Peer Review Process

Manuscript Evaluation Process

All manuscripts submitted to Nexus Scientific Journal —including original research articles and review articles— undergo a peer review process, which is carried out in several stages to ensure the scientific quality, methodological rigor, and academic relevance of the works published.

Initial Editorial Evaluation

In the first stage, the Editor-in-Chief receives the manuscript and conducts a preliminary review to determine whether the content falls within the thematic scope of the journal, as well as its scientific and academic relevance.

Subsequently, an initial editorial screening is conducted to verify compliance with the publication standards of Nexus Scientific Journal, evaluating aspects such as:

• the structure of the manuscript
• compliance with the required formatting
• adherence to the author guidelines
• originality of the content and compliance with anti-plagiarism policies

For this purpose, manuscripts are submitted to similarity detection software in order to identify potential cases of plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

If any irregularities are detected, or if the manuscript does not meet the journal’s requirements, the Editor-in-Chief may:

• return the manuscript to the authors for correction, or
• reject the manuscript before sending it for peer review.

Peer Review

Once the manuscript has passed the initial editorial review, it is sent to two external reviewers who are specialists in the relevant field, under a double-blind review system, ensuring the anonymity of both authors and reviewers.

Reviewers may belong to the Scientific Committee of the journal or be external researchers with recognized expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.

Based on the reports submitted by the reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief, together with the Associate Editor, will determine the editorial decision regarding the manuscript. The decision may fall into one of the following categories:

1. A) Accepted without modifications
   B) Accepted with minor revisions
   C) Accepted subject to major or substantial revisions
   D) Rejected

Review of Revised Versions

When reviewers request modifications, authors must submit a revised version of the manuscript, accompanied by a detailed response to each of the comments and suggestions raised during the evaluation process.

The responsible Associate Editor will review the revised manuscript to verify that the requested corrections have been properly addressed. If the authors disagree with any reviewer comments, they may provide a well-founded academic justification, which will be evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief and the Associate Editor.

Final Editorial Decision

Once the review process has been completed, the Editor-in-Chief, together with the Editorial Committee, will issue the final decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. This decision will be formally communicated to the authors and will be considered final.

Nexus Scientific Journal maintains an editorial process aimed at ensuring high standards of scientific quality, editorial ethics, and academic transparency in all its publications.

Editorial Process Transparency

The commitment of Nexus Scientific Journal to academic excellence is reflected in a rigorous and transparent peer review procedure. The following table presents the approximate average time dedicated to each stage of the editorial process.

Activity	Approximate Time
Manuscript submission	Defined by the author
Editor review	15 days
Blind peer review	30 days
Author revisions	15 days
Second editorial review	7 days
Editing and production of the final manuscript	21 days
Proofreading (galley proof)	7 days