Revista CEFAC (abbr. Rev. CEFAC; ISSN 1982-0216) continuously publishes articles with open access that are organized in six annual editions. The abbreviation of the journal’s title, Rev. CEFAC, should be used in bibliographies, in footnotes, and in bibliographical references and subtitles when necessary.

Mission and Scope

The mission of Revista CEFAC is to disseminate scientific advances related to different areas of speech-language pathology and audiology, as well as their interfaces with other areas of knowledge, in order to contribute to the growth and improvement of the quality of speech-language pathology and audiology at the national and international levels.

Revista CEFAC publishes Original Research Articles, Review Articles, Brief Communications, Case Reports, and Letters to the Editor that are relevant to speech-language pathology and audiology in the following areas: language, fluency, orofacial myofunctional disorders, voice, audiology, dysphagia, public health, neurofunctional speech therapy, gerontology, neuropsychology, work speech therapy and audiology, speech expertise, speech-language pathology in schools, and related areas. It also publishes other works that address the interfaces of speech-language pathology and audiology with other educational and health sciences.

General Policies

• Original Research Articles, Review Articles, Brief Communications, Case Reports, and Letters to the Editor may be submitted to Revista CEFAC.
• All articles submitted for publication may not have been previously published or be under review by another journal.
• Revista CEFAC accepts the submission of articles written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish.
• If an article is accepted for publication, then an English version is mandatory and has to be certified by a specialized company or translator that is responsible for the translation (declaration form presented below). All authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscripts, as well as for the translation of their manuscripts into English by a qualified translator. The cost of translation to English is the responsibility of authors.
• Only submissions adhering to the journal’s policies and standards will be considered for publication.

Data Sharing Policy

Revista CEFAC encourages authors to share their research data if doing so does not violate the protection of human rights or other valid privacy concerns. Upon submitting manuscripts, authors need to provide a data sharing statement on the Title Page.

The data sharing statement needs to indicate whether the research data will be shared and, if so, then (1) what data in particular will be shared, (2) when the data will become available and for how long, and (3) by what access criteria data will be shared.

Examples of data sharing statements are provided by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) at https://icmje.org/recommendations/browse/publishing-and-editorial-issues/clinical-trial-registration.html#two.

Advertising Policy

Revista CEFAC currently does not reproduce or publish advertisements. Its sole purpose is to disseminate scientific articles related to different areas of speech-language pathology and audiology and their interfaces with other areas of knowledge.

Manuscript Submission

Only articles submitted to the online publishing system will be considered for publication. The system may be accessed at http://mc04.manuscriptcentral.com/rcefac-scielo.
 

Publication Fees

Revista CEFAC does not charge any submission fee. There is a publication fee of BRL $900.00 to be paid by authors whose articles have been accepted for publication.

Translation costs are not included with the publication fee. The cost of an article’s translation to English is the responsibility of authors.

Language Policy

Revista CEFAC accepts the submission of articles written in English, Portuguese, or Spanish. If an article is accepted for publication, then an English version is mandatory and has to be certified by a specialized company or translator that is responsible for it (declaration form presented below). All authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscripts, as well as for the translation of their manuscripts into English by a qualified translator. The cost of translation to English is the responsibility of authors.

A declaration certifying the English version of an accepted article has to be sent along with the article using the following form:

Authorship and Contributions

Authorship Criteria

Every person designated as an author of a submitted manuscript should have sufficiently participated in its production to justify taking public responsibility for its content. Authorship credit has to be based on (1) substantial contributions to the conception and design of the research, to the collection of data, or to the analysis and interpretation of data; (2) participation in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content; and (3) the final approval of the version to be published.

Each author assumes responsibility for the scientific quality of the work as a whole, as well as professional, public, ethical, and social responsibility of its publication. Editors may request justification when the total number of authors exceeds eight.

The author responsible for the submission of the manuscript has to provide the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) of each author. If an author is not registered, then it is possible to register upon the submission of the article at https://orcid.org/.

Authors' Contributions

Authors' contributions have to indicated on the Title Page using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy defined at https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles-defined/. Possible contributions are conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, software, supervision, validation, visualization, writing – original draft, and writing – review & editing.

Changes in Authorship

If authors request the removal or addition of one or more authors after the submission or publication of a manuscript, then they are required to send an explanation and statement of agreement for the requested change signed by all listed authors and from the author(s) to be removed or added.

Acknowledgments

The “Acknowledgments” section needs to name collaborators whose contributions to the article do not justify authorship and acknowledge all forms of financial support and technical aid received. The contributions of all contributors and providers of support have to be specified.

The acquisition of funding, general supervision of a research group, writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading are examples of activities that do not qualify a contributor for authorship. In those cases, the contributor may be acknowledged.

The corresponding author has to submit written permission to be acknowledged from each individual named in the "Acknowledgments".

Preservation Policy

Revista CEFAC maintains electronic backup to preserve access to all its content through a partnership with Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) via LOCKSS – Cariniana, managed by the Brazilian Institute of Information on Science and Technology (IBICT).

Manuscript Evaluation Process

All content published by Revista CEFAC is subject to peer review. The evaluation of manuscripts comprises three steps:

1. Technical Evaluation

All submitted manuscripts are evaluated regarding whether they comply with the instructions described in the rules for submission. Manuscripts that do not comply or are not submitted along with all requested documents will be returned to the author(s) for revision. Manuscripts conforming to the rules for submission and for which all requested documents have been submitted will advance to Step 2: Scope and Interest Assessment.

2. Scope and Interest Assessment

Any manuscript that has passed the technical evaluation will be sent to the editors in chief, together with a similarity report (Crossref Similarity Check by iThenticate). The editors in chief will evaluate the similarity report and conduct a preliminary scientific assessment of the manuscript’s scope, relevance, and interest for publication. Any manuscript whose scope does not fall within the journal’s scope or that lacks scientific interest or relevance to its mission and/or goal may be immediately rejected by editorial decision. Manuscripts considered to be appropriate for publication will advance to Step 3: Double-Blind Peer Review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Any manuscript deemed appropriate for publication will be evaluated by at least two referees with expertise in the area of knowledge contained in the manuscript from national and international educational and/or research institutions based on their own scientific production. Anonymity is guaranteed throughout the peer review process. A referee’s opinion on a manuscript will be one of the following: “Accepted,” “Accepted with minor revision,” “Accepted with major revision,” “Rejected and resubmit,” or “Rejected.”

An opinion of rejection or acceptance with revision will always be accompanied by the referee’s comments on their evaluation. After the manuscript is resubmitted by the author(s) with their corrections, the manuscript will be analyzed again by the reviewers; it will be accepted if it receives two favorable opinions but rejected if it receives two unfavorable opinions. In the event of conflicting opinions, the editors in chief will send the manuscript to an associate editor for a third opinion that will determine the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript.

In the corrected version of all manuscripts, authors need to highlight all changes that they have made throughout the text. When submitting corrected versions of manuscripts, authors also need to present a letter to the reviewers listing the requests and/or suggestions made by the reviewers or editors and the authors’ responses.

Submissions from Editors and Editorial Board Members

Manuscripts submitted to Revista CEFAC by its editors or by members of the editorial board undergo the same double-blind peer review process as submissions in general. The editor or member of the editorial board responsible for the authorship of the submitted article will not participate in any stage of the peer review process.

Manuscripts submitted by editors or members of the editorial board are not given any priority over other manuscripts. Any editor or editorial board member listed as an author of a submitted manuscript is required to declare their affiliation with the journal in the manuscript’s “Conflicts of Interest” section.

Appeals and Withdrawals

If any editorial decision is doubted or contested, then the author(s) can contact the editors in chief, who will provide their justifications, clarify any doubts in the process, and confirm the status of the manuscript as being accepted or rejected for publication.

Manuscripts may not be submitted for consideration in other national or international journals while they are undergoing editorial evaluation in Revista CEFAC.

In the case of any doubts about the evaluation process, the author(s) should contact the editors in chief by email at revistacefac@cefac.br.

After Acceptance and the Publishing Process

When a manuscript has been accepted for publication, the corresponding author will receive an electronic message regarding payment. Payment should be issued to the Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial (ABRAMO) account at Banco Itaú, Agência 4271 C/C 23820-8 – CNPJ 022.196.630/0001-16. Authors who do not live in Brazil can issue payment via PayPal after completing the form available at https://abramofono.com.br/produto/taxa-de-publicacao-para-a-revista-cefac/.

Proof of deposit has to be emailed to revisora1@revistacefac.br, along with the name and ID of the person for whom the receipt has to be issued. The issue in which the article is to be published is chosen upon receipt of proof of payment. For further information, please contact us at revisora1@revistacefac.br.

After a manuscript’s acceptance, the author(s) will be requested to send the English version of the manuscript. For more information, see “Language Policy.”

Section Policies

Original Research: Original Research articles disseminate the new results of scientific research, whether quantitative or qualitative. Their formal structure has to include six sections: “Introduction,” “Methods,” “Results,” “Discussion,” “Conclusion,” and “References.” The maximum number of references allowed is 40, 70% of which need to be articles published in national and international journals, preferably in the past five years. If a greater number of references is required, then the editors may be consulted. Subheadings, citations of clinical implications, and limitations of the study, particularly in the “Discussion” section of the article, are recommended. The “Methods” section needs to state the research’s approval by an ethics committee and the case number, whenever appropriate, along with the registration number of the protocol used (i.e., for clinical trials). The section also needs to describe the study’s design, the study’s setting, the participants, any interventions performed, and clinical outcomes of interest. The abstract should not exceed 200 words in length and should contain the following sections: “Purpose,” “Methods,” “Results,” and “Conclusion.”

Literature Reviews: Literature Reviews, including integrative, systematic, and scoping reviews, provide critical reviews of a topic of scientific interest within speech-language pathology, audiology, or related areas and offer new insights into the topic, point out gaps of knowledge on the topic, raise new topics of discussion, and/or indicate paths to be studied in the future. Other types of literature reviews will be accepted at the discretion of the editors. The formal structure of all Literature Reviews needs to include the following: “Introduction,” which justifies the topic of the review, including the clinical question to be answered and the objective to be met; “Methods,” which contains information regarding the registration of the protocol in databases such as the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) or Open Science Framework (OSF), presents the eligibility criteria, the Patient, Intervention, Comparison, and outcome (PICO) strategy or Population, Concept, and Context (PCC) strategy, the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the databases consulted, the strategies for searching for literature (e.g., manual search), details of the process of data collection, how the quality of reviewed studies was assessed, risks of bias when relevant, the method of data analysis, the outcomes studied, and, when meta-analysis is present, the method used to perform it; “Literature Review,” which has to contain a flow chart showing how literature was selected for the review, a summary of qualitative and quantitative data, the results of the meta-analysis with forest plots when applicable, and, when relevant, the results concerning the risks of bias, methodological quality, and the risk analysis of the studies included in the review, along with a discussion of the results found; “Conclusion,” which has to objectively answer the research question(s) studied; and “References,” containing a maximum of 40 references to articles published in national and international journals. If a greater number of references is required, then the editors may be consulted. The abstract should not exceed 200 words and should contain the following sections: “Purpose,” “Methods,” “Literature Review,” and “Conclusion.” Systematic review articles registered in PROSPERO are preferred.

The scientific writing of systematic reviews should follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, while the writing of scoping reviews should follow the PRISMA for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.

Literature review protocols will be accepted in the category of Literature Reviews but only in cases in which the data extraction has not begun. The protocols need to contain the following sections: “Introduction,” containing the research question(s), hypothesis, and objectives; “Methods,” containing a description of PICO or PCC, eligibility criteria, sources of information, the search strategy, data selection and extraction, outcomes, the risk of bias assessment, data synthesis, meta-analysis when applicable, and the assessment of certainty of evidence; “Discussion,” containing the relevance, weaknesses, and strengths of the proposed revision; and “Final Considerations.” Literature review protocols registered on other platforms need to report the registration number in the “Methods” section. Protocols have to include all items and be accompanied by the PRISMA for Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist. The abstract has to be structured, not exceed 200 words in length, and contain the following sections: “Purpose,” “Methods,” and “Final Considerations.”

Brief Communications: Brief reports of research or professional experience with methodologically appropriate evidence, although manuscripts describing new methods or techniques will also be considered. The formal structure of Brief Communications has to include the following: “Introduction,” “Methods,” “Results,” “Discussion,” “Final Considerations” (or “Conclusions”), and “References.” The abstract has to be structured, not exceed 200 words in length, and contain the following sections: “Purpose,” “Methods,” “Results,” and “Final Considerations” (or “Conclusions”).

Case Reports: Reports of rare or uncommon cases that are particularly interesting or that yield new knowledge and/or showcase treatment techniques or reflections. Case Reports have to be original and unpublished. It is necessary to present the research ethics committee’s approval and to ensure the confidentiality of the case participant’s identity. The formal structure of Case Reports has to include the following: a succinct “Introduction” with support from the literature that justifies the presentation of the case; a “Case Report” containing a description of the history, procedures, and treatments performed; “Results,” which need to clearly show the progress achieved; “Discussion”; “Conclusion” (or “Final Considerations”); and “References” containing no more than 30 references to articles published in national and international journals, preferably in the past five years. The abstract should not exceed 200 words and should not be structured. The scientific writing of clinical case reports needs to follow the recommendations of the Case Report (CARE) Guidelines for the consensus-based reporting of clinical cases.

Letters to the Editor: Comments and criticisms regarding published articles, written in a constructive, objective, and educational way, or discussions of current specific issues. Letters to the Editor may be not exceed 1,000 words in length and will be published according to the criteria of the editors in chief.

Corrections and Retractions

Revista CEFAC values the maintenance of good scientific practices and publication ethics. All articles, following an initial technical evaluation, will be forwarded for similarity analysis using the Crossref Similarity Check by iThenticate to detect plagiarism. It should be noted that plagiarism is a crime punishable by Brazilian law. Fraudulent information or plagiarism is not accepted. In the case that plagiarism or self-plagiarism is detected, the author(s) will be notified, and the journal will adopt the retraction measures guided by SciELO⁽¹⁾, COPE⁽³⁾ and the ICMJE.

Revista CEFAC consistently observes a policy of correction to ensure the quality of articles. Editors have a strong commitment to clarify, prevent, and correct any errors made by authors and even those made by other editors or resulting from the editing process. Authors, readers, and editors are encouraged to report errors in articles by emailing the editors of the journal at revistacefac@cefac.br.

Revista CEFAC accepts comments and criticisms regarding published articles written in a constructive, objective, and educational manner. The author(s) of criticized articles or containing errors will be notified and afforded the opportunity to publish responses to the comments, criticisms, and/or clarification of errors. The editorial board observes that policy in order to ensure that the conduct of its editors aligns with ethics in publication.

Human and Animal Rights

Revista CEFAC requires authors to follow the recommendations proposed by the ICMJE and published in the article “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals,” published in February 2006 and available at http://www.icmje.org/.

For manuscripts reporting studies with human participants, a statement is required that identifies the ethics committee that approved the study and affirms that the study conformed to recognized standards—for example:

    • Declaration of Helsinki;
    • Resolução 466/2012, Conselho Nacional de Saúde, Ministério da Saúde, Brazil;
    • US Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects; and/or
    • European Medicines Agency Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice.

It should be clearly stated in the manuscript that all participants provided their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. It is also mandatory to provide the approval letter of the ethics committee of the institution where the research was conducted.

Participants’ anonymity should be maintained. Information about and images of individual participants will be published only if the individual’s prior informed consent has been obtained.

For manuscripts reporting studies with animals, a statement indicating that the protocol and procedures employed were ethically reviewed and approved has to be included in the “Methods.” Authors should state whether experiments were performed in accordance with relevant guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals—for example:

• Conselho Nacional de Controle da Experimentação Animal, Ministério da Saúde, Brazil;
• US National Research Council’s Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals;
• Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals; and/or
• Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes.

Clinical Trials

Revista CEFAC supports the policies of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the ICMJE for registering clinical trials, in recognition of the importance of those initiatives for the registration and international dissemination of information on clinical trials via open access. A clinical trial is any study that prospectively assigns humans to intervention or comparison groups to evaluate the cause and effect between a medical intervention and a health-related outcome. 

Clinical trials are required to be registered in a relevant clinical trial registration system, including:

    • Clinical Trials;
    • Australian Clinical Trials Registry;
    • ISRCTN Registry; or
    • UMIN Clinical Trials Registry.

Reporting Guidelines

Authors are encouraged to consult the guidelines relevant to their specific research design on Equator Network. For randomized clinical trials, authors should consult the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (i.e., CONSORT) statement; for observational studies, the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (i.e., STROBE) statement; and, for diagnostic studies, the Standards for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (i.e., STARD). Which guidelines are appropriate to follow depends on the type of study conducted, and other or additional guidelines may be used.

Preprints

Revista CEFAC accepts manuscripts that have been deposited on a non-commercial preprint server as long as they are not being evaluated by another journal. The submission to the preprint server can be performed before or in parallel with the submission to Revista CEFAC.

Authors need to cite the preprint in the manuscript, state in the Statement of Responsibility that the manuscript has been deposited in a preprint server, and provide the corresponding digital object identifier (DOI). 

For manuscripts that are accepted, the authors are requested to update the preprint with a link to the published article.

Submission Files Required

• title_page.docx: All information regarding authorship has to appear on the Title Page. The Title Page should contain: (a) the title of the manuscript in English; (b) the running head with no more than 40 characters, including spaces; (c) the full name of each author, their ORCID, and their institutional affiliation during the period when all or most of the research was conducted, along with their city, state, and country; (d) the institution where the study was conducted and its city, state, and country, (e) the name, full address, and email address of the corresponding author; (f) the area that the paper addresses (i.e., language, fluency, orofacial myofunctional disorders, voice, audiology, dysphagia, public health, neurofunctional speech therapy, gerontology, neuropsychology, work speech therapy and audiology, speech expertise, speech-language pathology in schools, or related areas); (g) the identification of the type of manuscript (i.e., Original Research, Literature Review, Brief Communication, Case Report, or Letter to the Editor); (h) a statement of sources of grants for research or study-related funding or, if none, then the statement “Nothing to declare”; (i) a statement of all conflicts of interest or, if none, then the statement “Nonexistent”); (j) each author’s contributions to the study; (k) acknowledgments; and (l) a data sharing statement.

In short, the Title Page should state the following in the following order:

• Title of the manuscript
• Running head, no longer than 40 characters
• Lead author (ORCID),¹ First coauthor (ORCID),² etc.
• ¹Institutional affiliation of the lead author and city, state, and country
• ²Institutional affiliation of the first coauthor and city, state, and country, etc. 
• Institution where the study was conducted, and its city, state, and country
• Name, address, and email of the corresponding author
• Area
• Type of manuscript
• Sources of funding
• Conflicts of interest
• Authors’ contributions
• Acknowledgments
• Data sharing statement

• manuscript.docx: The body of the manuscript should be in a Microsoft Word file in Arial, size 12, single-spaced on 212 × 297 mm (A4 size) pages with 2.5 cm at the top, bottom, right, and left margins and with pages numbered in Arabic numerals and ordered in the following sequence: title, abstract, and keywords; text; references; and tables and figures with their captions.

The manuscript may not exceed 15 pages in length (i.e., from “Introduction” until and excluding “References”), has to be single-spaced, and may include up to 10 tables or figures. Questionnaires can be included as supplementary materials.

• supplementary_material.docx: Supplementary materials include all useful materials to provide readers with detailed information that does not need to be in the manuscript but that may contribute to a greater understanding of the subject addressed.


• conflict_of_interest_disclosure.pdf: Revista CEFAC adopts the ICMJE Disclosure Form. Each author should submit a separate form and is responsible for the accuracy of the submitted information. All forms can be submitted in a single file.


• permissions_and_informed_consent.pdf: Permission to reproduce the photographic material of patients or another author needs to be provided, in which case an attached copy of the informed consent form is required that approves the use of the image(s) in scientific publications.


• rec_approval.pdf: Approval of the research ethics committee when reporting human research needs to be provided. See also “Human and Animal Rights.”


• responsibility_statement.pdf: A letter signed by each author stating that the manuscript is original, that the author or authors are responsible for the uploaded content, and that the manuscript has never been published or submitted elsewhere and presenting the contributions of each author. The manuscript will not be considered for publication in the absence of the Statement of Responsibility signed by each author.

Statement of Responsibility Template

Guidelines for Preparing Manuscripts

• Title: The title needs to adequately indicate the topic addressed in the manuscript without identifying the city or institution in which the research was conducted.


•  Abstract and Keywords: The manuscript needs to contain an abstract of no more than 200 words in length. The abstract needs to be structured according to the type of study (see “Section Policies”). The abstract should clearly describe of the major aspects of the research performed while highlighting the most significant data, new aspects of the content, and conclusions. Symbols, formulas, equations, and abbreviations should not be used.

Below the abstract, three to six keywords should be listed that capture the topic of the study. All keywords need to be based on the Descritores em Ciências da Saúde [Descriptors in Health Sciences] (https://decs.bvsalud.org/) published by Bireme, which is a translation of the Medical Subject Headings (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/) of the National Library of Medicine. For clinical trials, the registration number at the Clinical Trial Registration base should be provided after the abstract.

• Text: The body of the manuscript needs to follow the structure required for the respective type of manuscript (see “Section Policies”). Abbreviations should be avoided. When the use of acronyms is required, they need to be preceded by the term in full at the first appearance in the text. 

The “Introduction” needs to contain data that introduce the topic to the reader in a clear, concise way. The objective of the research needs to be clearly stated in the last paragraph of the section—for example, “The objective(s) of the study was (were) to” etc.—and needs to match the objective stated in the abstract. The “Methods” section needs to describe the methods used in detail. The section also has to state the research’s approval by the research ethics committee when applicable, specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and clearly describe the procedures to enable the replication of the study and a complete understanding of what and how it was accomplished. The relevant protocols to understand the methods also need to be incorporated into the section, and the section needs to state the theoretical approach on which the research was based including protocols adapted by the author(s) or used in full. The “Methods” also needs to present the type of statistical analysis used (i.e., descriptive and/or inferential) and describe the software used, the statistical tests applied, and the level of significance assigned. Ideally, descriptive results should be summarized in tables or figures when convenient, and, in that case, the data presented should not be repeated in graphics or the text.

• Footnotes: There should be no footnotes. If information is important for the understanding or replication of the research, then it needs to be included in the text of the manuscript.


• References: All references should be cited in the text in superscript Arabic numerals and numbered consecutively in the order in which they appear in the text. If a range of multiple references are cited, then they need to be separated by an en dash (e.g., 1–3). If multiple cited references are non-sequential, then they should be separated by commas. Authors should avoid indicating the name of other authors in the text. References to sources from indexed journals published in the past five years are preferred.

References need to be formatted in Vancouver style, as shown in the examples below. All authors should be listed with their last or family names, and only the first letter of those names is to be capitalized, followed by the initials of given name(s) without periods. For all references, the first six authors should be mentioned; if there are more than six authors, then the first six authors should be mentioned followed by “et al.” Whenever available, the titles of sources should be in English. The titles of journals need to be abbreviated in accordance with the List of Journals Indexed in Index Medicus of the National Library of Medicine, available at: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/index.html.

References to theses, dissertations, or papers presented at scientific conferences should be avoided. Personal communications, unpublished research, and studies in progress may be cited when absolutely necessary but should not be included in the references. Whenever possible, include the DOI of every reference and its PubMed Unique Identifier (PMID).

• Tables and Charts: Tables and charts should be formatted in Microsoft Word or Excel and be fully editable and unlocked. No tables or charts will be accepted if they are pasted into the text without the original database in which they were created. In the case of formatted charts or tables in Excel, the original files (i.e., .xls) in which they were created need to be submitted. Each chart or table needs to be submitted on a separate page after the References. 

Tables should be self-explanatory, avoid references to the text and other tables, and be numbered consecutively with Arabic numerals in the order in which they appear in the text. Each table should be presented with table number and title at the top, entirely in capital letters, without a period and aligned with the left edge of the table. Below each table, the same title alignment needs to be used to present the caption for the table, any statistical tests (i.e., with test name and p value), and the source from which the information was obtained when not the author(s). The layout should be simple, with top, bottom, and division lines between the header row and the other rows in bold. External vertical lines should not be included, and diagonal divisions inside the cells of the table are not allowed.

Charts need to follow the same guidelines as tables except that they need to have external vertical lines and be closed laterally.

• Figures (i.e., photographs, illustrations, and graphs): Figures should be submitted at the end of the manuscript after the References and be sequentially numbered in Arabic numerals according to the order in which they appear in the text. The approximate locations of the figures should be indicated in the text. Authors should follow the recommendations of ICMJE for illustrations, available at https://icmje.org/recommendations/browse/manuscript-preparation/preparing-for-submission.html#i.

Each figure needs to be submitted as an attachment in the submission system, in .TIF or .JPG format, with a minimum resolution of 300 dpi. Consideration should be given to the maximum width of the journal, which is 16.5 cm. Figures can be colored or black and white (i.e., grayscale). They need to be saved and named according to the article and their order within it—for example, “articleX_fig_1” and “articleX_fig_2” etc. 

Before-and-after images should be taken with the same intensity, direction, and color of light. Radiological and other clinical and diagnostic images, pictures of pathology specimens and photomicrographs should be sent as high-resolution photographic image files. Photomicrographs should have internal scale markers, with symbols, arrows, and letters contrasting with the background. The internal scale should be explained and the method of staining identified. 

Captions of figures should appear under the figures, not within them. When statistical tests are shown, the test name, p value, and source from which the information was obtained when the source is not the author(s) needs to be provided. In the case of graphs formatted in Excel, the original files (i.e., .xls) from which the graphs were created need to be provided. For still images, details with arrows, letters, numbers, and/or symbols, if provided, should be clear and large enough to withstand reduction. 

If a figure has previously been published, then the author or authors need to cite the original source and submit the written consent of the publisher and the original author(s) for its use.

• Statistical Analysis: Authors need to show that the statistical procedures employed were not only appropriate to test the hypotheses of their studies but also correctly interpreted. Levels of statistical significance (e.g., p < .05, p < .01, and p < .001) should be mentioned.


• Abbreviations and Acronyms: All abbreviations and acronyms need to be preceded by their full terms when first mentioned. When present in tables and figures, their full terms should be provided in the caption. Abbreviations and figures should not be used in the title or abstract.


• Units: Values of physical quantities should be listed as prescribed by the International System of Units, available on the website of the Bureau International des Poids et Mesures (https://www.bipm.org/en/measurement-units/si-base-units).


• Supplementary Material: Supplementary material is optional and includes relevant material that does not form part of the main manuscript, including additional data (e.g., computer codes), large tables, additional figures, questionnaires, and appendices. Supplementary material will be published after the References and should be submitted in a separate file but referred to in the text.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Revista CEFAC observes the “Guidelines on Best Practices for Strengthening Ethics in Scientific Publication” recommended by SciELO⁽¹⁾, which promote integrity and transparency in the dissemination and reproducibility of research, and the “Core Practices” of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)⁽³⁾.
 

Responsibilities and Duties of Editors, Referees, and Authors

Revista CEFAC complies with ethical standards and good practices, including COPE’s “Core Practices”: available at https://publicationethics.org/core-practices, which editors in chief follow and recommend associate editors, referees, and authors to also read and follow. Authors need to read, complete, and submit the Statement of Responsibility during the submission of the manuscript.

Declaration of Responsibilities and Duties of Editors, Referees, and Authors^(1-5)

Responsibilities and Duties of Editors

• Ensure that all necessary steps for the quality of published materials are followed respecting the information obtained through peer review and that the entire process has been conducted with transparency 
• Ensure the quality of published material
• Defend freedom of expression
• Publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and justifications whenever necessary
• Guide decision-making regarding the acceptance of articles in light of their importance, originality, and clarity and the relevance of the study without allowing commercial interests to interfere in such decisions
• Publish guidelines for authors regarding the preparation and submission of articles and to keep them regularly updated
• Publish guidelines for referees and keep them regularly updated
• Ensure the confidentiality of the identity of the referees
• Protect the confidentiality of the information contained in the articles throughout the review process
• Seek to meet the needs of readers and authors and respond promptly to complaints
• Ensure that published material complies with internationally accepted ethical guidelines
• Take appropriate action if there is misconduct is suspected, whether in published articles, manuscripts under review, or submitted manuscripts
• Reject manuscripts in which misconduct is suspected, ensure that an appropriate investigation is conducted, and ensure the resolution of the problem
• Allow the author(s) of criticized articles to respond to each criticism

Responsibilities and Duties of Referees

• Prepare a written, impartial, constructive opinion about each manuscript regarding the wording, relevance, originality, accuracy, and adequacy of the scope of the journal and its interest to readers
• Maintain the confidentiality of the information in the manuscript
• Meet the deadlines agreed with the editor and notify the editor immediately if it is impossible to accomplish the revision within the agreed-upon period
• Report to the editor when feeling unqualified to review an assigned manuscript
• Report ethical deviations related to the manuscript, including suspected plagiarism, to the editor
• Conduct reviews objectively and impartiality without personal judgment of any kind
• Consult the editor before agreeing to review a manuscript presenting potential conflicts of interest and to refuse to perform the review in the case of conflict

Responsibilities and Duties of Authors

• Describe the methodology of the research in a detailed, transparent, precise manner
• Present the results accurately without hiding or falsifying information
• Be prepared to provide public access to the data on which the article is based
• Ensure that the work is original, does not contain plagiarism, and, if the words or ideas of others have been used, that they have been properly cited
• Refrain from citing references to publications that they have not in fact read 
• Obtain written permission from other authors and/or editors to reproduce previously published material and reference it appropriately
• Provide the complete list of references used to prepare the manuscript
• State all sources of material support related, whether directly or indirectly, to the development of the research and dissemination process
• Refrain from submitting the same manuscript or manuscript that describe essentially the same research to more than one journal
• Inform the editor if the research data has previously been published, even if only in part
• Ensure that coauthors meet the essential criteria of authorship
• Ensure that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agree with its submission for publication
• Ensure that the article contains a statement that all procedures have been performed in compliance with laws and ethical guidelines and approved by the appropriate institutional committee in the case that the research has involved the participation of subjects or humans
• Declare all financial support received
• Respond to the referees’ comments professionally and by the agreed deadline and inform the editor if they want to rescind the manuscript from the review process
• Notify the editorial board immediately upon discovering a significant error or inaccuracy in a manuscript, whether it has been submitted, is under review, or has been published
• Cooperate with the editors if errors or omissions have been discovered in the manuscript and provide all material requested
• Provide retractions or corrections of errors detected in the manuscript
• Declare all potential conflicts of interest
• There is a potential conflict of interest for authors in situations in which their necessary interest in advancing and their interests of another nature, even if legitimate, can reasonably be perceived, by themselves or others, as conflicting and harmful to the objectivity and impartiality of their scientific decisions, regardless of their knowledge and will⁽²⁾.

Conflicts of interest

There is a potential conflict of interest for the reviewers in situations in which they identify or suspect that they have participated or intend to participate in the development of the manuscript submitted for their evaluation; maintain or have maintained regular scientific collaboration in research activities or publications with any of the researchers responsible for the manuscript submitted for their evaluation; have commercial or financial interests in the development of the manuscript submitted for their evaluation; have a family relationship with one of the researchers responsible for the manuscript submitted for their evaluation; or have any kind of relationship that can be reasonably perceived as compromising the objectivity and impartiality of their evaluation in relation to one of the authors responsible for the manuscript submitted for their evaluation⁽²⁾.
There is a potential conflict of interest for authors in situations in which their necessary interest in advancing and their interests of another nature, even if legitimate, can reasonably be perceived, by themselves or others, as conflicting and harmful to the objectivity and impartiality of their scientific decisions, regardless of their knowledge and will⁽²⁾.

References

1. SCIELO. Guia de boas práticas para o fortalecimento da ética na publicação científica, 2018 [viewed 5 April 2020]. Available from: https://wp.scielo.org/wp-content/uploads/Guia-de-Boas-Praticas-para-o-Fortalecimento-da-Etica-na-Publicacao-Cientifica.pdf

2. FAPESP. Code of good scientific practice, 2014 [viewed 16 August 2023]. Available at: https://fapesp.br/boaspraticas/2014/FAPESP-Code_of_Good_Scientific_Practice.pdf

3. Committee on Publication Ethics. Core Practices, 2017 [viewed January 2024]. Available from: https://publicationethics.org/

4. Council of Science Editors. Recommendations for promoting integrity in scientific journal publications, 2022 [viewed January 2024]. Available from: https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/recommendations-for-promoting-integrity-in-scientific-journal-publications  

5. World Economic Forum. Code of ethics for researchers, 2018 [viewed April 2020]. Available from: https://widgets.weforum.org/coe/index.html