First the editorial secretary verifies if the general rules for manuscript preparation were followed, and if the content was completely submitted (figures with appropriate quality, tables, letter of submission, disclosure of conflicts of interest, source of financial support, Certificate of Presentation for Ethical Consideration – CAAE number, etc.). Manuscripts submitted that do not comply with these instructions are immediately returned to the authors, with a date scheduled for return.

The manuscripts are analyzed by the editor-in-chief and the co-editor, who decide to send them or not to peer review. The process of peer review is coordinated by one of the associated editors. Manuscripts are always evaluated by at least two reviewers. In case of discrepancy between them, a new opinion may be requested for editorial decision. After peer review, the manuscripts are forwarded to the author for corrections and return to the reviewers, who analyze the changes and either request new changes, or make their recommendation for publication or rejection.

Based on the recommendations of peers and associated editors, the manuscript is returned to the editor-in-chief or co-editor, who finally decides for further technical corrections, publication or rejection, which is communicated to the corresponding author.

After this stage, all approved manuscripts are included in the editorial process flow, which consists of grammar review, technical revision to adjust to scientific writing, translation by an English language specialist, and layout. After the layout is finished, the author receives a PDF version to revise and approve the content. The author has 48 hours to approve the PDF version,  and after this deadline, the content is considered approved, even if the author does not report approval.