Article evaluation process

The JOURNAL OF BIOPROCESS AND CHEMICAL TECHNOLOGY (JBCT) establishes an academic evaluation process aimed at ensuring quality, scientific integrity, and compliance with ethical principles in the communication of knowledge. All submissions undergo a structured, transparent review procedure based on peer review.

1. Submission of Articles

Authors submit their manuscripts through the email address jbct@uadec.edu.mx or through the OJS platform available for the Journal of BioProcess and Chemical Technology (JBCT). At this stage, it is verified that the submission complies with the formal requirements established in the guidelines for authors:

  1. Types of publication. JBCT publishes the following types of manuscripts: literature reviews, reviews, research articles, or research notes, framed within the areas of chemical sciences, biological sciences, bioprocesses, materials technology, polymers, nanosciences, food science, and biochemical engineering.
  2. Format. The manuscript submitted for evaluation must be sent in Word format, following the instructions in the author guidelines.
  3. Length. Reviews and research notes must have a maximum length of 5 pages, following the established format. All other publications must have a minimum length of 7 pages.
  4. Structure. Documents must follow the standard format of scientific publications: abstract/resumen, introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion, and conclusions. In the case of reviews and literature reviews, some sections may be omitted as appropriate.
  5. Citation style. JBCT uses APA 7th edition format.

2. Review by the Editorial Team

The editorial committee conducts an initial review to assess the thematic relevance, academic coherence, and alignment with the journal’s editorial scope. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage or returned for preliminary adjustments.

All information contained in the manuscripts is considered confidential. Reviewers and the editorial team commit themselves not to disclose or use the content for purposes other than the evaluation process.

3. Ethical and Legal Declarations

Authors must submit the following documents on a mandatory basis:

  • Declaration of manuscript originality
  • Assignment or license of publication rights
  • Declaration of absence or existence of conflict of interest
  • Compliance with ethical research principles
  • Declaration of authorship and author contributions

Authorship is recognized for those who have contributed significantly to the conception, development, analysis, and interpretation of the work, as well as to the writing and approval of the final version.

4. Similarity Review and Use of Artificial Intelligence

The manuscript is submitted to similarity detection tools to identify possible matches with other published texts. Likewise, authors are required to declare the use of artificial intelligence tools, if any were used, specifying their function in the manuscript preparation process.

If plagiarism, unjustified self-plagiarism, data manipulation, or any practice contrary to academic ethics is detected, the manuscript will be rejected. In serious cases, the journal may notify the corresponding affiliated institutions.

5. Submission for Peer Review

Articles that pass the previous stages are sent for evaluation by at least two reviewers who are specialists in the field. The process is carried out under the single-blind peer review modality.

The journal uses a single-blind peer review system, which means that the identity of the reviewers remains anonymous throughout the process. Reviewers are selected based on their academic experience, scientific output, and absence of conflict of interest.

If a conflict of interest is identified, the person involved will be removed from the editorial process and another reviewer will be appointed.

In the case of contradictory reviews, or when the editorial team considers it appropriate, the evaluation of a third reviewer will be requested.

6. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers consider, among others, the following peer-review aspects, when applicable according to the type of manuscript:

  1. A title that clearly and sufficiently reflects the content
  2. Originality and contribution to the field of study
  3. Methodological rigor
  4. Clarity of argumentation
  5. Currency and relevance of sources
  6. Structural coherence of the text
  7. Academic and social relevance of the topic
  8. Appropriate experimental design
  9. Necessary and acceptable illustrations and tables

7. Review Times

The editorial process considers the following approximate timeframes:

  • Initial editorial review: 1–3 weeks
  • Peer review: 3–5 weeks
  • Revision by authors: 2–4 weeks

These timeframes may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.

8. Types of Decision

Based on the reviews received, the manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

  • Accepted without modifications
  • Accepted with minor modifications
  • Accepted with major modifications
  • Rejected

In cases requiring modifications, authors must address the observations and submit a new version accompanied by a response letter to the reviewers’ comments.

The final publication decision rests with the editorial team, based on the reviews received.

9. Open Access and Rights Policy

The journal operates under an open access model, allowing free and immediate access to its contents.