About the Journal

The journal Gestión en Salud y Seguridad Social is the official scientific publication of the Costa Rican Social Security Fund (CCSS). This aims to provide decision-makers and professionals in the health sector with inputs that allow modifying, strengthening or creating new processes of care, management and administration, for the benefit of the population.

It includes health and social security issues, such as: management and administration, policies and legislation, care management, technology, economics, equity and the right to health, pensions, epidemiology, primary health care, occupational health, environmental health, community and social participation, health promotion and education, social sciences, project evaluation, among others.

Editorial Ethics Policy

The journal is committed to the highest ethical standards in scientific publishing. This policy applies to all parties involved in the editorial process: authors, reviewers, editors, and the editorial team. Compliance with them is essential to ensure the integrity, transparency and credibility of published content.

1. Authors' commitments

• Authors must guarantee that the manuscript is original, unpublished and has not been simultaneously submitted to another journal.
• Any form of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, manipulation of data or falsification will be considered a serious offense.
• Third-party sources and contributions should be properly acknowledged.
• All authors must have contributed significantly to the work and approve the final version of the manuscript.
• Any conflicts of interest or funding that may influence the results must be declared.

2. Reviewers' commitments

• Reviewers must make an objective, confidential and substantiated evaluation of the manuscript.
• They should refrain from reviewing whether there is a conflict of interest with the authors or the content.
• They must not use the information contained in the manuscript for personal or professional gain.
• They are expected to deliver their opinions within the established deadlines.

3. Commitments of the Editorial Committee

• The editorial team is responsible for the final decision on the publication of manuscripts.
• It must ensure a fair, impartial, and confidential review process.
• It undertakes to act diligently in the event of any complaint of scientific misconduct, following the protocols established by COPE.
• In case of errors, retractions or corrections, the journal will act with transparency and promptness.

4. Misconduct Prevention

• The journal uses similarity detection tools to prevent plagiarism.
• Any suspicion of misconduct will be seriously investigated and, if necessary, corrective action will be taken, including retraction of the article.

Human rights and ethics in research

• Studies involving humans or animals must be approved by an institutional ethics committee and comply with international regulations.
• An ethical statement should be included in the manuscript, as well as informed consent from participants, where applicable.

Plagiarism Policy

The journal maintains a zero-tolerance policy against plagiarism, in all its
forms, as part of its commitment to academic integrity and ethics in scientific
publishing.

1. Definition of plagiarism
   Plagiarism is considered to be the total or partial presentation of ideas, data, images,
   texts or results of other authors as one's own, without due attribution. This
   includes, but is not limited to:

• Copying fragments of published works without citing the source.
• Paraphrasing content without proper recognition.
• Reuse previously published own works (self-plagiarism) without explicitly indicating it
• Present as original results obtained by third parties.

2. Plagiarism detection
   All manuscripts received are subjected to a similarity detection process using specialized tools (for example, Turnitin, iThenticate or other recognized platforms). The Editorial Committee will evaluate the reports generated and determine if there is an ethical violation.
3. Consequences of plagiarism
   In the event of plagiarism being detected, the journal may apply one or more of the
   following measures, depending on the seriousness of the case:

• Immediate rejection of the manuscript.
• Notification to authors and their affiliated institutions.
• Temporary or permanent prohibition of submitting new manuscripts to the journal.
• Public retraction of the article, if it has already been published.

4. Responsibility of the authors
   Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of their work and for correctly citing all sources used. By submitting a manuscript, authors declare that the content is original and does not infringe the rights of third parties.
5. Education and prevention
   The journal promotes the ethical training of authors, reviewers, and editors, and encourages the responsible use of sources and correct citation as part of a culture of academic integrity.

 

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automated Tools Usage Policy

The journal Gestión en Salud y Seguridad Social recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI) tools and other automated systems can contribute to research activities, scientific writing, editing, and editorial management. However, their use must be carried out in a transparent, ethical, and responsible manner, ensuring at all times scientific integrity, the reliability of results, and human accountability for published content.
This policy establishes guidelines for the use of generative artificial intelligence technologies, large language models (LLMs), writing assistants, machine translation tools, data analysis systems, and other automated tools by authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff.
1. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automated Tools by Authors
Authors may use artificial intelligence tools and automated systems to support activities related to research and manuscript preparation, provided that such use is transparent and responsible.
1.    Any substantial use of generative AI tools must be explicitly disclosed in the manuscript. This disclosure should include the name of the tool used, its version (when applicable), and a description of how it contributed to the preparation of the work.
2.    The use of tools intended exclusively for spell-checking, grammar review, language editing, basic translation, or text formatting does not need to be disclosed.
3.    Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and scientific validity of all submitted content, regardless of whether automated tools were used during its preparation.
4.    Authors must carefully verify outputs generated by these technologies to prevent errors, biases, misinterpretations, inaccurate information, or non-existent references.
5.    The use of AI does not exempt authors from complying with research ethics standards, copyright requirements, personal data protection regulations, and principles of scientific integrity.
6.    Authors must ensure that information entered into AI tools does not violate confidentiality agreements, participant privacy, or institutional restrictions concerning sensitive data.
7.    Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of a manuscript, as they lack legal, ethical, and scientific responsibility for the content generated.
8.    AI-generated content may not be cited as a primary or secondary source of scientific information. Authors must always cite the original, verifiable sources from which the information was obtained.
1.1 Disclosure of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use by Authors
When applicable, authors should include a statement similar to the following:
"During the preparation of this manuscript, the tool [name of the tool] was used for [describe the specific use, e.g., writing assistance, style review, summary generation, or exploratory data analysis]. The authors reviewed, edited, and validated all generated content and assume full responsibility for the final version of the manuscript."
2. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automated Tools by Reviewers
To preserve the confidentiality of the peer-review process, reviewers must not upload complete or partial manuscripts, or any confidential author information, into generative AI platforms that involve transferring data to external systems.
1.    Reviewers must not use generative AI tools to draft their review reports or evaluations in their entirety.
2.    Any automated assistance used to improve the wording or clarity of comments should be limited and must not replace the reviewer's critical judgment, scientific assessment, or responsibility.
3.    Reviewers are responsible for all observations and comments provided during the evaluation process.
4.    The confidentiality of the manuscript and all associated documentation must be maintained throughout every stage of the editorial process.
3. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automated Tools by Editors and the Editorial Board
The journal may use technological tools to strengthen the quality and integrity of its editorial processes, including systems for:
1.    Detection of textual similarity and potential plagiarism.
2.    Identification of image manipulation or duplication.
3.    Verification of metadata and bibliographic references.
4.    Support for administrative and editorial processes.
5.    Preliminary identification of potential scientific integrity concerns.
6.    All editorial decisions must be made by a human and never exclusively by an automated system.
7.    Results obtained through automated tools must be reviewed and validated by members of the editorial team.
8.    The journal will endeavor to use evaluated and trustworthy tools while respecting the privacy, security, and confidentiality of processed information.
4. Transparency and Human Oversight
The journal adopts the principle of continuous human oversight in the use of artificial intelligence systems. No automated tool shall replace the professional responsibility of authors, reviewers, editors, or members of the editorial board.
The use of AI should be directed toward improving the efficiency of scientific and editorial processes without compromising academic quality, research integrity, methodological transparency, or the ethical principles governing scholarly communication.
Failure to comply with this AI policy, or the misuse of automated tools, may be considered a breach of the journal's scientific integrity standards and may result in editorial actions, including requests for clarification, corrections, manuscript rejection, or retraction of published articles, depending on the severity of the case.

Open Science Policy

In accordance with the international principles of open science and with the aim of promoting a more transparent, accessible and reproducible scientific communication, this journal adopts the following guidelines:

1. Immediate
   Open access all articles accepted for publication will be immediately available in open access, under a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-SA), guaranteeing free access to the content without economic, technical or legal restrictions, the journal complies with the DOAJ definition of open access.
   The Gestión en Salud y Seguridad Social Journal does not charge Article Processing Charges (APCs). For this reason, authors are not required to make any payment for the submission, evaluation, peer review, editing, publication, or access to accepted articles.
   
   
2. Transparency in the peer
   review process The openness of the peer review process is promoted through the possibility of publishing evaluation reports, reviewers' names (where relevant) and previous versions of the manuscript. This practice seeks to strengthen the integrity and traceability of the editorial process.
3. Use of preprints
   Authors are encouraged to deposit preliminary versions of their manuscripts on recognized preprint servers, as part of the flow of scholarly communication and in compliance with the principles of early dissemination of knowledge.
4. Management and availability of research
   data Authors should include an explicit statement about the availability of the data underlying the results presented. The deposit of datasets, source codes, protocols, and other complementary materials in open, trusted, and persistently identifier repositories is encouraged.
5. Interoperability and technical
   standards Manuscripts must comply with international metadata and interoperability standards (e.g., XML JATS), facilitating their indexing, preservation, and visibility in databases and scientific information systems.
6. Interoperability and access to metadata (OAI-PMH)
   The journal Gestión en Salud y Seguridad Social exposes its metadata through the OAI-PMH protocol (Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting), thus guaranteeing interoperability with repositories and indexing systems. In this way, published articles can be collected and disseminated on academic platforms and specialized search engines, increasing their visibility and access.
   The OAI-PMH protocol link is:
   https://www.binasss.sa.cr/ojssalud/index.php/gestion/oai
7. Persistent identification of authors and contributions
   It is mandatory that all authors be registered with an ORCID identifier. A detailed statement of each author's individual contributions is also required.
8. Editorial ethics and good practices
   The journal adheres to international ethical standards in scientific publishing, including the declaration of conflicts of interest, the registration of clinical trials (when applicable), and the implementation of mechanisms for the correction, retraction or clarification of contents.
9. Linguistic and geographical diversity
   Publication in multiple languages and the participation of authors, reviewers, and editors from diverse geographic regions, disciplines, and institutional contexts are encouraged, for the sake of a more inclusive and representative science.
10. Digital preservation and global
    The journal ensures the digital preservation and conservation of its content through reliable archiving systems and its dissemination via international platforms, thereby guaranteeing its long-term availability and global impact. Specifically, backup copies of all files are maintained in different formats, and both the backup copies and file formats are updated annually.

The Journal of Health and Social Security Management uses the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA) license, which allows the reader to:

• Share — copy and redistribute material in any medium or format.
• Adapt — remix, transform and build from the material.

All this free of charge, provided that the following conditions are met:

1. Attribution (BY): Proper credit must be given, a link to the license must be provided, and any changes have been made. This may be done in a reasonable manner, but not in a way that suggests that the licensor endorses the use.
2. Non-Commercial (NC): The material may not be used for commercial purposes.
3. Share Alike (SA): If the material is remixed, transformed, or created, the contribution must be distributed under the same license as the original.

You can consult the complete description and legal text of this license at the following official Creative Commons link:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.es

Statement of peer review in the framework of open science

In accordance with the principles of open science, this journal promotes editorial practices that foster transparency, traceability, and collaboration throughout the scientific evaluation process. In this context, external peer review constitutes a fundamental pillar for ensuring the quality, rigor, and integrity of published content.

1. Evaluation modality

The journal Gestión en Salud y Seguridad Social generally uses the double-blind peer review system, in which the identity of both authors and reviewers is safeguarded. However, the possibility of applying the single-blind review modality is contemplated, in the case of preprints.

Double-blind peer review In this modality,
the personal data of the evaluators and
authors are reserved, in order to avoid conflicts between the parties. This process consists of several
stages, which are detailed below.

Single-blind Preprint Evaluation

In the evaluation of preprints under the single-blind review scheme, the reviewer knows the identity of the author, but the author does not know the identity of the reviewer. The objective of this model is to strengthen the quality, methodological rigor and transparency of manuscripts disseminated as preprints before or in parallel to their formal submission to the journal Gestión en Salud y Seguridad Social. This process consists of several stages, which are detailed below.

2. Recognition of the review
   workThe journal recognizes the academic value of the work of the reviewers. In cases where open review is implemented, a persistent identifier (DOI) may be assigned to the evaluation reports, allowing their citation and visibility in the academic field.
3. Ethics and confidentiality
   Regardless of the modality adopted, the journal guarantees compliance with ethical principles in the evaluation, including confidentiality, impartiality, the absence of conflicts of interest and mutual respect between authors and reviewers.
4. Transparency and continuous
   improvementThe opening of the review process seeks to strengthen trust in scientific evaluation, encourage academic dialogue and contribute to the continuous improvement of manuscripts. The journal is committed to regularly reviewing and updating its editorial policies, in order to align with international best practices in open science.

Manuscript review process

The journal establishes a rigorous and transparent editorial process for evaluating submitted manuscripts, with the aim of ensuring the scientific quality, originality, and relevance of the published content.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Stages of the Process

Receipt and Initial Editorial Review

Once the manuscript is received, the journal's editorial team conducts a preliminary review to verify:

• Compliance with formal requirements (as specified in the Instructions for Authors).
• Suitability of the topic within the journal’s editorial scope.
• Originality of the content, ensuring there are no issues related to plagiarism or duplicate publication.
• Properly designed and applied methodology.
• Quality of writing (clear, understandable, and logically structured).

The purpose of this review is to anticipate observations that reviewers may raise and strengthen the manuscript before the peer-review process.

Authors are strongly encouraged to carefully review all these aspects before submission. If the article is found to have serious deficiencies in one or more of these areas, it will be rejected.

This process may take approximately one month.

Assignment of Reviewers

If the manuscript passes the initial review, one or two external reviewers with subject-matter and methodological expertise are selected. Reviewers are chosen based on academic competence, impartiality, and the absence of conflicts of interest.

Peer Review

The evaluation is conducted through a peer-review system in which two experts in the subject matter read and analyze the manuscript to determine its quality and validity.

Within one month, the selected specialists assess the article according to the following criteria:

1. Importance
2. Originality
3. Timeliness
4. Coherence
5. Reliability of Information
6. Title–Content Relationship
7. Analysis of the Methodology Used

As a result of this process, reviewers issue one of the following recommendations:

• Publication recommended.
• Publication recommended subject to revisions.
• Publication pending (the document requires substantial revision).
• Do not publish.

Once completed, the article and evaluation reports are sent to the editor. In the event of disagreement between reviewers, a third evaluation may be requested to break the tie. This process may take an additional three weeks.

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editorial Committee issues a decision:

• Accept without changes.
• Accept with minor revisions.
• Major revisions and re-evaluation.
• Reject.

If publication is accepted but revisions are required, the manuscript is returned to the authors so that they may incorporate the observations and recommendations within 15 to 22 days.

If the Editorial Committee decides not to publish the article, the authors will be informed along with the corresponding justification.

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of the manuscript always rests with the Editorial Committee.

Author Revisions

If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised version of the manuscript within the specified deadline.

Final Editorial Decision

Once authors submit the corrected manuscript, the editor verifies the revisions and, in cases of major changes, the reviewers may also be consulted.

If the manuscript still does not meet the required corrections and quality standards, it will be returned to the authors as many times as necessary until it complies with the requested criteria. These additional rounds may significantly delay publication; therefore, authors are strongly encouraged to address all comments thoroughly in the first revision.

Editing and Publication

Once the manuscript is accepted, copyediting is performed, focusing mainly on writing style, spelling, citations, and references. Authors review the final version and provide their approval. Subsequently, layout design, proof review, and typesetting are carried out.

The article is then published online in open access, with its corresponding DOI and metadata.

Timeline of the Manuscript Review Process

 

Overall, the period from submission to acceptance is approximately four months.

For questions regarding this process, please contact: ednasss@binasss.sa.cr or iramirez@binasss.sa.cr.

Single-Blind Review

Stages of the Process

Receipt of the Preprint and Initial Editorial Review

Once the preprint is received, the journal’s editorial team conducts a preliminary review to verify minimum requirements, including format, file completeness, language, metadata, and ethical declarations. In addition, compliance with good research practices is assessed (informed consent, ethics committee approval, clinical trial registration when applicable, among others).

This process may take approximately one month.

Assignment of Reviewers

After the first stage has been completed, one or two external reviewers with subject-matter and methodological expertise are selected.
Since, in this model, reviewers know the identity of the authors, conflict-of-interest disclosure and management are required, as described below:

Conflict of Interest Declaration

Each reviewer must disclose any personal, professional, financial, or academic relationship with any of the authors or with the content of the preprint that could affect their impartiality. Examples include working with one of the authors, maintaining an academic rivalry, or having financial interests related to the topic.

Conflict of Interest Management

Once a conflict has been declared, the Editorial Committee must assess whether it is significant. If so, the individual may not serve as a reviewer, and another reviewer must be appointed to ensure objectivity. In less significant cases, transparency measures may be applied, such as recording the declaration in the system.

This entire process is estimated to take approximately one month.

Peer Review

The evaluation is conducted through a peer-review system in which one or two expert reviewers read and analyze the manuscript to determine its quality and validity.

Within one month, reviewers assess the article according to the following criteria:

1. Importance
2. Originality
3. Timeliness
4. Coherence
5. Reliability of Information
6. Title–Content Relationship
7. Analysis of the Methodology Used

As a result of this process, reviewers issue one of the following recommendations:

• Publication recommended.
• Publication recommended subject to revisions.
• Publication pending (the document requires substantial revision).
• Do not publish.

Afterward, the article and review reports are sent to the editor. If conflicting recommendations arise, a third review may be requested. This process may take an additional three weeks.

Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the Editorial Committee issues a decision:

• Accept without changes.
• Accept with minor revisions.
• Major revisions and re-evaluation.
• Reject.

If publication is accepted but revisions are required, the manuscript is returned to the authors so that they may incorporate the observations and recommendations within 15 to 22 days.

If the Editorial Committee decides not to publish the article, the authors will be informed along with the corresponding justification.

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection of the manuscript always rests with the Editorial Committee.

Author Revisions

If revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised version of the manuscript within the specified deadline.

Final Editorial Decision

When authors submit the corrected manuscript, the revisions are verified by the editor and, in cases involving major changes, by the reviewers.

If the manuscript still does not meet the required corrections and quality standards, it will be returned to the authors as many times as necessary until it satisfies the requested criteria. These additional rounds may significantly delay publication; therefore, authors are strongly encouraged to address all comments thoroughly in the first revision.

Once accepted, the version and acceptance date are recorded; if updates are made, the version history is maintained.

Good Practices

Throughout these stages, compliance with the following editorial principles is ensured:

• Data Policy: Promote the availability of datasets and supplementary materials through persistent links.
• Transparency: Describe limitations and disclose funding sources and conflicts of interest.
• Integrity: Use plagiarism-detection software and verify images/tables where applicable.
• Ethics: Protect sensitive information and safeguard identities when required by the field.

Diagram of the Single-Blind Preprint Review Process

For questions regarding this process, please contact: ednasss@binasss.sa.cr or iramirez@binasss.sa.cr.

Indexed Journals