Responsibilities or behavior of the Editorial Board.

The description of the peer review processes is defined and made known by the Editorial Team of Galicia Clínica, so that the authors are aware of the evaluation criteria. The Editorial Board will always be willing to justify any controversy in the evaluation process.

Publisher's Responsibilities or Behavior

The editor must be responsible for everything published in Galicia Clínica. You should strive to meet the needs of readers and authors; for non-stop improving the journal; for ensuring the quality of the material it publishes; for promoting academic and scientific standards. On the other hand, the editor must be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when necessary. The editor's decision to accept or reject a paper for publication must be based solely on the article's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal. The editor undertakes to guarantee the confidentiality of the evaluation process and may not reveal the identity of the authors to the reviewers. He also may not reveal the identity of the reviewers at any time. The editor is responsible for deciding which articles can be accepted in the journal and the Editorial Board will make the final decision about which articles will be published. The editor assumes the responsibility of duly informing the author of the phase of the editorial process in which the submitted text is, as well as of the resolutions of the opinion. An editor must evaluate manuscripts and their intellectual content without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, national origin, or political philosophy. The editor and any editorial team will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, potential reviewers, or other editorial advisors All unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in an editor's personal research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or insights obtained through peer review will remain confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Publishers must make fair and unbiased decisions and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process.

Authors' responsibilities

Authors must guarantee that their manuscripts are the product of their original work and that the data has been obtained ethically. In addition, they must guarantee that their works have not been previously published or that they are not being considered in another publication. A work will be considered as previously published when any of the following situations occurs:

When the full text has been published.

When extensive fragments of previously published materials are part of the text sent to the Journal. When the work submitted to the Journal is contained in reports published in extenso. These criteria refer to previous publications in print or electronic form, and in any language. For the publication of their works, the authors must strictly follow the rules for the publication of articles defined by the Editorial Board. The authors will send the journal an original of the article without personal information (name, contact information, affiliation, etc.) and excluding their name from the bibliographical references in which it appears. Authors of original research reports must present an accurate description of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its importance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the article. A document must contain enough detail and references to allow others to use the work. Fraudulent or willfully inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Authors must ensure that they have fully written the original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, it must be properly cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical editorial conduct and is unacceptable. Consequently, any manuscript found to be plagiarized will be removed and not considered for publication. An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts that describe essentially the same research in more than one primary journal or publication. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behavior and publication is unacceptable. Sources must be adequately acknowledged. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in the nature of the work presented. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, should not be used without explicit written permission from the source. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The lead author(s) should ensure that all co-authors are included in the article, and that all have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial background or other conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed. When an author discovers an error or significant inaccuracy in his published work, it is his obligation to immediately notify the Journal's Editor or and cooperate with him to retract or correct the paper.

Reviewer Responsibilities

The reviewers undertake to notify any unethical conduct by the authors and point out all the information that may be a reason to reject the publication of the articles. In addition, they must agree to keep the information related to the articles they evaluate confidential. For the review of the works, the reviewers must have the guidelines to carry out this task. These guidelines must be provided by the Editor and are the ones that must be considered for the evaluation. Every selected reviewer must notify the Editor in the shortest time possible if he is qualified to review the research of a manuscript or if he is not able to do the review. Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It should not be shown or discussed with other experts, except with permission from the Editor. Reviewers must conduct themselves objectively. Any personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their points of view clearly and with valid arguments. Any inside information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and will not be used for personal gain. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. More information on unacceptable conduct in scientific publishing can be found at the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) or the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).