa:
    • Posible sesgo de selección bibliográfica.
    • Restricciones en la búsqueda (idioma, bases de datos, ausencia de estrategia sistemática).
    • Dependencia del criterio del autor para la inclusión de fuentes.
  • Implicaciones para la práctica clínica, la política de salud o la investigación futura: propone acciones concretas, realistas y basadas en los hallazgos presentados.
  • Identificación de vacíos de conocimiento: áreas donde la evidencia es insuficiente y se requieren futuras revisiones sistemáticas o estudios primarios.

 

CONCLUSIONES

  • Vinculación directa con los objetivos: responden explícitamente al propósito de la revisión.
  • Basadas en los hallazgos presentados: no introducen información nueva ni especulaciones no sustentadas.
  • Claridad y concisión: evitan generalizaciones excesivas.
  • Reflejan el nivel de certeza de la evidencia: reconocen incertidumbres o limitaciones cuando corresponde.
  • Relevancia clínica o científica: destacan el aporte práctico de la revisión.

 

REFERENCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS

  • Exhaustividad y representatividad: la revisión refleja adecuadamente el estado del arte del tema, incluyendo estudios fundacionales, recientes y, cuando aplique, literatura nacional e internacional.
  • Calidad: la bibliografía proviene de fuentes científicas confiables (revistas arbitradas, repositorios indexados, guías clínicas validadas).
  • Relevancia: cada referencia citada contribuye directamente a la síntesis. Se evitan citas ornamentales o tangenciales.
  • Jerarquía de la evidencia: se prioriza la citación de metaanálisis, revisiones sistemáticas y ensayos clínicos aleatorizados; se justifica la inclusión de estudios observacionales o series de casos cuando la evidencia de alto nivel es escasa.
  • Correspondencia: todo artículo relevante utilizado en la discusión está acotado como referencia bibliográfica.
  • Cantidad: el número de referencias es suficiente para respaldar la profundidad del análisis. En revisiones narrativas, se espera un mínimo de 30 referencias, sin límite superior si está justificado por el alcance temático. La decisión se basa en la necesidad de cubrir adecuadamente el estado del arte.
  • Formato: estilo Vancouver (numeración en superíndice, dentro de paréntesis y después del signo de puntuación).

 

TABLAS

  • Tabla de características de los estudios clave incluidos:
    • Incluye al menos: autor, año, país, diseño del estudio, tamaño de la muestra, población, intervención/comparador, resultados principales y nivel de evidencia.
    • Está completa, clara y suficientemente detallada para permitir la evaluación crítica.
  • Tablas de comparación temática o cronológica: (si aplica) resumen la evolución del conocimiento, comparaciones entre intervenciones o subgrupos poblacionales.
  • Consistencia y formato:
    • Títulos descriptivos y colocados en la parte superior de la tabla.
    • Sin bordes innecesarios, colores ni sombreados (la revista imprime en blanco y negro).
    • Números decimales separados con coma (ej. 3,14).
    • Enviadas en formato editable (Word o Excel), nunca como imagen.
  • Notas al pie:
    • Incluyen abreviaturas, símbolos (†, ‡, etc.) y, si aplica, la fuente de datos secundarios.
    • Si se usan datos externos, se adjunta el permiso de reproducción.

 

FIGURAS

  • Figuras conceptuales o de síntesis: (opcional pero recomendado) pueden incluir mapas conceptuales, líneas de tiempo de la evidencia, diagramas de fisiopatología o ilustraciones que faciliten la comprensión del tema.
  • Figuras de resumen de evidencia: tablas gráficas, matrices de comparación o diagramas de decisiones clínicas.
  • Autosuficiencia: las figuras no repiten información ya presentada en tablas o texto; complementan o sintetizan.
  • Calidad técnica:
    • Enviadas en formato editable o de alta resolución (TIFF, EPS, PDF vectorial, PNG ≥300 dpi).
    • Resolución mínima: 300 dpi para imágenes médicas/fotografías; 600-1000 dpi para gráficos de líneas finas.
    • Ancho máximo: 800 píxeles; no exceden una cuartilla.
  • Leyendas:
    • Colocadas debajo de la figura.
    • Incluyen título breve, explicación de símbolos/marcas, escala (en microfotografías), método de tinción (si aplica) y fuente completa si la figura es adaptada.
    • Si proviene de otra publicación, se requiere permiso escrito del titular de derechos, salvo que esté bajo licencia abierta (ej. CC BY-NC 4.0).
  • Integridad y ética:
    • Prohibida cualquier manipulación que distorsione los resultados.
    • Si se usó IA para generar o editar figuras, debe declararse en la Lista WAME y en una nota al pie.

Nota: El diagrama PRISMA 2020 no es obligatorio en revisiones narrativas. Si el autor decide incluir un flujo de búsqueda descriptivo, debe aclararse que no sigue la metodología PRISMA de revisión sistemática.

 

REDACCIÓN

  • El uso de abreviaturas y siglas no es excesivo y no impide la lectura fluida.
  • Se describe el significado de las abreviaturas, siglas y símbolos utilizados al primera aparición.
  • Claridad, coherencia y flujo argumental de la redacción.
  • Corrección en la sintaxis y la ortografía.
  • Tono académico y objetivo; evita lenguaje coloquial o sesgado.

OTROS ASPECTOS

  • Calidad de la presentación en cuanto a redacción y ortografía.
  • Cumple con los principios bioéticos aceptados en nuestra sociedad.
  • Declaración de conflictos de interés y contribuciones de los autores (según políticas de la revista).

 

EXTENSIÓN

  • Hasta 6000 palabras, sin incluir la bibliografía.
  • (Nota: menor extensión que una revisión sistemática, dado que no incluye metanálisis ni evaluación formal de riesgo de sesgo).

 

 

Copyright Notice

Those authors who have publications with this journal accept the following terms: The authors will retain their copyright and guarantee the journal the right of first publication of their work, which will be simultaneously subject to the Recognition License. Creative Commons that allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication in this magazine are indicated. Authors may adopt other non-exclusive license agreements for the distribution of the published version of the work (e.g.: deposit it in an institutional telematic archive or publish it in a monographic volume) as long as the initial publication in this journal is indicated. Authors are allowed and recommended to disseminate their work through the Internet (e.g.: in institutional telematic archives or on your website) before and during the submission process, which can produce interesting exchanges and increase citations of the published work.

Privacy Statement

Names and email addresses entered in this magazine will be used exclusively for the purposes set out in this magazine and will not be provided to third parties or for use for other purposes.