About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The Journal of Health Students in Las Tunas is a specialized publication of the province of Las Tunas, Cuba, with the purpose of socializing the results of scientific research achieved by students in health sciences, or linked to them, and experiences in the teaching-learning process and other relevant activities in the development of public health in the network of institutions in the province.

The objective of the journal is to disseminate the scientific results of students related to health and the training of human resources for health, anywhere in the world, with priority in the territory of the province of Las Tunas.

In the Journal of Health Students in Las Tunas, authors can publish letters to the editor, editorials, original articles, historical articles, case presentations, bibliographic reviews and any information that is pertinent and important for the development of scientific activity in the province. and the country. The articles and opinions published in the journal are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of the institution or its editorial committee. The works are selected and reviewed by an editorial committee and specialists through arbitration management. Manuscripts and their authors receive appropriate ethical treatment in the editorial process and rejections are reported to the authors. This magazine does not contain, nor does it accept advertising materials, nor does it accept works that have been previously published or are under consideration by the Editorial Board of another national or foreign magazine. The publication regulations can be consulted before sending an article online in section policy.

Accepted manuscripts remain the property of the journal and, therefore, may not be submitted for consideration by another journal for publication, unless duly authorized by the Editorial Committee. The journal adheres to the open access policy for scientific publication, which allows copying and distribution, as long as it maintains the recognition of its authors, does not make commercial use of the works and does not make any changes to them. The Editorial Committee reserves the right to introduce style changes and/or limit the texts that require it, committing to respect the original content.

On the other hand, the journal does not publish experimental studies or clinical trials in phase II or III or quasi-experimental, if these studies are not registered and approved by the national bodies that regulate the development of these investigations.

Any ethical violation related to the publication will be resolved using the protocols established by the International Committee on Ethics in Scientific Publication (COPE).

The Journal of Health Students in Las Tunas complies with the certification requirements established for scientific-technological serial publications, provided for in the third section, article 20 of resolution no. 59/2003 of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment of the Republic of Cuba.

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

About the editorial process with authors

To publish in the journal, the main author and co-authors must be registered.

The manuscript, within ten (10) days from its entry into the system, must define its ACCEPTANCE or REJECTION to the editorial process. Exceptionally, up to twenty (20) additional days will be available, depending on its complexity, for expert consultations. Once ACCEPTED, there are 90 days for the editorial process which can be suspended in case of non-response by the author/co-authors to the arbitration comments or communications from the editors. The extension of the term may be a cause of rejection, mainly due to the loss of validity of the chosen topic, its relevance or the update of citations.

The possibility of being accepted an article proposal depends on two main aspects: the adequate scientific level of the information offered, and a correct structure of the words according to their arrangement, scientific style, that is to say, the substance (what is said) and the form (how it is said) and the bio-ethical aspects, which will define its quality for the expected final decision.

Accepted manuscripts must be unpublished, remain the property of the journal and, therefore, cannot be submitted for consideration by another journal for publication, except with the due authorization of the Editorial Committee of the Journal. However, as Pinar del Rio Medical University journal follows the policy of open access to scientific publication, it allows its copy and distribution as long as it maintains the recognition of its authors, does not make commercial use of the works and does not make any amendment of them. The Editorial Board reserves the right to introduce modifications of style and/or to limit the texts that it is required, committing itself to respect the original content.

Pinar del Rio Medical University journal does not contain, nor does it accept advertising materials, does not take responsibility for the opinions or criteria of the authors, nor does it accept works that have been previously published or are under the consideration of the Editorial Board of another national or foreign journal. The rules of publication can be analyzed before submitting an article on-line in section policy.

Conflicts of interest: the author and the co-authors must ensure that their submissions comply with the policies of the journal and are therefore accepted. The use of the names of institutions and of the persons included in the works are the responsibility of the author, who assumes any possible conflict as well as the information offered, the validity, accuracy, reliability and authorization for publication of the information it contains, which must be compatible with the mission of the journal.

Peer Review Process

The journal of Pinar del Rio Medical University follows the policy of peer review of scientific articles submitted by the authors, which meet the publication standards. In all cases, this review process protects both author and expert reviewing manuscripts, maintaining special care with established ethical standards and avoiding conflicts of interest.

The peer review process is carried out by members of the editorial committee and the national and international scientific committee, as well as other professionals outside the publishing institution and the country.

The editors of the journal will keep the authors informed of the papers received and their subsequent acceptance or not to continue in process, and may know when they are in it. The manuscripts will be reviewed anonymously by two experts in the object of study and / or methodology used. The editorial staff of the journal reserves the right to reject articles the staff does not consider appropriate for publication.

In all cases, the editorial committee will consider the value of the works proposed for the development of the National Health System, regardless of the national or foreign origin of the authors or their belonging to one or another organization.

OFFICIAL EVALUATION FORMS FOR THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ARTICLES

Original article

Evaluation parameters

1. Relevance.

- Contributes to solving some current important problem of local, national or international order.

- Opens new perspectives to solve unresolved issues.

- It constitutes a contribution or an innovation.

Indicate any other reason why you understand that the results presented in the article are relevant.

2. TITLE

- Corresponds to the topic of the article

- Concise, understandable and informative.

- Must not exceed 15 words.

- In Spanish

- It should not include acronyms or abbreviations.

- If institution names are used, they must be official and up to date.

3. ABSTRACT

- Structured by sections.

- It has a maximum limit of 250 words.

- It includes main objectives, basic procedures used, most important results and conclusions.

- Offers a good idea of what the work is about.

- The writing is done in the third person.

4. KEY WORDS

- Concrete and representative of the semantic content of the document, both in the main and secondary contents.

- It must be tried that they are between the limits of 3 to 10.

5. INTRODUCTION

- Presents brief, clear and appropriate background information.

- Rationale for the problem.

- Clearly describes the purpose of the work.

6. MATERIAL AND METHOD

- Defines the type of research or study.

- Defines the population or study group as well as the criteria for inclusion, exclusion and elimination.

- Describes the criteria and justification for sample selection if required.

- The variables analyzed are clearly described.

- Clearly state the methods of data collection, processing and analysis used.

- The statistical method is appropriate.

- The work may be reproduced by other researchers.

- Declares the particular ethical aspects of the study.

7. RESULTS

- Exposure in accordance with the objectives of the work.

- Appropriate use of statistics (when required).

- Figures and tables highlight the relevant results without incurring in repetitions of information between them.

8. DISCUSSION

- The results of the study are critically reviewed in the light of the works published by the authors themselves or by other national and international researchers.

- It explains the scope and limitations of the results.

- Describes the possible applicability and generalization of the results.

9. CONCLUSIONS

- Do not repeat the results.

- Have an adequate degree of generalization.

- Respond to the objectives of the study and are in correspondence with the results and the discussion.

10. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

- Comply with the recommendations of the Association of Medical Journal Editors (Vancouver Style).

- Up to date; most of them from recently published work, a minimum of 50% of the last five years.

- Relevant national and international literature on the subject is represented.

11. TABLES

- The information they present justifies their existence.

- They do not repeat information already indicated in the text.

- The title of the table corresponds adequately with its content.

12. FIGURES

- They are of adequate quality.

- They are necessary and relevant.

- The feet of figures correspond properly with these.

13. OTHER ASPECTS.

- Quality of presentation in terms of writing and spelling.

- It complies with bioethical principles accepted in our society.

Conclusions of the evaluation

Title of the article:

1-Can be published as it is.

2. Can be published with minor arrangements .

3. Must be rewritten and reevaluated.

4. Not acceptable for publication.

Basis of opinion:

Evaluator's name and surname:

Date

Review article

Evaluation parameters

1- TITLE

- Corresponds to the subject of the article.

- Concise and understandable.

- In Spanish

2- ABSTRACT

- Structured by sections.

- Includes main objectives, basic procedures used, most important results and conclusions.

- Offers a good idea of what the work is all about.

- It has a maximum limit of 250 words.

4. KEY WORDS

- Concrete and representative.

5. ABSTRACT (Translation into English of the abstract with its key words)

6. INTRODUCTION

- Presents brief, clear and appropriate background.

- Importance and relevance of the topic.

- Rationale for the scientific problem giving rise to the review.

- Clearly describes the objective of the work.

- Criteria and justification for the selection of the sources consulted.

8. DEVELOPMENT

- Exposure in accordance with the objectives of the work.

- Figures and tables highlight the relevant aspects without incurring in repetitions of information.

- There is interpretation of the results indicated in the literature consulted.

- It contrasts the differences and coincidences of the analyzed studies.

- Criticism of the results of the study is made in the light of the works published by the authors themselves or by other researchers.

- It describes the possible applicability and generalization of the results.

- It includes new aspects to be considered.

- Indicates or highlights the limitations or contributions of the review.

9. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

- Respond to the objectives of the study.

- It sets out clear, concrete and relevant conclusions.

10. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

- They follow the recommendations of the Association of Medical Journal Editors (Vancouver Style).

- - Up to date; most of them correspond to recently published work.

- Relevant national and international literature on the subject is represented.

11. TABLES AND FIGURES

- The information they present justifies their existence.

- The title of the table adequately corresponds to its content.

- They are of adequate quality.

- The figure feet correspond adequately to these.

- They do not repeat information in tables and figures.

Title of the article:

Conclusions of the evaluation:

Basis of opinion:

-Name and surname of the evaluator

-Date

-Clinical Case

-Evaluation parameters

TITLE

- Corresponds to the subject of the article.

- Concise and understandable

- In Spanish and English

ABSTRACT

- Structured by sections.

- Offers a good idea of what the topic is about.

- Indicates the reasons for presenting the case.

- Appropriately synthesizes the clinical case.

- It has a limit of 250 words.

- In Spanish and English.

KEY WORDS

- Concrete and representative.

- In Spanish and English.

INTRODUCTION

- Brief, clear and appropriate background information.

- Describes the purpose and reasons for reporting the case.

CASE DESCRIPTION

- It adequately describes the antecedents (family inheritance, personal pathology, non-pathology, surgery, obstetrics/gynecology, etc.) related to the case.

- Indicates the onset, evolution and current state of the condition.

- It summarizes the main clinical, laboratory, cabinet and imaging findings, highlighting those that make the picture a peculiar case.

- Indicates employee processing.

- Point out the evolution of the case.

DISCUSSION

- Analyzes and compares the main findings with those of other reported cases.

- Points out the pathology/physiopathology and its meaning.

- Describes the difficulty in establishing the diagnosis and/or treatment of the case presented.

- Discusses differential diagnoses.

- Analyzes theories or hypotheses about the implications of the findings.

CONCLUSIONS

- The conclusions are clear.

- Justify the presentation of the case.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

- They are cited according to the instructions for authors (Vancouver Style).

- Relevant national and foreign studies on the subject are cited.

- Present at least 40% from the last 5 years.

TABLES

- A maximum of two tables.

- The information it presents justifies its existence

- If abbreviations or special symbols are used, their meaning is described.

FIGURES

- A maximum of three images.

- Quality of the figures.

- Necessity and relevance of the figures.

- Graphs and diagrams.

- The data they present do not repeat information already indicated in the text.

- They're adequate. What do you define?

- Protecting the patient's identity and complies with bio-ethical principles.

- Source from which the figures and photos were taken.

FEET OF FIGURES

- The description of the figure is adequate.

- The feet correspond to the figures.

- The meaning of the abbreviations or symbols used in the figures is described.

GENERAL EVALUATION

- The subject is important.

- The article has scientific/practical/educational value.

- Complies with bio-ethical principles accepted in our society.

WORDING

- The use of abbreviations and acronyms is not excessive and does not impede fluent reading or understanding of the article.

- The meaning of the abbreviations, acronyms and symbols used is described.

- Clarity and consistency of wording.

- Syntax and spelling.

Title of the article:

Conclusions of the evaluation:

Basis of opinion:

Name and surname of the evaluator:

-Date

-Historical Articles

-Evaluation Parameters

TITLE

-Corresponds to the topic of the article

-Concise and understandable

ABSTRACT

-Clearly indicates the objective

-Describes the methodology

-Identifies main inputs and conclusions of the work

-It has a limit of 250 words.

- Keywords (in Spanish and English).

-Concrete and representative.

INTRODUCTION

-Presents brief, clear and appropriate background information.

-Specifies the scope, originality, importance and relevance of the topic.

-Clearly describes the purpose of the work.

METHODOLOGY

-Consult primary or secondary sources

-Perform the triangulation of the sources.

DEVELOPMENT

-Correct organization and presentation of the theme.

-Criteria and justification for the selection of the articles consulted.

-It is divided into sections that facilitate the development and understanding of the subject.

-Supports primary and/or secondary sources.

-Includes a critical analysis of the sources consulted.

CLOSING REMARKS

-The conclusions respond to the objective of the work.

-Provides clear, concrete and relevant conclusions.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

-They are relevant and sufficient according to the subject under discussion

-They are quoted according to the Vancouver style.

TABLES AND FIGURES

-The number of tables and figures is not excessive, only the relevant ones.

-The data they present do not repeat information already indicated in the text.

-The information presented in the tables justifies their existence.

-The figures are necessary, pertinent and have the required quality.

-If abbreviations or special symbols are used, their meaning is described.

-Includes credits from the following figures.

OTHER ELEMENTS

-The meaning of the abbreviations, acronyms and symbols used is described and their use is not excessive.

-Quality of presentation in terms of writing and spelling.

-Compliance with ethical principles.

-The subject is important and relevant.

-Article has scientific/practical/educational/SOCIAL value

Title of the article:

CONCLUSIONS OF THE EVALUATION:

Basis of opinion:

Name and surname of the evaluator:

Date