AUTHOR GUIDELINES AND EDITORIAL POLICIES
Manuscripts should be submitted through the following link: https://dm.saludcyt.ar/index.php/dm/submission/wizard
All articles must be original. The work, or a significant portion of it, should not have been previously published or be under consideration or review by another journal. If the manuscript is an extended version of a conference paper, this should be mentioned as a note to the editor.
Our editorial team uses iThenticate to check for plagiarism. If we identify clear plagiarism (including self-plagiarism), the manuscript will be rejected.
Articles previously published on a preprint server, such as ArXiv, bioRxiv, agriRxiv, PeerJ PrePrints, etc., may be submitted. In this case, we do not consider it redundant publication or plagiarism.
Manuscripts are published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). With this license, authors may share the work with recognition of their authorship and initial publication in the journal. Unless otherwise noted, the published material associated with it is distributed under the same license. Any use that does not conform to the attribution (CC BY 4.0) must be reported to firstname.lastname@example.org further resolution.
3. ARTICLE PRESENTATION STANDARDS
For life science articles, there are reporting guidelines that help ensure a complete description of the research. This facilitates other researchers to evaluate and reproduce the work, aiming for more details and a complete overall description. In this regard, FAIRSharing initiative (http://fairsharing.org/standards) should be consulted. In addition, reporting guidelines lists can be found on the EQUATOR Network website (http://www.equator-network.org/).
4. TYPES OF ARTICLES
Peer-reviewed research articles presenting results of scientific research. Recommended designs include analytical surveys, case-control studies, cohort studies, controlled clinical trials, and qualitative research. They should be structured according to the IMRaD format. The recommended maximum length is 3000 words, and only up to 6 figures or tables are allowed. For the development of controlled clinical trials, CONSORT guidelines (http://www.consortstatement.org/) must be followed. Trials should be registered in a public clinical trial registry in accordance with the regulations of the author's country of origin. We suggest using the CHEERS guideline (https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/cheers/) for the development of health and economic evaluations.
Peer-reviewed research papers that, due to their special features (series with a reduced number of observations, research papers with very specific objectives and results, descriptive epidemiological studies, qualitative studies), can be published in a more concise and rapid form. The maximum length is 1500 words, and no more than 3 tables or figures are accepted. This type of article should have the same structure as an original article.
Peer-reviewed articles describing and analyzing the results of one or more cases and how certain events of interest unfolded. The suggested structure is Introduction, Case presentation, Discussion, Conclusions, and References. The maximum length of the text is 1000 words, and only one figure and one table are allowed. More than 10 bibliographic references are not advisable. All articles submitted to this section must comply with the CARE guidelines (https://www.care-statement.org/).
Peer-reviewed articles based on the compilation and selection of original scientific articles, and experts in a thematic area. Their purpose is to inform about advances or the state of the art of a particular topic. The maximum length is 4000 words, and up to 3 tables or figures are allowed.
Systematic Reviews and/or Meta-analyses
Peer-reviewed articles that:
· Include critical analysis and synthesis of multiple publications on a particular topic,
· Use a systematic method to locate studies on the topic,
· Employ objective criteria to select studies included in the review,
· Use rules to evaluate the quality of the original studies,
· Synthesize quantitative data,
· Provide an objective interpretation of the results, and
· May or may not use a mathematical method to evaluate results.
The maximum length is 3500 words, and up to 6 figures or tables are allowed. Authors should follow the recommendations proposed by PRISMA (http://www.prisma-statement.org/).
Scientific Letters and Letters to the Editor
Works published in the journal that provide opinions, observations, or experiences that, due to their characteristics, can be summarized in a brief text. The maximum length is 500 words, and may contain up to one table or figure.
Done solely by the Editorial Committee. Its objective is to present the volume of the journal or express a point of view or position on a relevant current topic for the scientific community. This type of article communicates relevant facts from an editorial point of view for the journal. The maximum length is flexible, up to 500 words, and may contain up to one table or figure. No more than 3 bibliographic references are accepted.
Brief original peer-reviewed articles that describe the research data deposited in a data repository. This type of article should include a description of the data (data collection methods, covered taxa, spatial and temporal domains and geographic coverage, data collectors and owners, software used to create or visualize the data). For presentation, the FAIR methodology (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) should be followed. The Registry of Research Data Repositories tool (https://doi.org/10.17616/R3D) is recommended for finding a repository according to region, thematic area, and/or data type.
Brief original peer-reviewed articles that concisely describe a set of genomic or transcriptomic data, making it a free and open resource for the genomic community. This type of article should include a description of the data, and for presentation, the FAIR methodology should be followed (https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18). The Registry of Research Data Repositories tool (https://doi.org/10.17616/R3D) is recommended for finding a repository according to region, thematic area, and/or data type.
These are original articles, peer-reviewed, that describe open access computer tools. Their purpose is to present the tool, its visualization (if applicable), and possible uses or applications. The methodological aspects of its construction should be detailed and, if applicable, the software validation process. During the peer review process, the software should be accessible to reviewers. The authors are recommended to provide a website where the software can be accessed or, failing that, to the developers' site. In the case of open-source projects, it is recommended that they be hosted in a recognized open-source code repository.
These are brief original articles, peer-reviewed, that describe a new experimental or non-experimental procedure or method, or variations of existing methods or new applications. A sufficiently exhaustive explanation of the techniques, procedures, materials, or equipment necessary for the development of this methodology should be provided. Authors are recommended to provide a dataset (test or pilot sample) deposited in an open data repository to facilitate its use by the scientific community.
These are study protocols, peer-reviewed, that have not yet been developed, or are in the beginning/implementation phase. Protocols will contain a detailed explanation of theoretical assumptions, research hypotheses, justification, and methodology for the study. In the case of clinical trials, they will be accompanied by their respective registration and follow the SPIRIT guidelines (http://www.spirit-statement.org/spirit-statement/). In the case of systematic reviews, they will follow the PRISMA-P guidelines (http://www.prisma-statement.org/Extensions/Protocols.aspx).
Living Systematic Review
These are systematic reviews that keep the evidence updated. They respond to the premise of the dynamism inherent in available scientific information, through regular updates to incorporate new evidence on the topic. There are three premises for considering a systematic review as "living":
• there is a priority for its approach for decision-making;
• existing evidence is low or very low;
• high probability of new evidence in the near future.
The maximum length of the text will be 3500 words and up to 6 figures or tables will be allowed. The authors should follow the PRISMA-P guidelines (http://www.prisma-statement.org/Extensions/Protocols.aspx).
These are articles or abstracts of works presented at a scientific conference. The length varies depending on the specific rules of the scientific conferences, and they must adhere to the publication standards according to the article typology mentioned above.
5. FORMAL ASPECTS FOR THE WRITING OF COMMON STRUCTURES OF ARTICLES
It should be concise and informative, avoiding the inclusion of formulas and abbreviations whenever possible. The title should also be provided in English.
Include a maximum of 6 keywords after the abstract. For Spanish and Portuguese keywords, please use the DeCS terms (https://decs.bvsalud.org/es/). For English keywords, use the MeSH thesaurus (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/).
Verify that the authors' names and institutional affiliations are correct. Each author's ORCID should be included. Indicate all affiliations with an Arabic numeral in superscript at the end of each author's surname. The corresponding author should be declared, and their current address provided. The author contributions should be declared at the end of the article, according to the CRediT taxonomy (https://casrai.org/credit/).
The abstract should not exceed 250 words and must be structured as follows: Introduction; Objective; Methods; Results; Conclusions.
Include acknowledgments in a separate section after the bibliographic references. Include individuals who contributed to the article but did not meet authorship criteria (e.g., revising or translating it).
Authors must declare the funding institutions that provided financial support for the research and/or article preparation, and briefly describe the role of the sponsors in the study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation, article writing, or decision to submit the article for publication. If there was no participation of any kind, please indicate this as well.
The contributions of each author's roles are subject to the CRediT taxonomy (https://casrai.org/credit/). The Taxonomy of Contributor Roles in Spanish is a tool that distributes participation roles into 14 typologies through which an author can be recognized in the publication. Authorship roles will be identified in the following order, including each author(s) in the role(s) that correspond to them, and omitting roles that do not apply to their article. Authors will add to the "Authorship contributions" section at the end, the authorship roles in the following way regardless of authorship order:
1. Conceptualization: xxxxxx Author names
2. Data curation: xxxxxx
3. Formal analysis: xxxxxx
4. Funding acquisition: xxxxxx
5. Investigation: xxxxxx
6. Methodology: xxxxxx
7. Project administration: xxxxxx
8. Resources: xxxxxx
9. Software: xxxxxx
10. Supervision: xxxxxx
11. Validation: xxxxxx
12. Visualization: xxxxxx
13. Writing - original draft: xxxxxx
14. Writing - review and editing: xxxxxx
Units of measurement
Units of measurement should be in accordance with the International System of Units (SI). If mentioning other types of units, please provide their equivalent in SI.
Tables should be numbered consecutively according to their order of mention in the text. Each table should have a title. Titles should be short but clear, containing information that is not repeated in the text. Each column should have a short abbreviated title. Explanations should be placed in footnotes, not in the title. Explain all abbreviations in footnotes and use symbols to explain information, if necessary. Symbols can vary, including alphanumeric characters or symbols, such as: *, +, ‡, §. Identify statistical measures of variation, such as standard deviation and standard error of the mean. If using data from another published or unpublished source, you must obtain permission and cite it.
Graphics, illustrations, and figures:
They should be added in the body of the article with good resolution. Figures should be as self-explanatory as possible.
For radiological and clinical diagnostic images, as well as for photographs of pathological anatomy samples or microphotographs, high-resolution photographic image files should be submitted. Photographs showing before and after an intervention should be taken with the same characteristics of intensity, direction, and color of ambient light.
Microphotographs should have internal scale markers. Symbols, arrows, or letters used in microphotographs should contrast with the background. Explain the scale and identify the staining method in microphotographs.
They should be numbered consecutively in the order in which they have been cited in the text. If a figure has been previously published, identify the original source and present written permission from the rights holder to reproduce it. Separate permission is required from the author and publisher, except for documents that are in the public domain.
In the manuscript, the captions for the illustrations should be at the bottom, identified by corresponding Arabic numerals to the illustrations. When symbols, arrows, numbers, or letters are used to identify parts of the illustrations, each one should be clearly explained in the caption.
Authors who wish to reproduce a figure or table from a previously copyrighted publication are responsible for obtaining permission from the copyright holders and making clear reference to the original source. Figures previously published under a Creative Commons license may be reused under the specific license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/) that applies to those figures.
Abbreviations and symbols
Use only ordinary abbreviations. Non-standard use of abbreviations can be confusing for readers. The detailed abbreviation followed by the abbreviation in parentheses should be used in the first mention unless the abbreviation is a standard unit of measure.
6. POLICIES ON ETHICS
Health, Science and Technology adheres to the COPE (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) guidelines related to ethical supervision.
6.1 Research involving humans Ethical approval
All studies involving human subjects (individuals, human data or material) must have been conducted in accordance with the principles expressed in the Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects).
Approval for all protocols must have been obtained from the authors' institutional ethics committee or another ethics committee to ensure compliance with national and international guidelines. Details of this approval must be provided when submitting an article, including the institution, the name of the review committee and the permit numbers.
Studies involving humans categorized by race/ethnicity, age, disease/disability, religion, sex/gender, sexual orientation or other socially constructed groups must include a justification for the choice of definitions and categories, even if human categorization rules are required. Appropriate language that does not stigmatize when describing different groups should be used. Ethical approval must be obtained before conducting research; retrospective approval cannot usually be obtained and it may not be possible to publish the study using retrospective approval.
Patient privacy and informed consent As stated in the Recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/): "Patients have a right to privacy that should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent/guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that the patient be shown the manuscript to be published. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the published article."
Consent to participate
For all studies involving human subjects, including genomic studies, case reports, clinical trials, surveys, observations, etc., written informed consent to participate in the research must have been obtained.
Consent for publication of identifiable data
For any article that includes information that could potentially identify a person, ensure that written informed consent has been obtained from all patients or healthy participants (or their legal guardians in the case of minors, or closest relatives if the participant has died), confirming that the results and accompanying images can be published.
This includes large clinical data sets with direct or indirect identifiers, specific details about individuals, images, etc. If your article contains identifiable images of individuals, you must include a statement confirming that you have permission to publish these images.
If your article contains clinical images or identifiable data, you must include an explicit consent statement in a separate header from the "Consent" section (we suggest: "We confirm that we have obtained permission to use [images/data] from the participants/patients/individuals included in this presentation"). Please also indicate the conditions under which permission was obtained.
6.2 Animal Research Authors describing animal studies must have consulted the Animal Research
Reporting In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) guidelines (http://www.nc3rs.org.uk/arrive-guidelines), developed to improve reporting standards. It should be ensured that data from animal experiments can be fully analyzed and used. Articles reporting on in vivo experiments must comply with the ARRIVE Essential 10 checklist (https://arriveguidelines.org/sites/arrive/files/documents/Author%20Checklist%20-%20E10%20only.pdf) as a minimum, and we encourage authors to use the ARRIVE 2.0 checklist.
The relevant information described in these guidelines should be included in the corresponding section of the article. Experiments involving regulated vertebrates or invertebrates must be conducted within the ethical guidelines provided by the authors' institution and national or international standards.
When applicable, an ethics statement, permission granted, or animal licenses must be included. If animals were used, but ethical approval was not required, a clear statement indicating why this approval was not necessary must be included. In all cases, a statement must be made confirming that all efforts were made to improve animal suffering, and details of how this was achieved must be provided.
Authors must comply with the Convention on Biological Diversity (http://www.cbd.int/convention/) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/text.php).
6.3 Inappropriate Image Manipulation
Photographic images published in Health, Science and Technology must accurately reflect the original image. As such, we require that all images, whether submitted as figures or uploaded as data, not be manipulated so as to mislead readers about what the images indicate. We understand that it is standard practice to use software to modify images to make them clearer and easier to interpret.
However, any modifications made to the images must be minor and must be done uniformly throughout the image. Modifications that alter the scientific meaning of the image are not allowed, whether they are made in specific regions or the entire image.
When splicing parts of the same gel, this must be indicated in the figures with a dividing line, making it clear where the image has been joined. Areas from different gels should not be spliced together.
When there are load controls, these must always be included in the image; if spliced, any modifications to the load control and the area of interest must be identical. Authors must include details of all modifications made to images published as figures or uploaded as data in the Methods section of an article, including the name of the software (with version number) used to make these modifications.
7. PROCESS OF PEER REVIEW
Data & Metadata employs a double-blind peer review process by external evaluators of the journal. The manuscript will undergo an initial review by the editor, who will apply the plagiarism procedure and then conduct a thorough first review. After the initial evaluation by the editor, he/she will decide if it meets the requirements and criteria to move on to peer review.
The article will be sent to two independent external reviewers, who will make observations and recommendations to the editor. In some cases, the article may require a new round of peer review, in which two additional reviewers will be assigned for a second evaluation of the manuscript.
7.1 Article Correction
Correspondence with authors
If an author requires a change to the article, the editorial team will require confirmation of the individual's identification. This will usually be done by sending an email using the email address that Data & Metadata has stored in the system. If this is no longer possible, please contact the editorial team, who may be able to assist with confirming the identification.
Changes in authorship
If the list of authors of an article changes after publication, a new version of the article with an explanation included may be published. Any change in authorship must be confirmed by all authors. If the editorial team cannot contact an author, the corresponding author is responsible for facilitating communication. In accordance with COPE guidelines (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines), the editorial team cannot assume responsibility for resolving any disputes about authorship; any disagreement between authors should be resolved by the authors' institution(s).
Changes in author names
Data & Metadata understands that authors, reviewers, or commentators may want to change their names for many reasons, including gender identity recognition, marriage, divorce, and other personal reasons. After a request for a name change, the editorial team will require confirmation of the individual's identification. To avoid any distress this process may cause, Data & Metadata wants to work with researchers to allow them to provide identification on their own terms. Legal or official proof of a name change will be required.
Articles may be retracted for several reasons, including:
• Honest errors reported by the authors (e.g., errors due to sample mix-up or the use of a scientific tool or equipment that is subsequently found to be defective)
• Research misconduct (data fabrication)
• Duplicate or overlapping publication
• Fraudulent use of data
• Unethical research
For any retracted article, the reason for retraction and who is instigating the retraction will be clearly stated in the Retraction Notice. The Retraction Notice will be linked to the retracted article (which usually remains on the site) and the article will be clearly marked as retracted (including the PDF) in all its versions.
Usually, an article is only retracted at the request of the authors or by the editor in response to institutional investigation.
The content of a retracted article will only be removed when legal limitations have been imposed on the editor, copyright holder, or author(s). For example, if the article is clearly defamatory or infringes the legal rights of others, or if the article is the subject of a court order. In such cases, the bibliographic information of the article will be maintained on the site along with information about the circumstances that led to the removal of the content.
In exceptional circumstances, for example, if false or inaccurate data has been published that, if action is not taken, represents a serious risk to health, the original incorrect version(s) may be removed and a corrected version published.
7.3 Allegations of Misconduct
If we are informed of a suspected case of research or publication misconduct, we will follow the guidance and workflows recommended by COPE (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts?classification=2771). In the first instance, this will usually involve contacting the person(s) about whom the allegations have been made to request an explanation. The editorial team may also contact the research institution of the involved party, an ethics committee, or others.
If you suspect possible misconduct in a published article in Data & Metadata, please contact our editorial team (email@example.com). A member of the team will contact you within a maximum of 10 days to confirm the details you have provided and ask any additional questions necessary for us to investigate. Please note that it may not be possible to keep you updated throughout the process, however, we will do our best to inform you of the outcome when appropriate.
7.4 Appeals and Complaints
Data & Metadata follows the COPE guidelines (http://publicationethics.org/appeals) regarding complaints and appeals. If you wish to appeal an editorial decision or make a complaint, you should contact the editorial team (firstname.lastname@example.org).
8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
All authors must disclose any personal or financial relationships with individuals or organizations that could improperly influence (bias) their work.
In this regard, the journal adheres to the Recommendations for Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which can be consulted in section II-B-2 at the following link: https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/translations/spanish2021.pdfIn the event that there are no conflicts of interest, authors will declare in the corresponding section: "Conflicts of interest: None."
In the event that there are conflicts of interest, the authors of the article must declare them in the corresponding section (Conflicts of Interest) and attach the Conflict of Interest Disclosure form provided by the ICMJE (https://www.icmje.org/downloads/coi_disclosure.docx). The information in the disclosure must match that in the submitted manuscript.
9. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES
Bibliographic references should be prepared according to the Vancouver style (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine or https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/uniform_requirements.html). They should be listed consecutively in the order in which they first appear in the text. They should be placed after the punctuation mark in superscript and in parentheses. The DOI should be included in all resources that have it, always as a link (e.g., https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt2023264)
The use of bibliographic management software, especially Zotero, is recommended for managing bibliographic references.
10. POLICY ON THE USE OF LARGE LANGUAGE MODELS (LLM)
Data & Metadata does not prohibit the use of large language models (LLMs), such as Chat GPT, and aligns with the recommendations proposed by WAME on this issue (WAME Recommendations on ChatGPT and Chatbots in Relation to Scholarly Publications; https://wame.org/page3.php?id=106).
It should be noted that LLMs do not meet the authorship criteria proposed by the ICMJE, and if any LLM tool is used, it should be declared in the methods section. Finally, the use of LLMs does not exempt the author from responsibility for the accuracy of the content.