The estimated time from work acceptance by the reviewers to publication is three (3) months. The CET ALFA Journal reserves the right to suggest formal modifications to articles accepted for publication. All submitted texts must follow the Vancouver style for the presentation of articles.

This quality control system is implemented throughout the entire journal editorial process in digital format, as follows:

• It begins with the process of receiving article proposals from the author(s). The article is then rigorously evaluated by the Editorial Committee, ensuring that it meets the structure parameters, objectives clarity, coherence of ideas, relevance of methodology, results solidity and discussion, conclusions, and references, in order to guarantee relevance, originality of the contribution, scientific rigor, and ethics in the editorial process. The committee reserves the right to refer the article to experts in the proposed subject matter.
• Subsequently, two peer reviewers external to the publishing institution, national or international, will be assigned as double-blind reviewers of the article. In the event of disagreement regarding the concepts, a third peer reviewer will be assigned to resolve the disagreements. They will make observations and issue a ruling in terms of: (a) Accepted for publication, (b) Pending publication or (c) Not accepted for publication.
• Finally, the article is published in the corresponding issue, structured around current and relevant topics. Therefore, article proposals are entered into our system according to the parameters established by the Editorial Committee.

The following criteria are taken into account in the arbitration process:

• Compliance with the standards suggested by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
• Relevance of the topic to the coverage area of what is published in ALFA Journal.
• Contribution of new theoretical and practical knowledge on the subject studied.
• Rigor and objectivity with the subject matter addressed.
• Appropriate, clear and coherent use of written language.
• Update and validity of the reported reference support (last five years).

Successively, two peer reviewers external to the publishing institution will be assigned; these may be national or international; as evaluators of the article under a double-blind peer review process. In the event of disagreement in the concepts, a third peer reviewer will be assigned to resolve the disagreements. They will make observations and issue an opinion in terms of: (a) Accepted for publication, (b) Pending publication or (c) Not accepted for publication.