The estimated time from acceptance of the manuscript by the reviewers to publication is approximately three (3) months. VIVE Journal of Health of CET reserves the right to suggest formal modifications to articles accepted for publication. All submitted texts must comply with Vancouver  guidelines for article presentation.

This quality control system is carried out throughout the editorial process of the journal 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 parameters of structure, clarity of objectives, coherence of ideas, relevance of methodology, solidity of results and discussion, conclusions, and references, in order to guarantee relevance, originality of contributions, scientific rigor, and ethics in the editorial process. The committee reserves the right to refer the article to experts in the proposed subject matter.
• Afterwards, two external reviewers, national or international, are assigned as evaluators under a double-blind modality. In case of disagreement in their assessments, a third reviewer will be appointed to resolve conflicts. These reviewers will provide observations and issue a recommendation in terms of: (a) Accepted for publication, (b) Pending publication or (c) Not accepted for publication.
• Finally, the article is published in the issue corresponding to the thematic structure of current and relevant topics. Therefore, article proposals must comply with the parameters established by the Editorial Committee.

Criteria considered during peer review:

• Compliance with Vancouver style guidelines.
• Relevance of the topic to the scope of VIVE Journal of Health.
• Contribution of new theoretical and practical knowledge on the subject.
• Scientific rigor and objectivity in addressing the topic.
• Appropriate, clear, and coherent use of written language.
• Currency and validity of referenced support (last five years).

Two external reviewers, national or international, are assigned to evaluate the article under a double-blind peer review process. If disagreements arise, a third reviewer is assigned to resolve them. Reviewers issue recommendations as: (a) Accepted for publication, (b) Pending publication or (c) Not accepted for publication.