Peer review

RDCGD employs a double-blind peer review model, a process in which neither the authors nor the reviewers are identified to one another. The process proceeds as follows:
All submitted articles are examined by the editor to verify whether the content is appropriate for the journal and whether the manuscript has been prepared in accordance with the instructions for authors. The editor may reject the article if the following are detected:

- errors regarding the general guidelines established by the editorial policy;
- inappropriate content regarding the journal's defined focus and scope;
- the work lacks sufficient scientific or technological merit.

Once this stage is passed, the editor forwards the article to one or two members of the Editorial Board to suggest at least two *ad hoc* reviewers who are experts in the subject matter of the proposed article. The reviewers (– 21 days) must be scientific experts working in fields related to the article's topic and, therefore, must be fully qualified to evaluate the manuscript and recommend its acceptance or rejection. Reviewers receive the manuscript with all author identification removed, along with a letter outlining the review process and an evaluation form for providing comments and recommendations regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of the article.

The estimated timeframe from submission to approval is approximately three months.