On This Page
Overview
Imagen Diagnóstica is a diamond open access journal and the official publication of the Catalan Association of Diagnostic Imaging Technicians. We publish in Spanish and English and welcome scientific contributions related to diagnostic imaging in any modality, image-guided medical treatment, and imaging technology. All manuscripts are evaluated through a single-blind peer review process to ensure scientific rigor, clinical relevance, and professional value.
Peer Review Procedure
The journal follows a structured editorial workflow designed to be fair, timely, and transparent. Submissions undergo an initial editorial assessment, followed by external peer review when appropriate. Final decisions are based on reviewer input, editorial judgment, and alignment with the journal’s scope, ethical standards, and quality requirements.
Pre-Check Stage
Each submission is screened to confirm: (i) fit with the journal’s aims and scope; (ii) completeness of files and required declarations; (iii) adherence to formatting and reporting expectations; (iv) basic methodological clarity; and (v) compliance with ethical requirements (e.g., patient consent where relevant, ethics approval when required, and image permissions). Manuscripts may be returned to authors for corrections before peer review.
Reviewer Selection and Final Decision
After pre-check, the handling editor invites qualified reviewers. Reviewer recommendations are considered alongside the editor’s assessment of novelty, validity, clarity, and clinical or technical relevance. The Editor-in-Chief (or delegated academic editor) makes the final decision.
Peer Review Process Overview
Peer review is single-blind: reviewers know the authors’ identities, but authors do not know the reviewers’ identities unless a reviewer chooses to sign their review. Reviewers evaluate scientific soundness, methodological transparency, ethical compliance, interpretability of results, and the contribution to diagnostic imaging practice or imaging science.
Selection of Reviewers
Reviewers are selected based on subject-matter expertise, publication/clinical/technical experience, and the ability to provide an impartial, high-quality review. The journal aims to avoid conflicts of interest and may use reviewer databases, editorial board recommendations, and author-suggested reviewers (at editor discretion).
Reviewer Criteria
Reviewers should have demonstrable expertise relevant to the manuscript, such as clinical imaging practice, radiological/ultrasound technology, nuclear medicine, imaging informatics, radiation protection, or related research methods. Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest and decline reviews when impartiality cannot be ensured.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to: (i) provide objective, constructive feedback; (ii) comment on strengths, weaknesses, and necessary corrections; (iii) flag potential ethical concerns (e.g., consent, image manipulation, plagiarism); (iv) maintain confidentiality; and (v) submit reviews within the agreed timeline.
Communication and Support
The editorial office communicates decisions and reviewer comments to authors in a clear and respectful manner. Authors and reviewers may contact the journal for procedural questions, technical difficulties, or to report concerns related to integrity or conflicts of interest.
Manuscript Revision Process
If revision is invited, authors should respond to each reviewer comment in a point-by-point reply and clearly mark changes in the revised manuscript. Revised submissions may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed by the editor depending on the extent of changes.
Editorial Decision Making
Editorial decisions include: accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. Decisions are based on scientific validity, clarity, relevance to scope, ethical compliance, and the extent to which reviewer and editorial concerns have been adequately addressed.
Handling Appeals from Authors
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a reasoned response explaining why they believe a decision was incorrect, including evidence and clarifications. Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, when appropriate, an independent editor or additional reviewer. Appeal outcomes are final.
Production Process
After acceptance, manuscripts proceed to editorial production, which may include copyediting, formatting, reference checks, and preparation of final files for online publication. Authors may be asked to approve proofs to ensure accuracy of text, figures, tables, and author metadata.
Publication Ethics and Guidelines
The journal follows recognized standards for research integrity and publication ethics. Authors must ensure originality, accurate reporting, appropriate citation, and transparency regarding funding, conflicts of interest, and ethical approvals. For studies involving humans, patient privacy and consent are essential, particularly for identifiable clinical images.
Addressing Unethical Conduct
Suspected misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication/falsification, unethical image manipulation, undisclosed conflicts, or compromised peer review) is investigated by the editorial team. Actions may include requests for clarification, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on severity and evidence.
Handling Authorship Disputes
Authorship disputes are handled according to documented contributions and author declarations. The journal may request written statements from all authors, institutional confirmation where appropriate, and may pause review/publication until disputes are resolved. Changes to authorship after submission generally require consent from all authors and editorial approval.
Publishing Standards and Compliance
Manuscripts must comply with applicable ethical and legal requirements, including patient confidentiality, copyright permissions for third-party materials, and accurate disclosure statements. Published articles are distributed under the journal’s open license and must meet quality and reporting expectations appropriate to the study type.
Editorial Independence
The journal maintains full editorial independence. Editorial decisions are made solely by the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial team based on scholarly merit, relevance, and ethical standards. Any publishing or technical support partners provide operational assistance only and do not influence peer review, acceptance decisions, or the journal’s editorial direction.