Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
  • Author metadata was entered correctly indicating affiliation and ORCID for each author.
  • The article is original and unpublished, as it has not been submitted for review and has not been published, in part or in full, in any other national or foreign scientific journal. There are no commitments or financial obligations with state or private bodies that may affect the content, results or conclusions of the article submitted. There are no conflicts of interest.
  • The submission file is in Microsoft Word format
  • Authorisation from the Scientific Ethics Committee is attached for those projects that need to go through a SAC.
  • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author guidelines, which appear in About the journal.

Author Guidelines

Revista Confluencia is an electronic publication whose purpose is to disseminate scientific knowledge in the field of health. Its objective is the publication of unpublished articles in Spanish in the field of health, whose elaboration emanates from the scientific production of students in the context of courses, workshops, clinical experiences, assistantships (among others), which can be presented in sections such as research (qualitative and quantitative), literature reviews, clinical cases, intervention programmes or projects, reflections and letters to the editor.

From 2023, Revista Confluencia includes the publication of student articles with optional co-authorship by academics, researchers, health professionals, authorities and public health managers. It is very important for us to ensure that students continue to be the protagonists of the journal, so the participation of professors or clinical tutors who participate in the publication will be open to their inclusion as last authors.

From 2024 onwards, Revista Confluencia takes on the challenge of continuous publication, which will reduce the time required to submit and publish articles.

The publication process has different stages, which begin with the preliminary review process by the Editor of the Journal, who evaluates the Publication Requirements, review of compliance with the Journal Standards (depending on the type of article submitted), review by a Committee composed of at least two professionals in the area, review of compliance with ethical aspects, process of article modifications and publication.

The submission of papers is done through the SEND MANUSCRIPT button (after registering a new account) and correspondence with the authors is by e-mail [email protected]. Once received, the review process begins, which is described in the following flowchart and is detailed below:

 

DETAIL OF THE PROCESS

A. Preliminary Review by the Editor of Confluencia Journal

Description: Process that verifies compliance with the Publication Requirements.

Approximate Review Time: 2 weeks

  1. The article metadata and author data (name, affiliation, email and ORCID) are correctly entered in the submission platform.
  2. The total length of the article is:
    - Qualitative and quantitative research: up to 2,500 words.
    - Bibliographic Reviews: up to 3.000 words
    - Clinical Cases: up to 2,000 words
    - Intervention Programmes or Projects: up to 2,500 words
    - Reflections and Letters to the Editor: up to 1,000 words
    Word count is from the Introduction to the Conclusion. It does not include Abstract and Summary, References, Tables or Figures.
  3. Write the article on letter size paper, spacing 1.5, with 2 cm margin on each edge, Calibri # 11 font, and page numbering in the lower right corner.
  4. On the first page of the article include title, summary, abstract and keywords (in Spanish and English).
  5. Prepare an Abstract (in Spanish and English) on the first page of the article with a maximum of 250 words (150 for reflections), which contains a brief description of the article to be presented.
  6. Include between 2 and 5 keywords in Spanish and English, according to the list of descriptors in health sciences (DECS) of BIREME.
  7. If applicable, include the source of funding or project affiliation at the bottom of the page.
  8. Organise the article according to the Publication Guidelines for each type of article (described below this section).
  9. Write the article in a formal, academic writing style.
  10. The article should be written with a common thread that allows for a clear and concrete understanding of what is being presented.
  11. There are no errors in literal, accentual or punctuation spelling.
  12. In-text citations should be written according to Vancouver style. It is suggested to check the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine
  13. Consider only those bibliographical references cited in the text.
  14. If applicable, include a maximum of 2 tables and/or 2 figures, correctly numbered and cited. See example (LINK)
  15. Comply with the ethical aspects requested by Revista Confluencia.
  16. Plagiarism detection: the paper will be submitted to a plagiarism check using Turnitin software to evaluate its degree of similarity with texts or contents belonging to other authors. Articles that show evidence of plagiarism or self-plagiarism will be rejected and their authors may be banned from future publications in our journal.

B. Submission to Review Committee

Description: Once all the publication requirements have been met, the paper is sent to two or three reviewers who are members of the UDD School of Medicine or external reviewers. At all times the anonymity of the authors in the process of evaluation and approval of the work is safeguarded.

Approximate Review Time: 4 weeks.

C. Sending the result of the article rating

Description: At the end of the Review Committee's evaluation, it is determined whether the article is approved without modifications, with modifications or rejected. The result of the article rating, together with the suggestions, is sent to the author(s) who submitted the article via the OJS platform.

D. Author(s) response period

Description: Corrections to the article are expected to be sent by the author(s) through the journal's platform.

Approximate Review Time: 2 weeks.


E. Review of corrections

Description: The Review Committee will analyse the relevance of the corrections sent by the author(s) and will issue a resolution regarding acceptance for publication. Papers selected for publication will become the property of Revista Confluencia and will be published according to the criteria of the editorial production.

Approximate Review Time: 2 weeks.

ETHICAL ASPECTS

The Confluencia Journal will require the author(s) to detail the procedures for obtaining informed consent in the case of articles involving the participation of individuals. In the same way, ethical requirements will be explicitly demanded. For more information, please consult the Participant Protection section at the following link: http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/protection-of-research-participants.html

Confluencia Journal asks the author(s) to make explicit the existence of a possible conflict of interest, i.e. when an author (or the author's institution) has personal or financial relationships that inappropriately influence his/her actions. The author(s) will be asked to make explicit in a written statement the existence of such conflicts at the time of submitting their article. For more information, please consult the Conflicts of Interest section at the following link: http://www.icmje.org/conflicts-of-interest/

Plagiarism detection: the manuscript will be subjected to plagiarism review using Turnitin software to assess its degree of similarity with texts or content belonging to other authors (up to 15% similarity). Articles that show evidence of plagiarism or self-plagiarism will be rejected, and their authors may be banned from future publications in our journal.

Qualitative Research

Suggested Document Structure

First Page

  • Write an abstract (in Spanish and English) of the research, with a maximum of 250 words, briefly describing the content to be presented, with a clear and specific focus on the qualitative research.
  • The following organization is suggested: introduction, objectives, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion.
  • Include between 2 and 5 keywords in Spanish and English, according to the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS) list from BIREME at the following link: http://decs.bvs.br/E/DeCS2018_Alfab.htm.
  • If applicable, include funding source or project affiliation as a footnote.
  • Do not include any author information on this page (names, email address, or phone number).

Second Page and Subsequent Pages

Introduction

  • Briefly state the origin of the idea for the qualitative research and the motivation of the author(s).
  • Justify the relevance of the topic to be investigated.
  • Develop the state of the art of the topic with an analysis of scientific evidence, including at least 10 bibliographic references:
    • Journal articles no older than 10 years.
    • Classic texts without age limit.
    • Information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • The arguments and counterarguments used are precise and relevant, demonstrating a thorough and serious analysis of the topic.
  • Ensure the content reflects a personal, synthetic, and autonomous elaboration.
  • Clearly state the purpose or general objective of the qualitative research. You may include 3 to 5 specific objectives consistent with the general objective.
  • Explain the organization of the article and the qualitative methodology used in the research.
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.

Methodology

  • Justify the selection of the qualitative design (consistent with the research question).
  • Provide an appropriate description of the participant population.
  • Specify the sampling technique used.
  • Explain the method for selecting participants (inclusion and exclusion criteria).
  • Describe the rigor criteria of the qualitative research.
  • Briefly describe the data collection process.
  • Describe the dimensions covered by the study.
  • Specify qualitative analysis methods consistent with the research objectives.
  • Explicitly state compliance with national and international research ethics standards (informed consent, ethics committee approval, institutional support letters, etc.).

Results

  • Adequately describe the main results of the qualitative research.
  • Data analysis should align with the methodology proposed in the research.
  • Results presented should address the objectives stated in the research.
  • Use appropriate resources for presenting results (transcriptions, direct quotes, tables, etc.).

Discussion

  • The discussion should be clear, specific, and related to the problem.
  • Compare results with available evidence.
  • Present considerations regarding the implications of the results for the discipline and health.

Conclusions

  • Justify the objectives achieved through the qualitative research.
  • Highlight the importance of the work for undergraduate education.
  • Clearly state the most relevant findings and relate them to the reviewed evidence.
  • Justify the importance of the results for the discipline.
  • Identify knowledge gaps or new problems that could be investigated.
  • If applicable, include limitations of the study.

References

  • References should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • References should be relevant to the topic.
  • They should come from specialized journals or scientific databases.
  • They should be up to date (journal articles no older than 10 years).
  • Include only sources cited in the text.

 

Quantitative Research

Suggested Document Structure

First Page

  • Write an abstract (in Spanish and English) of the research, with a maximum of 250 words, briefly describing the content to be presented, with a clear and specific focus on the quantitative research.
  • The following organization is suggested: introduction, objectives, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion.
  • Include between 2 and 5 keywords in Spanish and English, according to the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS) list from BIREME at the following link: http://decs.bvs.br/E/DeCS2018_Alfab.htm.
  • If applicable, include funding source or project affiliation as a footnote.
  • Do not include any author information on this page (names, email address, or phone number).

Second Page and Subsequent Pages

Introduction

  • Briefly state the origin of the idea for the quantitative research and the motivation of the author(s).
  • Justify the relevance of the topic to be investigated.
  • Develop the state of the art of the topic with an analysis of scientific evidence, including at least 10 bibliographic references:
    • Journal articles no older than 10 years.
    • Classic texts without age limit.
    • Information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • The arguments and counterarguments used are precise and relevant, demonstrating a thorough and serious analysis of the topic.
  • Ensure the content reflects a personal, synthetic, and autonomous elaboration.
  • Clearly state the research question, hypothesis, and general objective of the quantitative research. You may include 3 to 5 specific objectives consistent with the general objective.
  • Explain the organization of the article and the quantitative methodology used in the research.
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.

Methodology

  • Justify the selection of the quantitative design (consistent with the research question).
  • The universe, sample, and unit should be consistent with the research question.
  • Specify the sampling technique used.
  • Provide an appropriate description of the participant population.
  • Explain the method for selecting participants (inclusion and exclusion criteria).
  • Identify the variables to be studied.
  • Specify the characteristics, sections, or parts of the instrument.
  • State the validity and/or reliability of the data collection instruments.
  • Describe the data analysis plan, consistent with the research objectives.
  • Ensure the data collection instruments are consistent with the research question.
  • Explicitly state compliance with national and international research ethics standards (informed consent, ethics committee approval, institutional support letters, etc.).

Results

  • Adequately describe the main results of the quantitative research.
  • Data analysis should align with the methodology proposed in the research.
  • Results presented should address the objectives stated in the research.
  • Use appropriate resources for presenting results (tables, graphs, charts, figures, etc.).

Discussion

  • The discussion should be clear, specific, and related to the problem.
  • Ensure consistency between results and discussion.
  • Compare results with available evidence.
  • Present considerations regarding the implications of the results for the discipline and health.

Conclusions

  • Justify the objectives achieved through the quantitative research.
  • Highlight the importance of the work for undergraduate education.
  • Clearly state the most relevant findings and relate them to the reviewed evidence.
  • Justify the importance of the results for the discipline.
  • Identify knowledge gaps or new problems that could be investigated.
  • If applicable, include limitations of the study.

References

  • References should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • References should be relevant to the topic.
  • They should come from specialized journals or scientific databases.
  • They should be up to date (journal articles no older than 10 years).
  • Include only sources cited in the text.

 

Literature Review

Suggested Document Structure

First Page

  • Write an abstract of the review (in Spanish and English), with a maximum of 250 words, briefly describing the content to be presented, with a clear and specific focus.
  • The following organization is suggested: introduction, objectives, methodology, development, and conclusion.
  • Include between 2 and 5 keywords in Spanish and English, according to the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS) list from BIREME at the following link: http://decs.bvs.br/E/DeCS2018_Alfab.htm.
  • If applicable, include funding source or project affiliation as a footnote.
  • Do not include any author information on this page (names, email address, or phone number).

Third Page and Subsequent Pages

Introduction

  • Briefly state the origin of the idea for the review and the motivation of the author(s).
  • Justify the relevance of the topic to be investigated.
  • Clearly state the purpose or objective of the review.
  • Explain the organization of the literature review.
  • Specify the method used for selecting available evidence.

Development

  • Adequately describe the main findings.
  • Use at least 10 bibliographic references:
    • Journal articles no older than 10 years.
    • Classic texts without age limit.
    • Information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • Ensure the content reflects a personal, synthetic, and autonomous elaboration.
  • The information presented should address the objective stated in the review.
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.

Conclusions

  • Justify the importance of the review for the discipline.
  • Highlight its relevance for undergraduate education.
  • Identify new topics that could be addressed in future reviews.
  • Include limitations of the review (if applicable).

References

  • References should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • References should be relevant to the topic.
  • They should come from specialized journals, scientific databases, university websites, corporate sites, etc.
  • They should be up to date:
    • Journal articles no older than 10 years.
    • Classic texts without age limit.
    • Information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • Include only sources cited in the text.

 

Clinical Case

Suggested Document Structure

First Page

  • Write an abstract of the clinical case (in Spanish and English), with a maximum of 250 words, briefly describing the content to be presented, with a clear and specific focus.
  • The following organization is suggested: introduction, objectives, methodology, development, and discussion.
  • Include between 2 and 5 keywords in Spanish and English, according to the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS) list from BIREME at the following link: http://decs.bvs.br/E/DeCS2018_Alfab.htm.
  • If applicable, include funding source or project affiliation as a footnote.
  • Do not include any author information on this page (names, email address, or phone number).

Second Page and Subsequent Pages

Introduction

  • Briefly state the origin of the idea to report the clinical case and the motivation of the author(s).
  • Justify the relevance of the topic, referring to evidence or literature in the field.
  • Use at least 10 bibliographic references:
    • Journal articles no older than 10 years.
    • Classic texts without age limit.
    • Information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • Clearly state the purpose or objective of the clinical case report.
  • Explain the organization of the clinical case.
  • Explicitly state compliance with national and international research ethics standards (informed consent, ethics committee approval, institutional support letters, etc.).

Case Development

  • Provide a detailed description of the clinical situation, avoiding irrelevant information.
  • Refrain from making comments or value judgments.
  • Present information objectively and in an organized manner.
  • Protect the identity of the clinical case by using a pseudonym or initials.
  • Use appropriate resources for presenting background information (tables, images, graphs, charts, figures, etc.).

Discussion

  • Analyze the most relevant aspects of the clinical case.
  • Identify similarities or differences compared to previously reviewed specialized literature.
  • Provide recommendations when relevant.
  • Clearly describe the main findings.
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • Journal articles should be no older than 10 years; classic texts have no age limit; information from websites or corporate sources should be no older than 5 years.
  • Justify the importance of the case report for the discipline.
  • Highlight its relevance for undergraduate education.
  • Identify new topics that could be addressed in future reviews.
  • If applicable, include limitations of the case report.

References

  • References should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • References should be relevant to the topic.
  • They should come from specialized journals, scientific databases, university websites, corporate sites, etc.
  • They should be up to date:
    • Journal articles no older than 10 years.
    • Classic texts without age limit.
    • Information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • Include only sources cited in the text.

 

Intervention Program or Project

Suggested Document Structure

First Page

  • Write an abstract with a maximum of 250 words (in Spanish and English), briefly describing the implementation process of the intervention program or project.
  • The following organization is suggested: introduction, objectives, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusions.
  • Include between 2 and 5 keywords in Spanish and English, according to the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS) list from BIREME at the following link: http://decs.bvs.br/E/DeCS2018_Alfab.htm.
  • If applicable, include funding source or project affiliation as a footnote.
  • Do not include any author information on this page (names, email address, or phone number).

Second Page and Subsequent Pages

Introduction

  • Briefly state the origin of the idea for the intervention program or project and the motivation of the author(s).
  • Justify the relevance of the topic, referring to evidence or literature in the field.
  • Use at least 10 bibliographic references (journal articles no older than 10 years, classic texts without age limit, information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years).
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • Clearly state the identified problem and the purpose or objective of the intervention program or project report.
  • Explain the organization of the intervention program or project.

Methodology

  • Specify the paradigm and/or intervention model that supports the implementation of the program.
  • State at least one general objective. You may include 3 to 5 specific objectives consistent with the general objective.
  • Provide a detailed description of participants, including general and sociocultural characteristics.
  • Describe the theoretical content addressed by the intervention program or project (derived from the identified problem), properly supported by scientific evidence, theory, and/or institutional or expert perspectives.
  • Mention project stages or overall organization.
  • Describe the intervention carried out, specifying activities, techniques, and educational materials used (brochures, posters, charts, etc.), each justified by its selection.
  • Ensure methodologies or activities are consistent with the educational objective and target population.
  • Indicate the location where activities will take place, describing the environment, specific spatial arrangements, and resource use.
  • Describe time allocation for each stage and activity.
  • Include process, outcome, and impact evaluation indicators.
  • Include a description of evaluation instruments used (if applicable).
  • Explicitly state compliance with national and international research ethics standards (informed consent, ethics committee approval, institutional support letters, etc.).

Results

  • Adequately describe the main results of the intervention program or project.
  • Data analysis should align with the methodology proposed in the intervention program or project.
  • Results presented should address the objectives stated in the intervention program or project.
  • Use appropriate resources for presenting results (tables, graphs, charts, figures, etc.).

Discussion

  • The discussion should be clear, specific, and related to the identified problem.
  • Ensure consistency between results and discussion.
  • Compare results with available evidence.
  • Present considerations regarding the implications of the results for the discipline and health.

Conclusions

  • Justify the objectives achieved through the implementation of the intervention program or project.
  • Highlight the importance of the work for undergraduate education and the discipline.
  • Clearly state the most relevant findings.
  • Identify new problems that could be addressed through an intervention program or project.
  • Include conclusions about the experience in designing and implementing the intervention program or project, including analysis of strengths and opportunities for improvement.

References

  • References should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • References should be relevant to the topic.
  • They should come from specialized journals or scientific databases.
  • They should be up to date (journal articles no older than 10 years).
  • Include only sources cited in the text.

 

Reflection

Suggested Document Structure

First Page

  • Write a summary of the reflection, with a maximum of 150 words (in Spanish and English), briefly describing the content to be presented, with a clear and specific vision.
  • Include between 2 and 5 keywords in Spanish and English, according to the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS) list from BIREME at the following link: http://decs.bvs.br/E/DeCS2018_Alfab.htm.
  • Do not include any author information on this page (names, email address, or phone number).

Second Page and Subsequent Pages

Introduction

  • Provide a brief description of the topic for reflection and the objective pursued.
  • Briefly state the origin of the idea for the reflection and the motivation of the author(s).
  • Justify the relevance of the topic, referring to evidence or literature in the field.
  • Use a maximum of 5 bibliographic references (journal articles no older than 10 years, classic texts without age limit, information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years).
  • If applicable, explicitly state compliance with national and international research ethics standards (informed consent, ethics committee approval, institutional support letters, etc.).
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.

Development of the Reflection

  • Explore the topic in depth from different perspectives.
  • Present arguments and counterarguments that support or challenge the original approach.
  • In-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • Present information objectively and in an organized manner.
  • If applicable, use appropriate resources for presenting background information (tables, images, graphs, charts, figures, etc.).

Conclusions

  • Conclude appropriately with the main or strongest ideas of the reflection.
  • Provide recommendations when relevant.
  • Justify the importance of the reflection for the discipline and health.
  • Highlight its relevance for undergraduate education.
  • Identify new topics that could be addressed in other reflections.

References

  • Use a maximum of 5 bibliographic references:
    • Journal articles no older than 10 years.
    • Classic texts without age limit.
    • Information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • References should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • References should be relevant to the topic.
  • They should come from specialized journals, scientific databases, university websites, corporate sites, etc.
  • They should be up to date: journal articles no older than 10 years; classic texts without age limit; information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years.
  • Include only sources cited in the text.

 

Letter to the editor

SUGGESTED DOCUMENT STRUCTURE

First page and subsequent pages:

Development:

  • Indicate the intended audience.
  • Briefly state the origin of the idea for the letter and the motivation of the author(s).
  • Provide brief comments—agreement or disagreement—on conceptual, methodological, interpretative, or content aspects of an article previously published in the Journal.
  • Promote and encourage the dissemination of knowledge in your discipline by developing an opinion, idea, or hypothesis presented to the academic community.
  • Present information objectively and in an organized manner.
  • If applicable, explicitly state compliance with national and international research ethics standards (informed consent, ethics committee approval, institutional support letters, etc.).
  • If applicable, in-text citations should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.

Closing:

  • Conclude appropriately with the main or strongest ideas.
  • Provide recommendations when relevant.
  • Justify the importance of the central idea of the letter for the discipline and health.
  • Highlight its relevance for undergraduate education.
  • Identify new topics that could be addressed in other letters to the editor.
  • Include the author’s email address for communication via email.
  • The total length of the letter should not exceed two pages or 1,000 words.

References:

  • Use a maximum of 5 bibliographic references (journal articles no older than 10 years, classic texts without age limit, information from websites or corporate sources no older than 5 years).
  • References should follow the Vancouver style. It is recommended to review the following link: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/citingmedicine.
  • References should be relevant to the topic and up to date.
  • They should come from specialized journals, scientific databases, university websites, corporate sites, etc.
  • They should include only sources cited in the text.

 

Copyright Notice

All contents of this e-journal are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC-BY-NC-ND) licence. Any reproduction of material in whole or in part must always cite the source.

The rights of the academic works published in Revista Confluencia belong to their authors, who grant the journal the licence for their use. The management of permissions and authorisation to publish images (or any other material) containing copyright and their consequent reproduction rights in this publication is the exclusive responsibility of the authors of the articles.

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.