The OBJN adopts the double anonymous evaluation system (double anonymous peer review), ensuring that neither the authors nor the reviewers have access to each other's identity during the evaluation process, promoting impartiality and transparency. All manuscripts in the sections Original Articles; Review Articles; Implementation, Development, and Technological Innovation; Reflection Articles; and Experience Reports undergo this process.

Peer reviewers are researchers selected based on their academic experience, work in the thematic area of the manuscript, and technical knowledge on the evaluated topic. They are independent, with no direct link to the authors, and with no declared or presumed conflicts of interest.

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two external reviewers. In case of divergent opinions, the Associate Editor may request a third reviewer. Based on the reviews, the Associate Editor issues a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief/Adjunct, who decides on approval, request for adjustments, or rejection.

The estimated time for the first feedback to the authors after submission is up to 90 days, including the stages of administrative screening, similarity analysis, assignment of reviewers, and issuance of reviews.

The evaluation form used by the reviewers is available for consultation: click here.

Date of update: October 23, 2026