Peer Review Process
Reviewer Guidelines and Policies
Brazilian Dental Science follows a single-blind peer review process, in which reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, but the authors do not know who the reviewers are. Reviewers are expected to evaluate all submissions impartially, focusing on the scientific merit and relevance of the work, regardless of author background or institutional affiliation.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
• Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback regarding the quality, originality, methodology, clarity, and relevance of manuscripts submitted for publication.
• Highlight any major strengths, limitations, or ethical concerns within the manuscript, including conflicts of interest or issues with research integrity.
• Respond to the review invitation within 7 days, indicating whether the review will be accepted or declined. Once accepted, the reviewer must complete and submit the evaluation within an additional 7 days, for a total of 14 days from the invitation.
• Treat all manuscripts and associated data as confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use the data except for the purpose of evaluation.
• Disclose any potential conflicts of interest that might affect their review, in accordance with the journal’s policy.
Reviewer Accreditation
Reviewers may opt to receive recognition for their review activities via the Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service (Publons). This accreditation is offered free of charge and requires a registered profile on Publons.
Publication of Reviews
For transparency and to uphold open science principles, reviewer comments will be published alongside the article. The name of the reviewer will only be disclosed if the reviewer provides explicit written consent; otherwise, reviews will be published anonymously.
Evaluation Criteria
Reviews should address the following:
• Scientific rigor, originality, and relevance to the field of dentistry
• Appropriateness of experimental design and data analysis
• Clarity, coherence, and accuracy of the writing
• Ethical standards and compliance, especially in research involving human or animal subjects.
Communication
Comments directed to the authors should be constructive and polite, avoiding derogatory language. Additional confidential remarks to the editor may be included as appropriate. If major revisions are suggested, clear instructions and justification should be given to help authors address concerns.
Reviewer Anonymity and Recognition
While the journal practices single-blind review, reviewer names are not disclosed to authors. Reviewers can request recognition for their work through the Publons platform, if desired.
Compliance with Journal and International Standards
Reviewers are expected to follow both the policies established by Brazilian Dental Science and the broader standards set forth by leading indexing databases, ensuring reviews are fair, unbiased, and methodologically sound.
______________________________
This version clarifies the step-by-step timeline for review acceptance and completion, and continues to include publication procedures for reviewer comments and name consent.