Editorial Policies

Authorship policies

With the objective of ensuring transparency, the journal adopts rigorous criteria to define authorship. In order to ensure integrity of the double-blind peer review process, the authors' full information must be exclusively provided in the submission system; it is not allowed to identify them in the text of the manuscript.

The following must be informed at submission: full name of all authors; institutional affiliation (including up to three hierarchical levels: institution, unit and department); email address; ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) identifier, with free registration (https://orcid.org/); and identification of the corresponding author, including full mail address. All this information will be incorporated to the article immediately after its final approval.

The journal recommends up to six (6) authors per manuscript. Any and all submissions with more authors shall be accompanied by a detailed justification that will be assessed by the Editor in Chief regarding its pertinence and conformity with the study complexity.

The authorship criteria set forth by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) are adopted. In order to be considered as author, a person must meet the following criteria:

  1. Substantial contribution to the study conception or design; or to data acquisition, analysis or interpretation;
  2. Writing of the manuscript or critical review of relevant intellectual content;
  3. Approval of the final version to be published;
  4. Commitment regarding responsibility for all aspects inherent to the paper, ensuring integrity and accuracy of any of the study parts.

All authors must render their responsibilities public and comprehensively agree with the content submitted.

Changes in authorship and conflict resolution

Authorship changes (inclusion, exclusion or change in order) shall only be accepted upon formal request to the Editor in Chief, with due reasons and agreement by all authors. These requests can be analyzed during the evaluation, and the editorial process may be put on hold until reaching a final decision. Changes are exceptional after acceptance or publication and, when approved, they imply formal corrections (errata).

Authorship conflicts must be informed to the journal, which will act as mediator following the recommendations set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). When necessary, the resolution can be forwarded to the authors' institutions. All decisions will be based on transparency, integrity and documentary evidence.

Authors' contributions

CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) is used to define authorship contributions and ensure their transparency. Authorship must reflect substantial intellectual participation in developing the manuscript, attributing it to those who have made relevant contributions in at least one of the following functions.

All authors must explicitly state their individual contributions according to the CRediT taxonomy, as well as fully agree with the content submitted.

Contributions by non-authors

No collaborator failing to meet all authorship criteria must be listed as author; they must be mentioned in the Acknowledgments section instead.

Inclusion of any name in the Acknowledgments sections requires previous written authorization from all the individuals mentioned, as such recognition may imply endorsement of the content published.

Section policies

The following materials are accepted for publication: original articles, review articles, theoretical reflections, case studies and experience reports. Furthermore, the journal publishes editorials written by specialists with renowned expertise via invitation by the editorial board, as well as letters to the editor, which contribute to scientific debate and to dialoguing with the academic community.

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

Text materials resulting from original and novel research studies, of a theoretical and/or empirical nature, and related to topics of interest in the Stomatherapy field. The preferred structure is as follows: Introduction, Objectives, Methods, Results, Discussion and Conclusion.

Length: up to 6,000 words, including references, tables and figures.

LITERATURE REVIEWS

Manuscripts presenting a critical synthesis of the literature on any relevant topic for Stomatherapy, with the possibility of being in the following formats: narrative, integrative, scoping or systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis. The journal prioritizes systematic reviews due to their higher scientific evidence level.

Review protocols are not accepted.

The recommendation for systematic reviews is to adopt the PRISMA guidelines.

Length: up to 5,000 words, including references, tables and figures.

EXPERIENCE REPORTS OR CASE STUDIES

Descriptive and analytical text materials referring to professional experiences, clinical cases or case series involving individuals, groups or communities, with a potential contribution to the Stomatherapy practice. They can include Report experiences corresponding to clinical cases, professional practice experience or technological innovations.

In the case of studies involving human beings, it is mandatory to present due approval by a Research Ethics Committee.

Length: up to 3,000 words, including references, tables and figures.

REFLECTION ARTICLES OR THEORETICAL ASSAYS

Analytical text materials presenting a critical and grounded stance on relevant or emerging topic in the Stomatherapy field, articulating theory, practice and scientific production. They must make original contributions to conceptual progress in the area.

Length: up to 3,000 words, including references.

EDITORIALS

Text materials written by specialists with renowned expertise, via invitation from the journal Editors and addressing current topics that are relevant to the Stomatherapy area.

Length: up to 1,500 words.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Correspondence intended to the Editor with the objective of clarifying, discussing or commenting articles recently published in ESTIMA -- Braz. J. Enterostomal Ther., where informed agreement or disagreement can be expressed, as well as concisely reporting relevant scientific findings.

Length: up to 1,000 words, including references.

Language policies

The editorial policy adopted is based on clarity, scientific rigor and use of ethical and ethical language exempt from biases. The journal accepts manuscripts in Portuguese, English and Spanish; all articles are published in these three languages with the goal of expanding scientific knowledge visibility, accessibility and international dissemination.

All manuscripts must prioritize clear, objective and technically suitable language, preferring to use active voice as recommended by scientific writing international guides. Lexical choices must favor terminological precision, avoiding ambiguities, undue generalizations and excessively complex constructions.

The journal suggests that authors adopt inclusive and respectful language exempt from preconceptions, in consonance with widely recognized international guidelines such as those set forth by the American Psychological Association (Bias-Free Language), the Council of Science Editors, SAGE Publications, the National Institute for Health and Care Research, the American Chemical Society and the American Medical Association.

The recommendations in this sense are as follows:

  • Using terminology that acknowledges people's dignity, avoiding stigmatizing and discriminatory expressions or those that may reinforce stereotypes related to age, gender, deficiencies, health conditions, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic condition or any other individual or collective characteristic.
  • Prioritizing person-first language such as "person with a stoma", "person with a wound" or "person with incontinence", avoiding labeling or reductionism.
  • Avoiding terms implying victimization, suffering or inadequate limitations (for example: substituting "suffering from" with objective descriptions of a clinical condition).
  • Using factual and neutral descriptions for health conditions, assistive technologies and therapeutic interventions, avoiding value judgments or emotional language.
  • Employing adequate terms for different assistance contexts, respecting the specificities inherent to health practices and avoiding obsolete or pejorative denominations.
  • Ensuring that the text is free from implicit or explicit biases, even in the choice of examples, analytical categories and interpretations of the results.

Considering its international and multilingual nature, the journal recognizes that stigma and terminological adequacy perceptions can vary across cultures and languages. Thus, it is recommended to pay attention to the linguistic specificities of Portuguese, English and Spanish, avoiding terms that may be culturally inadequate or interpreted as ffensive in certain contexts.

Research and publication ethics

The Brazilian Journal of Enterostomal Therapy -- Revista Estima reasserts its commitment to scientific integrity, research ethics and transparency in all stages of the editorial process, from submission to publication or post-publication. This section establishes the ethical precepts that guide authors, editors and evaluators, defining principles, responsibilities and procedures aligned with the international best practices and the current legislation.

The journal establishes that all published articles are the authors' entire responsibility, not necessarily reflecting the editors' or editorial board's opinion. It is recommended for pharmaceutical products, medical devices or technologies to be cited in a general way in the text body, avoiding commercial promotion; when it is indispensable to mention a brand, it must be indicated at the end of the manuscript as a comment.

This set of guidelines ensures that the journal operates in compliance with high international standards regarding ethics, integrity and transparency in scientific communication, promoting reliability and credibility in the scientific production published.

Errors and suspected misconduct instances

The journal uses Digital Object Identifiers (DOI®), assumes a commitment to ethics and scientific integrity principles and strongly condemns plagiarism and self-plagiarism, resorting to the iThenticate similarity level detection system under due agreement signed by the Brazilian Association of Scientific Editors (Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos, ABEC).

In case such similarity exceeds 21%, the manuscript will be rejected and both its authors and their institutions will be notified. If plagiarism or fraud is detected in the peer review process, these measures will also be applied in the evaluation stages conducted by reviewers or editors.

When any type of misconduct is identified after publishing an article, a retraction will be published informing about the infringement in the same issue where the manuscript has been disclosed.

Authors' responsibilities

All authors are responsible for the originality, accuracy and integrity of their manuscripts and must ensure that the data presented are truthful, obtained in an ethical way and reported in a transparent and reproducible manner.

The journal follows the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations; in addition, it is a signatory of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), reasserting its commitment to responsible scientific production evaluation. It also endorses the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical trials policies and the Clinical Good Practices, in addition to adopting the ethical principles established in the Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in 2013), which instruct on how to conduct research studies involving human beings in the international scope.

From study conception, all authors must observe good research practices, including adequate authorship definition, responsible data handling and compliance with all ethical and regulatory norms. Research studies involving human beings must fully observe Law No. 14,874/2024, with due approval from the Research Ethics Committee linked to the National System of Ethics in Research with Human Beings, coordinated by the National Research Ethics Commission or by the equivalent body in the country where the study is conducted. Opinion numbers must be informed in the Methods section and a Free and Informed Consent Form must be obtained and stated, when applicable. Any and all studies involving animals must present due approval from a Committee of Ethics in Use of Animals.

Before submission, all authors must guarantee that their manuscript is original and novel and that it is not undergoing any simultaneous evaluation process by another journal. In addition to that, it is necessary to ensure that all authors agree with the submission and with the final version of the manuscript.

All authors must also state potential conflicts of interest, as well as present all pertinent ethical and institutional authorizations, when applicable. It is also recommended to avoid contents of a promotional or commercial nature, preferentially using generic denominations for products, materials and technologies mentioned in the text.

In the case of clinical trials, it is mandatory to present the corresponding registration number in an international renowned database; this number should have been obtained at the beginning of the data collection period. The identification number must be informed at the end of the abstract and described in the Methods section. Registration in platforms validated by the WHO and ICMJE criteria will be accepted, namely: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ClinicalTrials.gov, International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN), Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), Registro Brasileiro de Ensaios Clínicos (ReBEC), Registo Nacional de Estudos Clínicos (RNEC -- Portugal), UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). Only studies duly registered will be considered for publication.

In studies involving animals, it is mandatory to present due approval by the Commission of Ethics in Use of Animals, in compliance with the current norms.

During the evaluation process, all authors must collaborate in an ethical and transparent way, answering the reviewers' requests and implementing the changes required. After publication, they remain responsible for the content of their article and must promptly report any error identified and collaborate with any due correction or retraction, in addition to answering questions from the academic community.

Corrections and retractions

In this section, the journal establishes the guidelines and procedures to deal with errors, suspected misconduct instances and ethical disputes related to submitted manuscripts and published articles. These guidelines apply to authors, reviewer, editors and readers and aim at ensuring scientific recording integrity, editorial transparency and reliability of all publications, in consonance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and with the journal's current editorial policy.

Any suspected misconduct instance (including plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, redundant publications, inadequate authorship or undeclared conflicts of interest) must be formally reported to the journal by means of the institutional channels, especially via the official email ([email protected]) and addressed to the Editor in Chief. The journal encourages responsible and informed communication of these situations on the part of authors, reviewers, readers or institutions, ensuring confidential treatment of all the information and ethical implementation of the entire process.

Errors not constituting misconduct but that may impair clarity, precision of interpretation of the scientific content will be handled by means of corrections (errata) after publication. Corrections can be requested by the authors or identified by the editors and will be assessed in terms of their relevance and impact. When approved, they will be published as soon as possible in the form of a document linked to the original article, with a clear identification of the changes made and ensuring their transparency and reliability. The original content will remain accessible, though duly flagged.

The retraction procedure will be adopted when severe errors, verified scientific misconduct instances or ethical infringements that impair reliability of the results are identified. Retractions can be total or partial depending on the extension of the problem identified; their objective is to preserve integrity of the academic records without removing articles from the database. All retracted articles remain indexed and are clearly identified as such, publishing a retraction note where the reasons are explained and duly referenced and linked to the original content.

The retraction process is initiated with a formal communication to the Editor in Chief along with detailed reasons and, when applicable, the retraction text. The editorial decision will be based on an analysis of the available evidence, with the possibility of involving queries to reviewers, institutions and other actors involved. The journal follows a fair and confidential process based on the right to the contradictory, ensuring that all parts have an opportunity to express their opinion.

Already published articles are not removed ("depublished"). Cases of errors not characterizing misconduct will be treated exclusively by means of errata. Both corrections and retractions are published as soon as possible, ensuring that the scientific registry remains updated.

Changes to a manuscript are only allowed up to the acceptance phase and conditioned to editorial approval. After acceptance, changes will only be considered under exceptional circumstances and to the discretion of the Editor in Chief. In case a manuscript has already been published, eventual approved corrections may imply issuing errata and charging the administrative fee for editorial processing.

Authorship definition and order must be established before submitting the manuscript and no changes are allowed during the evaluation process or after acceptance, except in exceptional situations duly justified and approved by the Editor in Chief.

These guidelines ensure that the journal acts transparently, ethically and in line with the international best practices on how to handle corrections, retractions and scientific integrity.

Conflicts of interest

The statement regarding conflicts of interest and funding sources is mandatory and an essential element for scientific communication transparency and integrity. Public trust in the scientific process and credibility of the articles published depend on clearly disclosing any relationship, activity or interest (financial, institutional or personal) that may exert a direct or indirect influence on planning, conduction, analysis, writing, review and publication of a given paper.

At submission, authors are responsible for identifying and stating all potential conflicts of interest that may be perceived as influencing the study results or interpretations. They must also explicitly report all funding sources, institutional support instances and connections that have contributed to conducting the research. Any and all financial relationships (such as funding, counseling, employment contracts or societary participation) and non-financial ones (such as academic, personal or institutional connections) must be declared in full.

The information pertaining to conflicts of interest and funding must be explicitly included in the manuscript. The following statement must be presented in the absence of conflicts: "The author(s) declare(s) that there are no conflicts of interest." ESTIMA -- Braz. J. Enterostomal Ther. adopts the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations for disclosing conflicts of interests, including filling-in the standard form (ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest), which must be submitted as a complementary document.

At submission, the corresponding author must formally state the following: (a) that the manuscript is not being simultaneously evaluated by any other journal; (b) all authors' responsibility regarding authorship, originality and integrity of the paper; (c) existence or absence of conflicts of interest; and (d) all funding and support sources for the research.

In cases where undeclared conflicts of interest are identified after publication, the journal will follow the procedures recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), with the possibility of adopting measures such as publishing a correction or a concern or retraction comment, according to the severity of the omission.

Omitting or inadequately stating conflicts of interest can compromise editorial evaluation and result in rejecting the manuscript or in corrective measures after publication.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools

Given the need for accountability, Artificial Intelligence (AI) does not meet the ESTIMA -- Braz. J. Enterestomal Ther. requirements for authorship of scientific articles. AI tools and language models cannot be listed as authors in any academic paper published by ESTIMA -- Braz. J. Enterestomal Ther.

Due to risks related to confidentiality and copyright, it is not allowed to use Artificial Intelligence tools for the scientific analysis of manuscripts.

AI tools can only be used in a limited way for the linguistic review of own opinions (grammar, spelling or translation), provided that they do not compromise confidentiality and that such use is duly stated, when applicable.

The following activities will be considered valid for using Artificial Intelligence:

  • Assistance regarding language in the article. When AI is used to paraphrase or improve original content by the authors, instead of suggesting new content.
  • Literature search. Generative text models can be used as search assistants and to identify relevant literature materials.
  • Production of images or graphical elements, or data compilation or analysis. In the Methods section of the article, it is necessary to make explicit how a given AI tool was used, as well as which.

All authors are responsible both for the accuracy, integrity and originality of their research articles and also for any AI use instance.

AI use must not violate any misconduct policy.

Preprints and other previous publications

The journal accepts submissions of manuscripts previously made available as preprints, as well as those derived from theses, dissertations and papers presented at scientific events, provided that the below conditions are met and that the manuscript original publication is clearly informed in all cases.

Preprints

Manuscripts stored in reliable preprint servers (either before or in parallel to submitting them to the journal) are accepted.

Preprint use is optional; however, the recommendation is for authors to report the server name and respective DOI at submission, in compliance with the Open Science practice.

Considering public availability of manuscripts, the peer review process may not adopt the double-blind model, as authorship can be identifiable.

Course conclusion papers, dissertations and theses

Manuscripts derived from course conclusion papers, theses or dissertations are accepted, provided that they are duly adapted to the scientific article format and comply with the journal guidelines.

These manuscripts will be subjected to the usual peer review process. The manuscript origin must be informed at submission and shall be indicated in a footnote in the published version of the article.

Scientific events

Manuscripts derived from papers presented at congresses, symposiums or scientific events can be submitted, as long as they have not been published in full in any event annals.

The manuscripts will be evaluated according to the journal's standard editorial process.

Peer review process

The journal uses the double-blind peer review system as a standard model, where the authors' identities are safeguarded.

All submitted manuscripts initially undergo a technical screening in charge of the editorial secretary and/or editor in charge, who verifies compliance with the journal norms, documentation completeness and adequacy to the scope. Manuscripts not meeting the minimum requirements may be returned for adjustments or preliminary rejected in this stage.

All manuscripts will be subjected to a similarity verification procedure in the iThenticate system. Papers presenting low similarity shall advance in the editorial flow, those with moderate indices may be returned for revision and manuscripts with a high similarity degree or plagiarism clues are rejected. When necessary, scientific writing and text organization quality is also evaluated, with the possibility of requesting adjustments before the peer review process.

The manuscripts approved in these stages are forwarded to the Associate Editor. Subsequently, the Associate Editor performs a preliminary editorial evaluation considering relevance, originality, research question clarity and methodological adequacy, with the possibility of deciding to reject the material before the peer review process or forward it to the following stages. When a manuscript is considered to advance in the editorial flow, this editor designates two ad hoc reviewers (specialized in the theme), who assess the scientific merit, methodological rigor, relevance and contribution of the study. Based on the opinions, the Associate Editor (who can work with the Editor in Chief) deliberates on rejecting, requesting revisions (major or minor) or accepting the manuscript. The revised versions (R1, R2, etc.) are reassessed by the editor and forwarded to the reviewers when pertinent, especially in cases of substantial changes, until the final decision.

The final editorial decision is up to the Editor in Chief or to the Associate Editor, considering the series of evaluations and adherence to the journal policies, with the possibility of resulting in definite acceptance, acceptance conditioned to adjustments or rejection. In the articles published, the journal identifies the editors responsible for conducting the editorial process, thus reinforcing transparency.

All manuscripts submitted by members of the editorial board are evaluated by independent editors, with no participation whatsoever of the authors in the decision process, thus ensuring impartiality. The journal can also have invited editors to deal with certain manuscripts or thematic issues, maintaining the same rigor and independence criteria.

Both editors and reviewers can refuse an evaluation when identifying conflicts of interest, insufficient expertise or manuscript inadequacy to the journal scope and scientific standards. All authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions by presenting duly informed reasons to the Editor in Chief, who will reassess the case in question. Eventual suspected ethical misconduct instances during the editorial process will be treated according to the international good practices on research integrity.

This process ensures scientific rigor, transparency, equality and alignment with the contemporary scientific communication guidelines.

Policy on sponsorships, announcements and advertising

The journal adopts a transparent and ethical policy for sponsorships, announcements and advertising, ensuring editorial independence, scientific integrity and non-interference in the evaluation and decision process regarding manuscripts.

All financial or institutional support modalities are clearly identified and exert no influence on the journal's editorial content.

The editorial decision regarding manuscripts is totally independent from any commercial relationship;

Announcements or sponsorships that may give rise to conflicts of interest or compromise scientific credibility of the journal are not accepted.

Sponsorships and announcements

The journal can accept support in the following sponsorship and announcement modalities:

  • Institutional sponsorship: support to maintain the journal or to specific initiatives such as thematic issues, translation of articles or editorial improvements;
  • Institutional and technical announcements: publication of banners or informational materials related to products, technologies or services in the Stomatherapy and Health areas;
  • Scientific and educational disclosing: campaigns related to events, courses, congresses or academic initiatives;
  • Support for internationalization purposes: funding for the translation and linguistic review of articles.

Proposals and evaluation

  • Any and all sponsorship or advertising proposals must be submitted to the journal's editorial team, along with a description of their content, purpose and format;
  • The analysis considers criteria related to scientific relevance, ethical adequacy, alignment with the journal's scope and absence of conflicts of interest;
  • The person deciding approvals is the editor in charge, with the possibility of involving SOBEST when pertinent;
  • Approved contents are identified as sponsored or advertising materials, ensuring transparency to readers.
  • Misleading and non-scientific advertisements are not accepted, neither are those promoting practices lacking technical grounds;
  • No interference from sponsors in the peer review process or in editorial decisions is allowed;
  • Advertisements must not be presented in a way that they can be mistaken for editorial content.

Diversity, Equality, Inclusiveness and Accessibility (DEIA)

It is guaranteed that all manuscripts are exclusively evaluated based on their scientific merit, disregarding social markers of difference such as authors' gender, sexual orientation, race, religious belief and nationality, among others, as well as their political views.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal must observe the principles set forth in the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guideline, which instructs adequate consideration and reporting of the "sex" and "gender" variables in the study planning and data analysis stages, as well as when presenting and interpreting the results. Available in: https://www.scielo.br/j/rbso/a/nfGZ4MGZdnCXNZKCgfNQvyL

According to this guideline, the terms "sex" (biological attribute) and "gender" (social and cultural construct) must be used accurately and consistently, avoiding conceptual ambiguities.

The journal reasserts its commitment to the Diversity, Equality, Inclusion and Accessibility (DEIA) principles, progressively incorporating them to its editorial policies and practices. In this sense, the journal already implements and/or is developing the following actions:

  • Including a formal statement of commitment with the DEIA principles in its institutional webpage;
  • Ongoing review of the authorship and citation policies, encouraging scientific diversity and representativeness;
  • Further diversifying the editorial and reviewers board, seeking greater representativeness in terms of regions, gender and performance areas;
  • Adopting inclusive language in the journal's guidelines, communication instances and official documents;
  • Improving accessibility to the digital processes, simplifying formal submission requirements;
  • Monitoring and analysis of data related to diversity in submissions and publications;
  • Encouraging publication and spotlighting of studies related to the topics of diversity, equality and inclusion;
  • Developing guidelines for editors and reviewers in order to reduce unconscious biases in the peer review process;
  • Transparent disclosing of the institutional actions and progress related to the DEIA agenda.

These initiatives are in line with the international recommendations to promote equality in scientific communication, including guidelines from the Council of Science Editors (CSE), which gather examples of DEIA policies and statements adopted by scientific journals.