Revista de Saúde Pública
|
Inaugurated in 1966 by the School of Public Health of the University of São Paulo, Revista de Saúde Pública celebrates, in 2026, 60 years of uninterrupted publication dedicated to the field of Public Health. During this time, the journal has grown, improved, and been modernized, reaffirming its commitment to the health of the Brazilian population. It became a reference in Public Health, being nationally and internationally recognized. The origins of Revista de Saúde Pública were the Boletins do Instituto de Higiene de São Paulo (https://revistas.usp.br/bihsp), published during 27 years, between 1919 and 1946. After them followed the publication of Arquivos da Faculdade de Higiene e Saúde Pública, from 1947 to 1966, totaling more than 100 years of editorial scientific activity in the field, consolidating the vocation of the Faculdade de Saúde Pública (FSP) in the dissemination of studies and research in Public Health. The proposal of creation of the RSP came from a group of professors of FSP, formed by Armando Piovesan, Elza Salvatori Berquó, Flavio Wagner Rodrigues, Oswaldo Paulo Forattini, Paulo Nogami, Reinaldo Ramos, Walter Belda, and Odair Pacheco Pedroso. The proposal was approved by the director of FSP at the time, Rodolfo dos Santos Mascarenhas. From this group, Oswaldo Paulo Forattini worked as the editor responsible for changes and modernizations of the journal during 38 consecutive years (1967–2005). In his honor, nowadays RSP includes him as its Honorary Editor. In 2006, Prof. Carlos Augusto Monteiro succeeded Professor Forattini as editor-in-chief and currently forms part of the scientific editorial team of RSP alongside Professor Alexandre Dias Porto Chiavegatto Filho, Professor João Luiz Bastos, and the associate editors. The modernization of the journal had a great advancement with its inclusion, in 1997, in the SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online) collection. This meant making all its contents free and with universal access, via Internet, and also implied big editorial and editorial management changes. Revista de Saúde Pública is a founding member of SciELO Public Health. Currently, the journal is published in Portuguese and English and it is indexed in the main bibliographic bases such as PubMed Central (PMC), PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, Lilacs, among others. It manages its manuscripts using the ScholarOne system (Clarivate/SciELO). Since 1967, more than 5,500 articles were published – all available at the SciELO online platform. More recently, Revista de Saúde Pública adopted the use of social media as effective tool for spreading scientific knowledge. The journal created, in 2015, a profile on Facebook, Instagram, X and LinkedIn adopting a simpler and more direct approach to the understanding of the general public, hoping, thus, to increase the impact of the Public Health science on the everyday life of the population. |
Open Access
|
RSP adopts the open access model, offering virtual access without restrictions (including financial ones) to all scientific texts it publishes. Open access refers the copyright holder of an academic study granting rights of use to third parties by an open license (Creative Commons Attribution, CC-BY), offering immediate free access to it and authorizing any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link the full text of the articles, track them for indexing, or use them as software data or for any other lawful purpose. |
Open Science Compliance
|
The RSP editorial policy follows the communication of research in the Open Science model, a worldwide movement to make scientific knowledge accessible to all of society. RSP adopts the SciELO open science compliance form. Submitting manuscripts requires filling out and sending the Form on Compliance with Open Science along with other files. |
Ethics in Publication
|
RSP commits itself to respecting the principles of scientific integrity, ethics, and transparency in its editorial process and in the content it publishes. Its editors and reviewers are mindful to avoid any discrimination related to the author or origin of manuscripts. RSP adopts the criteria recommended in the Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines (a forum for editors of scientific journals that discusses all aspects of publication ethics and advises editors on how to address cases of misconduct in research and publication) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors criteria (which belongs to the former Committee). In the case of research with human beings in Brazil, RSP requests the due approval of a Research Ethics Committee duly registered with the National Commission of Ethics in Research of the Brazilian Ministry of Health. For research involving human beings abroad, it adopts the 2024 Declaration of Helsinki. Cases of conflicts of interest, research misconduct, and other ethical violations that come to the attention of editors or reviewers will be taken to the Editorial Board, who will adopt the necessary measures to find and prevent the publication of articles and other appropriate measures. |
Focus and Scope
|
Revista de Saúde Pública aims to publish original scientific contributions on topics that are relevant to public health in general, such as: epidemiology, nutrition and health, environment and health, health policies, planning and administration, social inequalities in health, gender and health, epidemiology of chronic non-communicable and infectious diseases, epidemiology in health services, infectious diseases, epidemiological surveillance, health and work, ergonomics, physical education, reproductive health, nutrition and food in public health, child health, biostatistics, primary care and primary health care, health care, science and technology in health, health information systems, health economics, health management, oral health, mental health, maternal and child health, the health of older adults, health planning, health policies, health management, racism and racial inequities in health, popular health education, the health of the Black population, the health of Indigenous people, among others. |
Digital Preservation
|
This journal follows the standards of the SciELO Program Digital Preservation Program, the principles of which are the conceptualization and management of scientific knowledge as a global public good (open science program), networking as a means of cooperation and sharing of resources, and the adoption of standards and good practices in scientific communication. |
Indexing Sources
Bibliographic Journal Information
|
Journal title: Revista de Saúde Pública |
Websites and Social Media
|
Website |
Preprints
|
Preprints are versions of authors’ manuscripts that are yet to be reviewed by any editor and that have been deposited on preprint servers and can be submitted to journals for publication. Preprints share the originality in article publication with journals. Thus, the condition for submitting articles to Revista de Saúde Pública is that it has neither been published in whole or in part in books or journals nor simultaneously sent to another journal. RSP accepts the submission of manuscripts that have been published on reliable preprint platforms such as SciELO Preprints, arXiv, bioRxiv, and medRxiv (other servers will be reviewed by the editors). Authors in this modality must inform the virtual location of their articles (link, DOI, or other) so they can undergo the regular double-blind peer review process (described below). Comments received on preprints may be considered by RSP editors during peer reviews. Accepted articles that remain available on preprint servers must provide the link to the version published by RSP. |
Peer Review Process
|
Pre-analysis: The Scientific Editor evaluates the manuscript based on its originality, validity, and relevance and interest to the public health area and decides whether the manuscript proceeds for evaluation by associate editors or if it is rejected immediately (“desk-rejected”). Peer review: The Associate Editor evaluates the manuscript and chooses possible reviewers according to their area of expertise (ideally two) so they can issue their recommendations. If the Associate Editor considers that the received opinions are insufficient for decision-making, they may appoint other rapporteurs. Based on the reviews, the Associate Editor may decide to accept, refuse (if the manuscript has important deficiencies), or suggest a new submission, in which case they must indicate the important modifications for possible reformulation in their comments (which will be reevaluated by rapporteurs). RSP adopts double-blind peer reviews, that is, neither the reviewers know the authors’ identity, nor the authors know who reviewed their manuscript. In the final version for publication, RSP inserts the names of the evaluating editors. RSP offers reviewers the option of dialoguing directly with the author with or without disclosing their identity. |
Open Data
|
RSP does not publish supplementary materials, annexes, or appendices. If existent, authors must make them available in open online repositories, such as Zenodo, Figshare, and OSF, indicating this information (the electronic address of the material) in the manuscript by a footnote. Authors must inform in a specific section whether their research data are fully available, unavailable, or are available upon request. This information will be published at the end of the article. |
Fees
|
In 2012, RSP began charging a publication fee, a necessary step to ensure its continuity, quality, and technological resources, as any institutional body does not financially subsidize it. This fee is an essential component to cover the costs associated with translation, editing services, grammatical review, reference standardization, layout, metadata production, publication in the appropriate markup languages, editing, process management, dissemination on social media, among other services. The publication fee is charged via a proforma invoice sent to the corresponding author after manuscript approval. Currently, the fee is US$ 1,200.00 for articles from abroad. In the case of Erratum, the amount is US$ 100.00. There is no budget provision for discounts or exemptions. |
Ethics and Misconduct, Correction and Retraction Policy
|
Editors will take the necessary measures to find and prevent the publication of articles with misconduct or ethical violations, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, data falsification/fabrication, no pertinent authorizations, discrimination, among others. The cases and allegations that come to the attention of editors and evaluators will be taken to the Editorial Committee, which will take the appropriate measures, including forwarding them to higher levels of the University if necessary. The inclusion of authors after the article is submitted will be rejected. It is of paramount importance that the corresponding authors assign credit to all co-authors at the time they submit their article (as stipulated in the original cover letter). As a scientific journal committed to excellence and best practices, RSP adheres to the principle of due diligence. Thus, we encourage a careful review of the list of authors involved in the manuscript before future submissions. A fee of R$ 400 will be charged if authors’ errors require errata. The registration and publication of errata and retractions must follow the SciELO Guide, available from Guia para Publicação de Errata e Guia para Publicação de Retratação | SciELO.ORG [Guide for Publishing Erratum and Guide for Publishing Retractions]. |
Policy on Conflict of Interest
|
Public trustworthiness during peer reviews and the credibility of published articles partially depend on how editors manage conflicts of interest during writing, peer review, and decision-making. Conflicts of interest may arise when authors, reviewers, or editors have interests (whether apparent or not) that could influence manuscript preparation or evaluation. Conflicts of interest may be personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial. Authors are responsible for acknowledging and disclosing financial or other conflicts that may have influenced their research at the time they submit their manuscripts. Authors’ manuscript should acknowledge all financial support for their research and other financial or personal connections regarding it. Reviewers must inform the editors of any conflicts of interest that may influence their opinion of manuscripts and, if applicable, must declare themselves unfit to review it. Authors should contact the RSP editorial secretariat if they are unsure of what may constitute potential conflicts of interest. |
Adoption of Similarity Software
|
To assess the occurrence of plagiarism, all manuscripts that have been approved for publication are input into iThenticate to detect similarity between texts. The executive director will analyze the similarity report and, if they find plagiarism, request an explanation from the authors. RSP adopts neither a minimum nor a maximum percentage for identifying similarities. |
Adoption of Software Using Artificial Intelligence Resources
|
Any use of artificial intelligence applications—systems that generate content, such as images, music, text, and videos based on internet content—or of content they generated must be reported in the abstract and in the “methods” or equivalent section. RSP adopts the following SciELO guidelines: (a) all AI material is to be correctly described (including full citations); the cited sources must support the statements of AI application as they refer to non-existent works; (b) authors must take public responsibility for their research. Concealing the use of AI or of its content configures an ethical violation that harms the principles of transparency and honesty in research. |
Gender and Sex Issues
|
The RSP editorial team, in addition to the authors who publish in the journal, must always observe the Sex and Gender Equity in Research – SAGER guidelines to report sex and gender information in study design, data analysis, findings, and their interpretation. Moreover, RSP observes the gender equity policy in the constitution of its editorial board. |
Ethics Committee
|
All manuscripts containing data collection involving human beings must include the approval document of the ethics committee of the institution responsible for the research. |
Copyright
|
Authors of articles published by RSP retain the copyright of their research, licensing them under the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0), which allows reuse and distribution without restrictions as long as the original article is correctly cited. Authors must grant the journal the right of first publication. The responsibility for the content of the articles is exclusive to the authors. |
Sponsors and Promotion Agencies
|
Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) Agência de Bibliotecas e Coleções Digitais (ABCD-USP) Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo (FSP/USP) |
Honorary Editor
|
Editors-in-chief
|
Associated Editors
|
Executive Editor
|
Technical Team
|
Library/CIR: Centro de Informação e Referência em Saúde Pública FSP/USP |
General Informations
|
Manuscripts in the following languages are accepted: Portuguese and English. Articles submitted in Portuguese are translated by our journal into English and published in both languages. For articles submitted in English, there is no translation to Portuguese. The original research manuscript must follow the structure known as IMRAD: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (Text Structure). Manuscripts based on qualitative researches may have other formats, with Results and Discussion being accepted in the same section, as well as Final Remarks and Conclusions. Other manuscript categories (reviews, commentary, etc.) must follow the text format suited to them. The studies must be presented so that any interested researcher may reproduce its results. For that, we encourage using the following recommendations, according to the submitted article category:
Details on the items required for presenting the study are described according to the article category. ORCID - Open Researcher and Contributor Identification The ORCID of the first author and all co-authors must be provided at the time of manuscript submission, in the cover letter. DOI - Digital Object Identifier All approved articles will receive a DOI upon publication. |
Types of Documents Accepted
|
a) Original articles Include observational, experimental or quasi-experimental studies, program evaluation, cost-effectiveness analyses, decision analyses, and studies on the evaluation of the performance of diagnose tests for populational triage. Each article must contain clear objectives and hypothesis, used design and methodology, results, discussion and conclusions. They also include theoretical essays (critique and formulation of significant theoretical knowledge) and articles dedicated to present and discuss methodological aspects and techniques used in public health research. In this case, the text must be organized into topics to guide the reader in relation to the essential elements of the argument developed. Measurement tools in populational research Manuscripts that deal with measurement tools may include aspects related to transcultural development, evaluation, and adaptation for usage in populational studies, excluding the ones with clinical application, which do not meet the RSP scope. For measurement manuscripts, we recommend the presentation of a detailed appreciation of the evaluated construct, including its possible intensity gradient and its occasional sub-dimensions. The development of a new tool must be based on a literature review, which can explicitly identify the insufficiency of previous proposals and justify the need for a new tool. The following must be detailed in the text: item proposition, selection, and elaboration, as well as the employment of strategies to adequate it to the construct’s definition, including the use of qualitative techniques in research (in-depth interviews, focal groups, etc.), meetings with specialist panels, among others; the path traced in the definition of how to measure items and the performing pre-tests, along with its preliminary sets; and the evaluation of face, content, criteria, construct or dimensional validity. Tool reliability analyses must also be presented and discussed, including measures for internal consistency, test-retest reliability, or interobserver concordance. The authors must expose the process of selecting the final tool and place it in critical and comparative view in relation to other tools destined to evaluate the same or similar constructs. For manuscripts on the transcultural adaptation of measurement tools, besides fulfilling the aforementioned recommendations on the whole, it is necessary to explain the theoretical model guiding the process. The authors must just as well justify the choice for a certain tool for adaptation to a certain socio-cultural context, based on a through literature review. Lastly, they should also explicitly indicate how, and which were the adapting theoretical model’s phases used in the work submitted for publication. The measurement tool must be included as an annex in the submitted article. Regarding manuscript formatting, we recommend:
b) Brief communication Short reports on findings which are of interest to public health, but which do not comprise a wider analysis or a more extensive discussion. Its presentation must follow the norms required for original articles.
c) Review article Systematic review and meta-analysis - Through the synthesis of results in original, quantitative or qualitative, studies, it aims to answer a specific question, which is significant to public health. It describes in detail the process of looking for original studies, the criteria used for selecting the ones included in the review and the procedures employed for synthetizing the results obtained by the reviewed studies. Consult: MOOSE: checklist and flowchart for meta-analyses and systematic reviews of observational studies; PRISMA: checklist and flowchart for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Narrative or critical review - The narrative or critical review has a descriptive-discursive character, and it is dedicated to comprehensively present and discuss themes of scientific interest in the field of public health. It must present a clear formulation of a scientific interested object, logical argumentation, theoretic-methodological critique of consulted works, and a concluding synthesis. It must be designed by researchers with experience in the studied field or specialists of recognized knowledge.
d) Commentary
They aim to encourage the discussion, introduce a debate, and “fuel” controversies on significant aspects of public health. The text must be organized into topics or subitems. The introduction must highlight the subject and its significance. Mentioned references must support the main aspects covered by the text.
e) Letters to the Editor Correspondence from a reader to the journal’s editor containing contributions to the validation of the research through opinions, ideas, hypotheses, critiques, or new data. Formatting: With up to 600 words and a maximum of 5 references. |
Authors' Contribution
|
Each author’s contribution must be explicitly stated at the end of the article, after the funding section. The inclusion of names of authors whose contributions do not meet the criteria mentioned above is not justified. Authorship According to the authorship criteria by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), authors should fulfill all following conditions: (1) contributing significantly to the conception and planning, or data analysis and interpretation; (2) contributing significantly to draft elaborations or to the content’s critical review; and (3) participating in the approval of the manuscript’s final version. In the case of multicentric groups, or if a great number of authors has developed the work, the group must indicate the individuals that accept direct responsibility for the manuscript. These individuals must completely fulfill the aforementioned criteria for authorship. In this case, the editors will ask them for the required declarations when submitting the manuscripts. The corresponding author must clearly indicate the preferred way of mentioning the group’s name and identification of its members, which will be listed at the end of the article. Do not comprise authorship: those who only acquired financing, gathered data, or performed a general supervision of the research group. |
Manuscript Preparation
|
Title in the manuscript’s original language The title must be concise and complete, containing significant information that can enable the recuperation of the article in databases. The limit is 90 characters, including spaces. If the manuscript is submitted in English, it will be also necessary to inform the title in Portuguese. Short title It is the title that will appear in the article’s header. It must contain the subject in a maximum of 45 characters. Descriptors For manuscripts written in Portuguese, the authors must indicate 3 to 10 descriptors extracted from the Descritores em Ciências da Saúde (DeCS) by BVS/Bireme. For English, authors should use the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) by the National Library of Medicine (USA). If descriptors suited to the article’s theme are not found, keywords may be indicated. Abstract The abstract must be written in the original language of the manuscript. Specifications regarding the abstract type are described in each of the article categories. As a general rule, the abstract must include: aim of the study, main methodological procedures (studied population, place and year of performance, observational and analytical methods), main results and conclusions. Text structure Introduction - Must be short, reporting the context and justification of the study, supported by references suited to the manuscript’s objective, which must be clear at the end of this section. Methods - It is indispensable to clearly describe the procedures adopted, the analyzed variables (with their respective definition, if needed), and the hypothesis to be tested. The population, sample, and measuring tools must also be described, presenting, if possible, validity measures. It is necessary to indicate information on data collection and processing. Due references for methods and techniques employed, including statistical methods, must be included; it is essential that new methods or the ones that were substantially modified be described, justifying the reasons for employing it and mentioning its limitations. Ethic criteria in research must be respected. The authors must explain that the research was conducted according to the ethic standards and approved by an ethics committee. Results - It is necessary to present them in a logical sequence, beginning with the description of the most important data. Tables and figures should be restricted to the ones that are necessary for the argument and the description of data in the text must be restricted to the most important ones. Graphs should be used to highlight significant results and to summarize complex relations. Data in graphs and tables should not be duplicated nor repeated throughout the text. Numerical results must specify the statistical method used in the analysis. Discussion - Based on the data obtained and results reached, new and significant aspects observed should be interpreted in the light of scientific literature and pre-existing theories in the field. Arguments and proofs based on personal communication or published in restricted documents cannot be used as bases for the author’s argumentation. Both the work’s limitation and its implications for future research must be described. It is necessary to include only hypotheses and generalizations based on data from the study. The Conclusions must close this section, recovering the work’s objective. |
Digital Assets
|
Tables They should be presented at the end of the text, after the references, and numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals, in the same order they were mentioned in the text. Each table must have a short title. Do not use internal horizontal or vertical dashes. Explanatory notes must be inserted at the foot of the table and not in the title. If there is a table extracted from a previously published work, the authors must formally ask the authorization of the journal that published it for its reproduction. To build a legible table, the maximum number is 10 columns, depending on the amount of content in each space. Notes in tables must be indicated by letters and superscripted. Boxes Boxes differ from tables for containing text instead of numerical data. They should be presented at the end of the text, after the references, and numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals, in the same order they were mentioned in the text. Each chart must have a short title. Explanatory notes must be inserted at the foot of the box and not in the title. If there is a chart extracted from a previously published work, the authors must formally ask the authorization of the journal that published it for its reproduction. Figures Images (photography, drawings, graphs, etc.) must be cited as Figures and numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals, in the same order they were mentioned in the text and presented after the tables. They also must have a title and legend inserted on the lower part of the figure. Figures will only be accepted for publication if they were sufficiently clear and have digital quality, preferably in a vector format. For JPEG format, the minimum resolution must be 300 dpi. Graphs with grid lines are not accepted, and their elements (bars, circles) cannot have volume (3-D). If there is a figure extracted from a previously published work, the authors must formally ask the authorization of the journal that published it for its reproduction. |
Citations and References
|
In-Text citations It is necessary for the reference to be indicated by its number in the list, as an exponent (superscript) before the punctuation, without parenthesis, brackets or similar symbols. In cases when the author’s name and year are significant, the reference number must be typed before the author’s name. Works by two authors must cite both authors connected by “and”. In cases of multiple authors, cite only the first author followed by ”et al.”. Examples: The promotion of population health has as reference the article by Evans and Stoddart9, who consider the distribution of income, social development, and individual reaction in the determinations of health-disease process. According to Lima at al.9 (2006), the prevalence of mental disorders in medicine students is higher than in the general population. References List: References must be normalized according to the Vancouver style - Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication, listed according to the order of apparition. Journal titles must be cited in abbreviation, according to the PubMed. For publications with up to six authors, all of them should be cited; for more than six, only the six first should be cited, followed by the Latin expression “et al.” References by a same author must be organized in ascending chronological order. Whenever possible, include the DOI of the cited work. Examples: Journal articles Rosa ACA, Silva LCC, Azevedo JC, Oliveira RTS, Ferreira KA, Parra MT, et al. Validity of Perceived Stress Scale in Brazilian low-income college students. Rev. Saude Publica. 2025;59:e4. https://doi.org/10.11606/s15188787.2025059005974 Books
Wunsch Filho V, Koifman S. Tumores malignos relacionados com o trabalho. In: Mendes R, coordenador. Patologia do trabalho. 2. ed. São Paulo: Atheneu; 2003. v.2, p. 990-1040. For other examples, we recommend consulting the norms (“Citing Medicine”) by the National Library of Medicine, available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?book=citmed. |
Supplementary Documents
|
According to the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), some documents and declarations by the authors are required for evaluating their manuscripts. Read the following document list and, if applicable, attach the documents to the process. The moment in which each document is required varies:
a. Cover letter
The cover letter must be signed by all authors or at least by the first author. The name and ORCID of all authors must be informed in the letter.
b. Ethics Committee Approval An approval document from the ethics committee of the institution responsible for approving the research must be attached when submitting the article. c. Declaration of Responsibility for Acknowledgements The authors must mention the names of those who, although they did not fit the authorship requisites, have collaborated to the work. It will be necessary to explain the reason for the acknowledgement (e.g.: scientific consultancy, manuscript critical review, data collection, etc.). Mentioned people should express their permission and the responsible author must attach the Declaration of Responsibility for Acknowledgements. It may also comprise the logistical support by institutions. d. Declaration of Rights of First Publication
All authors must read, sign, and submit the document transferring the rights of first publication. The article will only be released for publication once RSP has received this document. e. Open Science Compliance Form Through this form, the authors inform the journal about the conformity of the manuscript with Open Science communication practices. The authors are requested to inform: (a) if the manuscript is a preprint and, if so, its location; (b) whether data, software codes and other materials underlying the manuscript text are properly cited and referenced; and, (c) whether opening options are accepted in the peer review process. DOCUMENTS TEMPLATE a) COVER LETTER MODEL City, _[day]_ of month year. Dear Mr. Editor, Revista de Saúde Pública [Inform the most important finding and conclusions in the manuscript and explain its meaning for public health] [Inform the novelty of the study] [Mention, if any, up to three articles published by the authors in the same research line than the manuscript] Thus, we submit to your appreciation the work “____________[title]____________”, which fits RSP’s areas of interest. The journal was chosen [justify the choice for the journal to publish the manuscript]. Authors’ contribution (example): work’s design, planning, analysis, interpretation, and writing: author 1; result interpretation and manuscript writing: author 2. Both authors have approved the submitted final version. I certify that this manuscript represents an original work and that it, or another work with substantially similar content by me, has not been published, in parts or completely, nor is it being considered for publication by another journal, be it in print or digital publications. The authors declare no conflict of interest. (If there is a conflict, explain it).
__________________________
___________________________
b) DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I, (full name of the author responsible for the submission), author of the manuscript named (full title of the article):
_____/_____/_______ ________________________________________
d) DECLARATION OF RIGHTS OF FIRST PUBLICATION We grant the Revista de Saúde Pública the rights of first publication of our article (TITLE), allowing its full or partial reproduction in any other means of dissemination, whether printed or electronic, provided that the source is cited and proper credit is given. The authors retain the rights over the work. Authors:
_______________________ ________________________________
_______________________ ________________________________
e) OPEN SCIENCE COMPLIANCE FORM Preprints Deposit of the manuscript in a preprint server recognized by the journal.
Research data and other materials availability Authors are encouraged to make available previously or at the time of publication all content (data, software codes and other materials) underlying the manuscript text. Exceptions are allowed in cases of legal and ethical issues. The objective is to facilitate the manuscript evaluation and, if approved, contribute to preserving and reusing the contents and research reproducibility.
Open peer review Authors may choose one or more means to opening the journal peer review process.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional Information
|
Submission checklist
1. Complete name and affiliation institution of each author, including e-mail and telephone. Editorial process a) Evaluation Pre-analysis: the Scientific Editor evaluates manuscripts based on their quality and relevance for the public health field and decides whether the manuscript will be selected for peer reviews or not. Peer review: if selected in the pre-analysis, the manuscript is sent to one of the Associate Editors registered at the system according to his/her respective area of expertise. The Associate Editor selects the reviewers (two) according to their area of expertise and submits the manuscript for evaluation. If the Associate Editor considers that the received opinions are insufficient for a conclusion, he/she should refer another (other) reviewer(s). Based on the opinions, the Associate Editor decides: to refuse it, if the manuscript has major deficiencies; to accept it; or to allow a new submission, and, in this case, he/she should indicate in his/her comments the important modifications for possible reformulation and for re-evaluation by reviewers. b) Scientific writing review To be published, the approved manuscript will be edited by a team that will review grammar, style, and scientific writing (clarity, conciseness, objectivity, and solidity). RSP reserves the right of making changes aiming at a perfect communication with readers. The responsible author will have access to all suggested changes until the last proof sent. c) Proofs The author responsible for correspondence will receive a proof, in a text file (doc, docx, or rtf), with observations and changes made by the technical reading team. The deadline for reviewing the proof is two days. In case there are doubts regarding this proof, the editorial team will contact the author to review the text, until a final version of it is reached. Articles submitted in Portuguese will translated into English. About 20 days after the author has finished the article’s proof, RSP will send the article’s version in English for appreciation by the author. During this review, the author should pay attention to possible interpretation errors, field vocabulary, and especially to the content equivalence to the approved original version. The deadline for reviewing the English version is two days. The RSP adopts the continuous publication system. Therefore, the publication is faster: it does not depend on a set of articles for closing an issue, but on the individual process of each article. Because of that, we ask authors to observe the stipulated deadlines. Publication fees Revista de Saúde Pública (RSP) does not charge a manuscript submission fee. If the submitted manuscript is accepted for publication, the corresponding author will receive a proforma invoice with payment information for the publication fee (i.e., the Article Processing Charge [APC]). It is worth noting that this is a one-time fee, meaning the author will not incur additional costs, except in certain cases*. RSP will handle all subsequent editorial steps, including reference checking and formatting, grammar review, English translation (for manuscripts submitted in Portuguese), PDF formatting, XML conversion, and indexing in bibliographic databases. In 2026, RSP initiated a plan to progressively reduce the APC, with the goal of eliminating author costs as soon as the journal's financial sustainability allows. For this reason, the APC has been reduced to R$ 3,800.00. For international payments, the amount is US$ 1,200. RSP provides authors with the necessary documentation to verify APC payment to their employers, graduate programs, or research funding agencies. * If an erratum needs to be published due to an author’s error, a fee of R$ 400 (or US$ 100 for international payments) will be charged. |
Contact
|
Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo |
Read our Open Access Statement