Trabalho, Educação e Saúde - TES (Work, Education and Health) is an open access scientific journal, edited by the Joaquim Venâncio Polytechnic School of Health, from Oswaldo Cruz Foundation.

Editorial Policy

TES' editorial policy aims to establish principles, guidelines and responsibilities for authors, referees and editors. To this end, it makes public the scope, types of contribution, the peer review process, the form of access to content, the position vis-à-vis copyright, and the norms and recommendations of ethical and responsibility standards in scientific communication.

Scope

Professional training and qualification and the work process in health are central areas of the journal, which in this way believes to contribute to the improvement of social policies, in general, and of the Sistema Único de Saúde (Unified Health System – SUS), in particular.

Central themes to the journal:

  • Education policies
  • Health policies
  • Public policies and impacts on education and health
  • Health education
  • Qualification in health
  • Health training
  • Health work process
  • Gender, education and health
  • Racism, education and health
  • Job precarization
  • Forms of organization of health and education workers
  • Organization of contemporary work
  • Art, health and human training
  • Environment, work and health
  • Popular organization and health
  • Popular health education
  • Epistemology, education and health
  • Capitalism, health and education 

Open Access Policy

Aligned with Open Science principles, TES ensures Open Access to all its content.

Content license

Since 2015, the journal has adopted the CC BY 4.0 license, the most open of the Creative Commons.

Open Access Declaration

The journal is a signatory of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), which means that all content is available free of charge, at no cost to the user or their institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other legal purpose, without seeking prior permission from the publisher or the author.

Article Processing Charges (APCs)

TES does not charge any article processing fees (APCs) or article reading fees, nor does it request registration for access to its content.

Repository policy

The journal encourages depositing article versions in repositories.

For preprints, publishing in the SciELO Preprints repository is recommended.

As for the research data underlying the articles, SciELO Data is suggested.

Authors can also choose other institutional, discipline-specific, or multidisciplinary repositories.

In order to strengthen its commitment to making academic production available, in line with the Diamond OA model, TES content can be accessed free of charge not only on its website, but also on SciELO, RedALyC and the Fiocruz Journals Portal.

Digital Preservation

As a member of the SciELO Collection, TES benefits from the established preservation processes as described in the link  https://scielo.org/en/about-scielo/digital-preservation/. Additionally, Fiocruz has the institutional repository ARCA, responsible for preserving articles, theses, dissertations, and other digital objects of its scientific-academic production.

Copyright Statement

Authors of articles published in TES retain full copyright ownership. The copyright assignment is non-exclusive, empowering authors with continued control over their work Authors of

TES has adopted the CC BY 4.0 license since 2015, which allows sharing (copying and redistributing the material in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes) and adaptation (remixing, transforming, and creating from the material for any purpose, including commercial), with credit given for authorship.

Publishing Ethics

The editorial process of TES is guided by the norms and recommendations of ethical standards and responsibility in scientific communication, established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and by the principles of ethics in publication, established in the “Core Practices” and “Flowcharts” of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Trabalho, Educação e Saúde is affiliated and follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The requests and resources will be analyzed by the editor responsible for the article and the editor-in-chief, considering: the review of experts, the editorial autonomy regarding the relevance and consistency of the contributions, and the principles of ethics and good practices in research and publication.

Below, we highlight some of the main responsibilities of the professionals involved in the publication.

Authors

  • The authors undertake to be aware of the full content of the instructions to authors of the TES.
  • When submitting an article, authors must ensure that it is unpublished and that it has not been submitted at the same time for publication in another journal. It is worth mentioning that TES accepts manuscripts published in recognized preprint repositories.
  • If there is a previous publication that presents similar content or that overlaps with that of the submitted article, the authors must inform the editors, at the time of submission, and provide a copy of the similar or overlapping material, for an editorial decision.
  • With regard to authorship, TES follows the ICMJE Recommendations. The authorship criteria, which must be fulfilled by all designated authors, are as follows: (1) substantial contributions to the conception or design of the study; or the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of work data; (2) elaboration of preliminary versions of the article or critical review of important intellectual content; (3) final approval of the version to be published; (4) agreeing to be responsible for all aspects of the work to ensure that matters relating to the accuracy or completeness of any part of the work are properly investigated and resolved. Professionals who do not meet the four requirements, although they have contributed in other ways to the article, must be mentioned in the acknowledgments, but not identified as authors. Authors are responsible for acknowledging and obtaining written permission from all those mentioned in the acknowledgments section.
  • The corresponding author, the one who assumes responsibility for communicating with the journal during the article submission, peer review and publication process, must ensure that all authors have reviewed the final version of the manuscript and agreed with its submission to TES.
  • It is incumbent upon authors to maintain proper record of study data and provide access to such data when required by the editors. TES encourages the deposit of datasets in a thematic repository or, when not available, in a generalist or institutional repository, in order to favor sharing with other researchers, as recommended by the ICMJE.
  • Authors should confirm that all sources cited are accurate and complete. When there is doubt in the inclusion of citations and their references, the document cited is checked or requested. 
  • If, during the evaluation process, editors or referees detect excessive self-citation by authors and/or the journal, the corresponding author, or even all authors, is contacted for clarification in order to support decision making.
  • Any form of scientific misconduct, such as the fabrication of data, data falsification, misappropriation of data and materials and plagiarism, is not acceptable and constitutes grounds for rejecting the manuscript at any stage of the editorial process, in which case the editor will initiate the appropriate procedures detailed by COPE. If scientific misconduct is detected after publication, TES will proceed with the withdrawal of the article in accordance with the "Removal Guidelines" of COPE.
  • The author, or the first author of a scientific article, should make sure about the veracity of the data produced by third parties, including collaborators of a co-authored article, avoiding acting with indifference to the risk that the material is false, fabricated, or plagiarized, which may constitute negligent misconduct.
  • Authors should attach, when submitting, the protocol for approval of the study by the Research Ethics Committee with humans or animals. If applicable, they must also inform about obtaining the free and informed consent of the participants.
  • As it involves public trust in the scientific process and the credibility of published articles, authors must declare whether there are conflicts of interest that could influence the development of the study or its conduct. The declaration must be made in the body of the article, right after the references.
  • If authors identify any type of error in the article, at any stage of the editorial process, or even after its publication, they must contact the editorial team. In such situations, they are expected to cooperate with the editors for the eventual publication of errata, expression of concern or retraction of the article.

Referees

COPE has produced guidelines that set out the basic principles and standards to which all referees must adhere and which we reproduce below. We recommend reading the full document at https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers. Thus, during the peer review process, referees must:

  • agree only to review manuscripts whose object is their domain, so that they can carry out an adequate evaluation in a timely manner.
  • not use the information obtained during the peer review process for your benefit or that of another person or organization, or to harm or discredit others.
  • respect the confidentiality of the peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer review process, other than those that are disclosed by the journal. You should also understand that plagiarism during the review process is considered misconduct.
  • declare all potential conflicts of interest, seeking the journal's advice if you are unsure whether something constitutes a material interest. If such conflicts could influence the assessment, reviewers should decline the invitation.
  • not allow your revisions to be influenced by a manuscript's origins, nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or commercial considerations;
  • alert editors of any suspected similarity to another article.
  • be objective and constructive in your reviews, refrain from being hostile and making slanderous or derogatory personal comments.

Editors

TES editors are committed to acting in line with the best editorial practices and supporting initiatives to prevent scientific misconduct and encourage ethics in publication.

Still, they must:

  • ensure that all articles considered for publication, in addition to being relevant, original and qualified, are in accordance with research ethics standards, especially in the case of research involving human beings and animals.
  • treat the manuscript and all submitted complementary material confidentially, protecting the identity of referees and authors, since the TES adopts the double-blind peer review procedure.
  • ensure that all published manuscripts have been properly evaluated by qualified referees (including statistical review when necessary), sharing with no one, other than the authors and referees themselves, information about their content and status in the review process, criticism of referees and their final destination.
  • select competent external referees in the thematic areas of the articles;
  • seek referees who prepare opinions with good quality and courtesy within an appropriate period of time.
  • provide clear guidance to external referees and request that they indicate any conflicts of interest that may exist, prior to submitting the full text of the article for review. 
  • act ethically at all stages of the editorial process, without discriminating the origin of the manuscript, nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or even not be guided by commercial interests.
  • adopt a transparent editorial policy, provide clear instructions to authors, including steps in the editorial process and authorship criteria, and periodically update instructions to authors.
  • follow COPE guidelines in the event of suspected misconduct in the publication, investigate each suspicious situation and publish errata, expressions of concern and retractions, where relevant.
  • provide a means for journal staff members involved in the editorial process, including the editors themselves, to receive training and keep up-to-date on the latest guidelines, recommendations and evidence on scientific editing.
  • recognize the contribution of referees to the journal by posting a thank you to them in the last issue of each year.
  • ensure the journal's editorial autonomy in relation to its sponsoring institution, the Escola Politécnica de Saúde Joaquim Venâncio, scientific unit of the Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, thus avoiding academic endogeny.
  • Encourage reviewers to warn of any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or another form of publication misconduct.
  • Use plagiarism detection tools to avoid this form of misconduct, as well as to prevent duplicate publication.
  • Any form of scientific misconduct is not acceptable and is grounds for rejection of the manuscript at any stage of the editorial process, in which case the editor will initiate the appropriate procedures detailed by COPE.
  • Forms of misconduct are: the fabrication of data; the falsification of data, materials, equipment, or research processes, which includes the alteration or omission of data or results; the misappropriation of data and materials; plagiarism, which is the appropriation of ideas, processes, results, or large portions of text from another person without giving proper credit; negligence in certifying the veracity of data; and text recycling (also called self-plagiarism), which occurs when a significant overlap of the same text is identified between two or more articles or sections appear (usually unreferenced) in more than one of the author's own publications.
  • TES adopts the iThenticate plagiarism system for the text previously selected by scientific publishers and prepared for peer review. The text is registered in the anti-plagiarism platform of this plagiarism detection system, which automatically performs the process of searching and comparing possible sources.
  • In case of plagiarism, TES follows the COPE guidelines for submitted and published articles. According to the gradation of the result of the checking and the result of the contact maintained with the authors, the editor may request correction to the authors who omitted the credit or consider the retraction of the article, if published.
  • For the case of self-plagiarism, TES follows COPE's "Text Recycling Guidelines for Editors."
  • Each case is considered individually and depends on factors such as how much text has been recycled, where the recycling takes place, and the type of article. If it is detected in a submitted text, the text is rejected, and authors are assured of clear communication of the reason. If it is in a published article, it may be necessary to publish a correction or retraction.
  • The article being retracted will not be deleted from where it was originally published.
  • Errors or flaws that do not imply scientific misconduct may be corrected by means of an erratum.

Sections

The journal publishes unpublished contributions in the following sections:

Essays Invited by the editors. Textual production with a broad theoretical-analytical scope, non-conclusive and non-exhaustive.

Articles Presentation of research results of an empirical or conceptual nature. Size between 4,000 and 7,000 words, not counting bibliographical references, figures and notes.

Review article Presentation of critical, systematic and methodologically consistent analyzes of the scientific literature on a priority topic for the journal. They should explain objectives, researched sources, and application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Size: 4,000 to 7,000 words, not counting bibliographical references, figures and notes.

Conjuncture notes Invited by the editors. Systematic and grounded discussion on the current social scenario, especially from the standpoint of work organization, public policies, and the fields of health and education.

Debates Invited by the editors. Discussion on central themes to the magazine.

Interviews Invited by the editors. Opinion or position of a qualified interviewee in the journal's areas of expertise.

Book review Invited by the editors. Book review related to the journal's fields of confluence, published or translated in the last three years.

TES does not publish clinical trials.

Evaluation Process

The first stage of evaluation is carried out by the scientific editors, who judge the thematic and scientific-methodological adequacy, considering the editorial policy of the journal.This step can take from one to ten days.

Once accepted in this first phase, the text will undergo a “double blind peer review”. In this phase, the editors choose at least two researchers from areas related to the theme to evaluate the manuscript (ad-hoc referees external and internal to Fiocruz). The referees have up to 20 days to submit the review.

Once the response deadline expires, we send up to three reminders, and if we still don't get back, we invite another referee nominated by the editor. Opinions can indicate one of the four options:

a) publication in the present form;
b) publication subject to making minor changes;
c) publication subject to major changes;
d) must not be published in this journal.

In case of divergence between the opinions, a third opinion is requested for the Editor's decision, also within a period of 20 days.

Manuscripts indicating “major changes” (c) must be accompanied, in the reformulated version, by a letter with a response to each recommendation in the opinions and the treatment given to it by the authors, with special attention to those that were not met. Each opinion must be commented on separately.

The TES evaluation flow, with the decision possibilities, is described in the following figure:

Source: Editor, 2021

The term of cession and the term of responsibility for all aspects of the work are sent to the author(s), who must sign them and return them to the journal.

The signed texts are the responsibility of the authors, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the editors and members of the journal's Editorial Board.

Authors can follow the manuscript review process through the online review system. The texts will be analyzed via evaluation forms and the following aspects will be considered for analysis:

Article title, abstract, text development, originality and references; methodology; consistency of conclusions or results.

Essay title, abstract, originality and relevance, text development and references; consistency of conclusions.

Uniqueness The originals submitted to TES must not have been published and must not be simultaneously submitted to another journal. Originals submitted to the journal must not, under any circumstances, be removed after the evaluation process has started.

Time for evaluation

The evaluation is carried out first by the scientific editors, in a pre-analysis, whose duration should not exceed ten days. If accepted in the pre-analysis, the editors designate at least two ad-hoc referees to evaluate the manuscript. The average time for peer review, based on vol. 21(2023), is five months. The publication of the text, after approval, also based on the year 2023, takes two months.

The manuscript rejection rate, based on the year 2023, was 92%.