Peer Review Policy

Nexus Científico Multidisciplinary Journal en Ingeniería y Tecnología (NCMJIT) adopts a double-blind peer review system, ensuring the anonymity of both authors and reviewers throughout the entire editorial process. This model guarantees objectivity, academic independence, impartiality in evaluations and compliance with international standards of scientific quality, in accordance with the multidisciplinary nature of the journal, its focus on engineering and technology, and its semiannual publication frequency.

All submitted manuscripts are first subject to a preliminary editorial review. This stage aims to verify the suitability of the manuscript according to the journal’s focus and scope, compliance with formal submission guidelines, required academic structure, thematic relevance and originality of the content through similarity detection tools. Only manuscripts that meet these criteria proceed to the external review stage.

After passing the initial review, the manuscript is generally sent to two external and independent reviewers, selected according to their academic experience, research background and technical expertise in the corresponding field. The evaluation is carried out without institutional or professional links between authors, reviewers and the editorial team, ensuring the absence of conflicts of interest, confidentiality and transparency throughout the process.

Reviewer selection is based on the following criteria: one specialist with specific expertise in the central topic of the manuscript and a second reviewer from a related or complementary disciplinary field. This procedure ensures both the technical depth of the analysis and the methodological clarity, argumentative coherence, applicability of results and scientific relevance of the work. In cases of high specialization or when significant discrepancies arise between reviewers’ reports, the Editor may appoint a third external reviewer to support the editorial decision.

Evaluations must be critical, objective, ethical and constructive, aimed at improving the scientific quality of the manuscript and strengthening its academic, technological, technical or applied contribution. All documents submitted for review are treated with strict confidentiality. Reviewers commit not to disclose or use the information contained in manuscripts for personal, professional or institutional purposes. If additional technical consultation is required, it must be previously authorized by the editorial team.

Stages and Timeline of the Editorial Process

Manuscript Submission

Once the manuscript is submitted through the editorial platform, the author receives an automatic notification confirming receipt and assigning a reference number for tracking the editorial process.

Preliminary Editorial Evaluation

The Editor-in-Chief or a designated Editor conducts the initial review to verify the manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s editorial line, compliance with formal guidelines, academic structure, thematic relevance and originality of content. This stage takes approximately 7 to 15 days. If the manuscript does not meet the established requirements, it may be rejected at this stage.

External Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the preliminary stage are sent for external evaluation under the double-blind peer review model. This evaluation is carried out by reviewers specialized in areas related to engineering, technology, innovation, intelligent systems, applied sciences, sustainability, automation, renewable energies, data science or other fields relevant to the manuscript. The estimated time for this stage, including the first editorial decision, ranges from 20 to 45 days.

Communication of Decision and Revisions

When reviewers recommend revisions, the author receives the complete review reports together with the corresponding editorial observations. The deadline for submitting the revised version is up to 15 days, and authors must attach a response document addressing all comments made by the reviewers and the editorial team in a reasoned manner.

Additional Review Rounds

If the reports present significant discrepancies, if the manuscript requires substantial revision or if the corrections made require further technical assessment, the Editor may request the intervention of a third reviewer or arrange a second review round, preferably with the same reviewers.

Final Decision

The final decision regarding acceptance, rejection or request for further modifications rests with the responsible Editor, who will consider the reviewers’ reports, the authors’ response and the editorial criteria established by the journal. Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scientific quality, originality, thematic relevance, methodological rigor, technological contribution and compliance with ethical publication standards.

Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to the stages of style correction, technical editing, layout and digital publication. This process takes approximately 10 to 20 days after final acceptance. At this stage, the corresponding DOI is assigned under the institutional prefix 10.63969, when applicable, and the article is incorporated into the relevant registration, dissemination and indexing systems in accordance with the journal’s editorial policies.