Peer Review Process

The Mexican Journal of Oncology (Gaceta Mexicana de Oncología) publishes double masked peer reviewed articles; manuscripts’ authors and reviewers cannot see each other’s identity. 


The editorial process comprises 7 steps:


1. Technical check by the editorial office

a. Upon reception of the manuscript, the editorial office reviews the document to ensure adhesion to author guidelines (format, style, sections, references, etc), which are available at

2. First validation by the editor-in-chief

a. The editor-in-chief reviews the manuscript, and validates if the theme, originality and scientific quality of the paper are fit to be published in the journal.

b. The manuscript is evaluated for plagiarism, double publication and related issues.

c. The manuscript may be rejected at this step, in which case the main author will receive notification.

From time to time, manuscripts sent by the Editors will be accepted for publication in the journal. The manuscript will be assigned to another editor, who will handle the entire reviewer assignment process. The editor-author will only receive the correspondence sent automatically through the editorial platform, where they will be informed about the process of their manuscript.

If the manuscript is accepted, the editor-author must include a Conflicts of Interest section at the end of their article, in which they will confirm authorship and transparency during the process.

3. Assignment to a co-editor

a. If the previous step is cleared, the editor-in-chief may assign the manuscript to one of the co-editors with expertise in the field, who will be in charge of inviting reviewers.

b. The editor-in-chief will ensure that the assistant editor has no relevant conflict of interest according to COPE guidelines*.

4. Reviewer invitation

a. The co-editor will invite reviewers, who must be individuals with expertise in the field. The number of reviewers may vary according to the study type but will be at least two. An individual will not be considered as potential reviewer if a relevant conflict of interest exists.

5. Manuscript review

a. Reviewers will critically review the manuscript and must submit a recommendation among four possible options (acceptance, acceptance with minor changes, review/major changes, or rejection). They may also submit comments for the author aimed to improve the quality of the manuscript.

b. Whenever possible, reviewers must adhere to the Equator network guidelines:

6. Editorial decision

a. The co-editor will receive the recommendations issued by reviewers, so a final decision can be made.

b. If reviewers disagree in their recommendation, it is possible for the co-editor to invite additional reviewers.

c. Whenever needed, a review of statistical methodology may be carried out by members of the editorial committee fit to do so.

7. Communication of editorial decision

a. The editor contacts the main author via email with the final decision and comments made by the reviewers.


Even though the editorial process is different for each manuscript, it takes an average of 30 days to complete the first two steps, and an average of 90 days to reach a first decision. If the decision is acceptance with minor changes, it takes a few weeks to process the manuscript once corrections are submitted. If the decision is review/major changes, the editor will resubmit the manuscript to reviewers for a complete evaluation. The publisher of the Mexican Journal of Oncology (Gaceta Mexicana de Oncología) double-checks for grammar, style and references in the final version of the manuscript and will send final proofs to the main author for approval before publication. Processing of manuscripts is ruled by COPE best practice guidelines available at


*If an editor submits a manuscript as an author, the manuscript will follow the journal’s editorial procedure to ensure impartial handling of the manuscript. The editor (author) will not participate in the editorial and review process of his manuscript. The editor in chief will select another associated editor to handle this article during the editorial and peer review process to ensure no conflict of interest occur.

Please see:

- COPE best practice guidelines:

- ICMJE: Use of artificial intelligence in the review process