FAQ Selection of Periodicals for LILACS Brazil
The current version of the evaluation and permanence criteria for Brazilian journals is published at https://lilacs.bvsalud.org/guias-e-manuais/docs/criterios-de-selecao-e-permanencia-de-periodicos-lilacs-brasil/.
To learn about the criteria at the regional level, visit: https://lilacs.bvsalud.org/guias-e-manuais/docs/metodologia-lilacs-criterios-de-selecao-e-permanencia-de-periodicos/.
Both the presentation and standardization, as well as endogeneity (geographic and institutional concentration of the published authors and the editorial committee), are evaluated, along with the scientific content of the journal.
The selection process for journals in the LILACS Brazil collection is based on the LILACS Brazil selection and continuation criteria. Journals submitted for evaluation undergo analyses of format and standardization, endogeneity (geographical and institutional distribution of the editorial committee and authors), as well as content analysis by specialists in the field. The journal must have at least 50% original articles to be considered for selection and its publication schedule must be up to date.
This process is coordinated by BIREME/PAHO/WHO as one of the activities provided for in the Cooperation Agreement with the Brazilian Ministry of Health, which coordinates the Brazilian Health Sciences Information Network.
Yes! Always from 01 to 30 April of this year.
The same criteria apply for the evaluation of electronic or print journals. Please refer to the Selection and Continuation Criteria for Journals in LILACS Brazil.
Editors of print journals must submit full texts in electronic format within the LILACS journal evaluation platform. No printed documentation will be accepted.
Editors of electronic journals should provide a link for accessing the full text of articles on their own websites within the LILACS journal evaluation platform. They are responsible for maintaining the persistence of the link, ensuring access to content 24 hours a day, seven days a week during the evaluation process.
All journals in the health field are evaluated by the LILACS Brazil Journals Evaluation and Selection Committee, except for Nursing and Dentistry, which have their own committees.
The LILACS Brazil Journals Evaluation and Selection Committee decides on the indexing and exclusion of a journal from the LILACS Brazil collection based on reports issued by the BIREME coordination team and opinions from experts in the journal’s knowledge area.
- Adeilton Alves Brandão, from Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, representing the Biomedical Sciences area
- André Luiz Félix Rodacki, from Federal University of Paraná, representing the Physical Education area (including Speech Therapy, Physical Education, Physiotherapy, Occupational Therapy, and Sports Medicine)
- Antônio de Pádua Pithon Cyrino, from São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho, representing the Public Health area (including Nutrition)
- Drª Edna Frasson de Souza Montero, from University of São Paulo, representing the Clinical and Surgical Medicine area
- Drª Mary Sandra Carlotto, representing the Psychology area • Dr. Silvia Berlanga de Moraes Barros, from University of São Paulo, representing the Pharmacy area
- Drª Silvia Berlanga de Moraes Barros, da Universidade de São Paulo, membro representante da área de Farmácia
- Drª Maria Helena Palucci Marziale, from University of São Paulo, representing the Nursing thematic area
- Sigmar de Mello Rode, from São Paulo State University Júlio de Mesquita Filho, representing the Dentistry thematic area
The assessment from the National Selection Committee will be sent to the journal’s editor via email, typically containing recommendations for modifications to the journal and a timeframe for implementation.
The results are published on the LILACS portal after the meeting of the LILACS Brazil Journals Evaluation and Selection Committee. The forecast is for the results to be published by the third week of October, and the improvement recommendations report to be sent by the end of December.
► EDITORIAL TEAM
Assess the representativeness of the Editorial Board of the journal, considering their contribution, suitability, and scientific merit of its members.
► CONTENT
Based on the analysis of the content of the articles under evaluation, provide opinions on the following aspects, justifying your opinion in writing:
a) Are the articles aligned with the scope and objectives of the journal? Are the topics covered in the articles relevant to the field and current scientific developments?
b) Do the journal’s guidelines outline a clear and well-defined methodological structure? Are there sufficient details to ensure reproducibility of the research?
c) Comment on the methodological quality and structure of the articles. Is the study design adequate to address the hypotheses and research objectives? Does the methodological structure facilitate easy reading and comprehension? Do studies of the same nature exhibit consistent methodological standards?
d) Are the results clearly described? Do the discussions focus on the data obtained and the results achieved, emphasizing new and significant aspects observed in the study and discussing agreements and disagreements with other published research?
e) Are quality guidelines and standards applied in article preparation (e.g., Red Equator, PRISMA, etc.)?
f) What ethical and research integrity best practices are reflected in the journal and its published articles? (e.g., COPE, ICMJE)
g) Considering Open Science principles, analyze and comment on the aspects already implemented in the journal:
h) Is the writing style of the articles appropriate, reflecting editorial care?
i) Are article titles concise and clear? Are abstracts structured, objective, and provide a correct understanding of the article content? Do keywords represent the content and adopt DeCS / MeSH descriptors where possible?
j) Comment on the quality of graphical elements in the journal such as images, tables, and graphs (abbreviation definitions in footnotes, units of quantities, coherent and clear titles, properly cited sources, DOI, etc.). Do they facilitate independent understanding without the need for full article reading?
k) Are the communication channels and strategies, both for article dissemination and submission calls, adequate?
l) Do you consider that the articles published in the journal have sufficient quality, depth, and methodological consistency to justify their inclusion in LILACS?
► PEER REVIEW
Provide opinions on the peer review process conducted by the journal regarding the following aspects:
a) Presentation of the procedures adopted by the journal for article analysis and approval.
b) Information from the peer review form used by the journal for article evaluation.
► FINAL OPINION
Assign a rating to the journal based on the evaluation conducted.
( ) priority
( ) important
( ) relative importance
( ) not relevant
Provide your opinion on the importance of the journal for the development of the field.
Indicate necessary improvements and specific comments to be communicated to the editor.
In your opinion, are there journals more important to this field than the journal under review? If yes, please indicate below:
It will be indexed starting from the issue following the one that was evaluated.
Retrospective indexing is only performed if recommended by the Selection Committee.
The journal editor can request a new evaluation one year after the last evaluation.
Important: The history of recommendations made by the LILACS Brazil Journals Evaluation and Selection Committee to journals is reviewed, and if it is found that recommendations have not been implemented, the documentation may be disregarded during the pre-analysis phase of journals.
Yes, please check the criteria and register as a volunteer: LILACS (bvsalud.org).
