Peer review process

The scientific journals have an electronic manuscript management system that allows articles to be sent directly through the web. The letter addressed to the Editor explaining the interest of the article must be uploaded to the system and, subsequently, the author himself will generate a PDF document of his article, which he will also upload to the system, review and accept.
Once the article is submitted, it is reviewed by the editor-in-chief, who will decide to which editor(s) it will be sent for expert assessment. This is a critical part of the editorial process. Thus, the original articles are very critically evaluated by experts (peer review) in the same area of ​​interest. These experts are usually (but not always) chosen from the journal's editorial board. They analyze the weaknesses and strengths of the article, assess its interest for the journal and, usually, request multiple clarifications or modifications from the authors.
In a different letter, the members of the Editorial Board will express their opinion directly to the editors-in-chief and with their respective signature will reject, request modification, or accept its publication. With these evaluations, usually from two reviewers and sometimes more, the editor-in-chief will make a decision on whether the article is suitable for publication or should be rejected due to lack of priority. The editors will also attend to other editorial considerations (interest for their readers, previous publication of similar articles, number and type of articles pending publication, etc.). In case of a positive response, the authors must respond to all the evaluators' considerations with the pertinent changes in the manuscript or, failing that, explain very clearly why their suggestions are not taken into account. Usually, the modified article is sent back to the same reviewers who initially rated it for further consideration. Therefore, it is very important that the authors reply, one by one, to all the comments and also clearly indicate where changes have been made in the manuscript so that they are easily identifiable.
Many journals are now requesting further assessment by methodological and statistical experts. The process has a very variable duration, but the authors must wait for the letter (currently by email) with the first decision within one or two months. The time from referral to final acceptance is also highly variable, ranging from three to six months.
The time between acceptance and publication usually varies several months. The authors will have the opportunity to correct their proofs, which they will receive, not from the journal, but directly from the corresponding publisher. The time embargoes agreed upon in the dissemination of the data must be maintained before publication.
What happens if the article is rejected? The authors have put a great illusion and that is why they often feel misunderstood or treated unfairly. However, you have to resist the frustration of rejection. Only those who regularly publish scientific articles know how many times they are rejected and how, after incorporating new changes, they end up finding a journal that accepts them. This process, however, is very laborious and only known to the authors. It is always important to try to improve the article with the comments of the evaluators. However, the author himself, who by definition is also an expert on the subject, knows better than anyone the value of his contributions. Therefore, if he is convinced of his interest, he should not be discouraged by a rejection letter and have to try his luck in another magazine. Following the motto of some researchers 'keep fighting').