Ethical Standards

In relation to privacy

The editorial committee will ensure that under no circumstances will any information about the data, names, e-mails, institutional affiliation or others submitted to the Journal be revealed, which will be for the exclusive use of publication in accordance with its regulations, which is applicable during the course of the evaluation for all manuscripts and, after the evaluation, for those works that will not be published.

Regarding authors' responsibility

Authors should make a clear distinction between ideas cited and ideas produced in the course of the study, discussion of results, conclusions or final reflections. The presentation of other authors' ideas as if they were one's own is not an acceptable practice.

For empirical articles, the data collected or produced, and the procedures used, must be adequately represented in the article, so that it is understandable to readers what strategy was used to carry out the analyses, conclusions and reflections derived from them. Fraudulent or not very detailed statements of data, analysis or ways of collecting or producing information are not acceptable.

Authors may be asked to provide all or part of the original data from which an empirical article was developed, as well as a detailed report on the data analysis strategies or instruments used in the research. The editor may make this request at any time, not only during the period of the call for papers and the initial reception of articles. For this reason, authors are asked to keep all records that are useful for this purpose for up to two years after submission of their articles.

Authors should not submit papers for evaluation simultaneously to more than one Journal.

Authors should not submit previously published articles for further review, even if they are duly justified reworkings of papers.

Authors should clearly acknowledge anyone who has contributed significantly to the work presented in the article, not only in reference to bibliographic sources, but also in relation to subjects who contribute information or sources that do not constitute a bibliography, all of which should be referenced in the manuscript. Information that has been obtained privately (e.g., in conversations of trust, psychological consultations, therapy, consulting, or other contexts in which confidentiality is expected) should not be published without the explicit consent of the source.

The first author should be the one who has made the major part of the contribution in the design, execution, coordination, conduct and interpretation of the study, as well as in the written elaboration of the article. Those who have made significant contributions should be recognized as co-authors. In the case of people who participated in some phases of the study or contributed minor details in the preparation of the article, they can be mentioned in the acknowledgements.

All studies included in a manuscript must have been approved by a university or Health Service research ethics committee. Such approval should be explicitly stated in the article submitted for review.

Authors should report in the article any source of funding that allowed the study to be developed, as well as any other commitment that could influence the interpretation of the results. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include: reports based on situations that occur in the institution where the researcher works, reports of consultancies or psychotherapies in institutions that finance or promote the publication of results, testimonies of experts who have been remunerated, among others. Any of these situations should be pointed out.

If an author discovers any significant error in a paper he/she owns that has already been published, he/she should promptly notify the Editorial Team for possible immediate correction or erratum proofing in a subsequent issue.

Regarding responsibilities of reviewers

Double-blind peer review is an essential support strategy for the editorial decisions of the Revista Chilena de Atención Primaria y Salud Familiar and for the improvement of manuscripts received.

If a peer reviewer is not considered sufficiently qualified to evaluate an article, he/she should promptly notify the Editorial Team in order to be replaced by a peer reviewer competent in the area of the work to be evaluated.

Manuscripts submitted for peer review are submitted anonymously (without indicating the author's name or institutional affiliation). All peer-reviewed papers must be kept confidential by the reviewers.

Evaluators should conduct themselves objectively in their work, which is why personal criticism is not considered appropriate. Any criticism made of the article must be presented together with an argument that adequately supports it, which allows understanding the reason for modifying, suppressing or improving the criticized aspect.

Reviewers should point out if any theoretical source is being used in an article without being cited. Likewise, they should alert about any possible situation of plagiarism in a work, whether partial or total.

As in the case of the Editorial Team, peer reviewers should point out early on any conflict of interest that they may detect when reading a manuscript that has been sent to them for review. Such potential conflicts include, for example, recognition of a manuscript as having been written by a research team in which he or she is involved, the use of data that are familiar to him or her because they were collected or produced at an institution where he or she works, or other obvious situations. If there is a conflict of interest, the article will be sent to an alternate reviewer.

Materials that are not published cannot be used by the reviewers for any purpose and, if they need to be cited by them, given their relevance to other studies, it must be with the express authorization of the authors.

Regarding editors' responsibilities

The Editorial Team of the Revista Chilena de Atención Primaria y Salud Familiar is responsible for deciding which articles should be sent for peer review, as well as which are in conditions to be published after their review.

The Revista Chilena de Atención Primaria y Salud Familiar adheres to the editorial standards of the SISIB of the University of Chile.

The fundamental criteria for deciding whether an article is included in an issue of the journal are: its coherence with the editorial line of the journal, its adequacy to the rules for authors and its relevance to the discipline(s) to which the journal subscribes. The Editorial Team evaluates manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, political beliefs, nationality, ethnic origin or personal position of the authors.

The Editorial Team maintains the confidentiality of the manuscripts that are evaluated.

The Editorial Team does not use for its own benefit any information presented in the articles or in the comments made by the peer reviewers.

In the event of a conflict of interest of any member of the Editorial Team with a manuscript, it refers the manuscript to someone who does not present any conflict.

The Editorial Team does not require as a requirement for acceptance of an article that it cite sources previously published in the Journal. Any recommendation of authors or sources to be cited comes from the comments made in the peer review and is explicitly pointed out to the authors as a resource that can enrich the theoretical review or the discussion that takes place in the article.

The Editorial Team will be responsible for any possible ethical conflict that may appear as a result of the submission of papers or complaints or warnings from members of the scientific community, who may investigate errors, inconsistencies, plagiarism or other sources that may detract from the seriousness of a manuscript. Any ethical conflict will be resolved by the Editorial Team as soon as possible, in order to safeguard the credibility of the Journal, the authorship of the scientists who participate in it and the relevance of the studies for the reading community.

The preceding ethical recommendations have been elaborated following the regulations of:

- Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, available in: http://publicationethics.org/files/Code%20of%20Conduct_2.pdf

- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME), Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, available in: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/about-the-recommendations/