Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
  • The manuscript meets the focus and scope of RBMFC.
  • The manuscript has not been published, and is not being considered for publication by any peer-reviewed journal.
  • The manuscript was prepared according to the corresponding section policy.
  • The authors agree to the copyright notice (in the Submissions page, right above the privacy policy).
  • To complete the submission form, the submitter has all the information about each of the authors: full name, ORCID iD, URL of the Lattes CV (for Brazilians), affiliation, disclosure of conflicts of interest and bio statement.
  • All people listed as authors meet the four authorship criteria, and all people meeting the four authorship criteria are listed as authors.
  • All persons meeting one or more authorship criteria have had their contribution acknowledged in a statement to be submitted as a supplementary document, as described in Manuscript Preparation guidelines.
  • The research ethics committee approval document (or equivalent if outside Brazil) is ready to be sent as a supplemental document; or the manuscript does not report research with humans subjects.
  • Authors hold written consent signed by the research participants or their guardians; or the manuscript does not report research with human subjects; or a research ethics committee exempted researchers from obtaining written consent.
  • The authors hold written consent signed by the patient or his or her guardian authorizing publication of the clinical case; or the manuscript does not report a clinical case.
  • The manuscript Methods have data sharing plan, as described in Open Data and Reproducibility; or the manuscript does not report empirical research.
  • The manuscript Methods attest the use of share data in accordance with any terms agreed to upon receipt of the data, as described in Open Data and Reproducibility; or the manuscript does not report a secondary analysis of share data from empirical research.
  • The manuscript has been drafted in accordance with the relevant guidelines and extensions of the EQUATOR Network, as described in Open Data and Reproducibility; or does not apply.
  • The research was included in a public registry before enrolling its first participant, as described in Open Data and Reproducibility; or the manuscript does not report a clinical trial.
  • The manuscript was prepared as recommended in the author guidelines.
  • The manuscript Methods describe whether and how were patients and the community involved in the research; or the manuscript does not report empirical research.

Author Guidelines

Before even preparing the manuscript, potential authors should verify that the work meets the focus and scope, as well as other editorial policies of Revista Brasileira de Medicina de Família e Comunidade (RBMFC). Those policies and theses instructions were last updated on March 2, 2021.

RBMFC does not charge publication or submission fees, nor does it accept advertising; the funding is provided solely by Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina de Família e Comunidade (SBMFC).

RBMFC is indexed by LILACS, DOAJ, REDIB, Open Citations Index, Dimensions, Scite, Google Scholar (h5 index) and PKP Index, and listed in Latindex, EZB, Diadorim,  Sherpa Romeo, Periódicos CAPES and ISSN Portal (ROAD, The Keepers). In the period from 2017 to 2020 (which is the most recent one), the Qualis CAPES system classified RBMFC as B2 in all areas of knowledge evaluated.

 

In 2020, RBMFC accepted for publication 18% of the submissions received. In the same year, the journal declined 82% of submissions: 65% at entry and 17% after external review. Four-fifths of submissions received the first editorial decision within 30 days. Articles were published an average of 263 days after submission.

Manuscript preparation

RBMFC accepts manuscripts in Portuguese, Spanish or English, in ODT, DOC or DOCX format. For ease of peer review, we recommend automatic line numbering, as well as automatic page numbering in the footer. We suggest page size A4 , with top and bottom margins of 1.25 cm, left of 3 cm and right of 2 cm; paragraphs with line spacing of 1.5; and font Arial, size 12.

Manuscripts should be prepared according to ICMJE recommendations. Because the peer review is double-blind, the cover page should be replaced with a supplementary document called “Statements” containing:

  • Contributors: Inform how each author or collaborator meets the criteria of authorship. For example, “Study conception or design: FT, CS. Acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data: FT, BT, CS. Preliminary writing: FT. Critical review of the draft: BT, CS, José Vitória. All authors approved the final version and agreed to be accountable on all aspects of the work.” Being FT, CS and BT the acronyms of the authors’ name. Alternatively, authors and collaborators may use the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) to express the contribution of each author or collaborator.
  • Conflicts of interest: For every contributor, inform any activities or relationships that might bias os be seen as biasing the work, as per the policy on conflicts of interest.
  • Acknowledgment: any other due acknowledgment.

The manuscript itself must contain the following elements:

  • Title in all three languages. There is no hard limit to the size of the title, but it should be succinct, flashy and representative of the content of the manuscript.
  • Running title in the language of the manuscript, less than 40 characters long (counting white space).
  • Abstract and keywords in all three languages. The Section Policies specify the size, format, and content of abstracts. The keywords should be between 3 and 5, and should necessarily be included in the Health Science Descriptors (DeCS). DeCS is a superset of the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), so that any MeSH keyword is also a DeCS keyword. MeSH on Demand helps choosing keywords, although it lacks keywords specific to DeCS. The RBMFC editorial staff reserves the right to adjust the keywords.
  • The manuscript body should be written clearly and concisely, respecting the Section Policies. The text should not repeat all the data contained in tables or figures, and graphs should not repeat data contained in tables or vice versa. Footnotes are prohibited.
  • The title of the tables and figures should be inserted throughout the main manuscript, after the first paragraph quoting the table or figure. Tables and figures of vector format (graphics, maps etc.) should be inserted next to their title in their original format, not as screenshots. Figures in raster format (“bitmaps”) such as photographs should be attached as supplementary documents, preferably in TIFF format with a resolution of 300 dpi or more.
  • References should follow the Vancouver style, as described in the Citing Medicine book and exemplified in this page, both by the US National Library of Medicine. The digital object identifier (DOI; example: https://doi.org/10.5712/rbmfc12(39)1505) should be listed at the end of each reference, when available. The Uniform Resource Locator (URL) must be informed (as specified in the guide) for electronic resources not having DOI, ISSN or ISBN.

The manuscript should be written in accordance with the Open Data and Reproducibility policy (EQUATOR Network recommendations, data sharing plan, data citation, etc.).

As described in the editorial “Research for what?”, empirical research manuscripts should describe if and how patients and the community participated in research planning or design.

Abbreviations and acronyms should be restricted to those widely known; should be expanded on its first occurrence; and should be avoided in titles. It is not necessary to expand abbreviations of the International System of Units and others such as sp or spp in the binomial nomenclature of the species. Measurement units for laboratory tests that do not follow the International System of Units must be accompanied by their conversion; for example, “a glycemia of 126 mg/dL (7.0 mmol/L)”.

Tables (numerical or textual) and figures (graphs, maps, photographs, etc.) should be cited in the manuscript body (but not in the abstract), as in “Half the participants were female, and the mean age was 42 years (Table 1)”, or “Characteristics in the sample are described in Table 1.” Tables and figures both should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals, and have self-explanatory titles. Any abbreviations or acronyms used in tables or figures should be expanded in the respective footer.

References should be cited in the body of the manuscript using consecutive numbering; for example, “Primary care is critical for health systems to fulfill their mission.¹ According to Starfield,² primary care is defined by the concomitance of four key attributes …”. Citations within tables or figures should follow the order of the text prior to the illustration.

The main manuscript should omit the authors name and institutional affiliation; this information will be completed in the submission form. In addition, in preparing the main manuscript, authors should use "XXXXXXXXXX" (without quotation marks) in place of any proper names that might identify the authors or their institutional affiliations, such as the organization to which the ethics committee belongs, or the municipality where the data were collected. Upon approval, authors will be reminded to replace the "XXXXXXXXXX" prior to publishing.

As of January 1, 2020, RBMFC does not publish attachments. Research instruments (eg questionnaires), databases and other supplemental materials should be deposited in repositories such as Zenodo, OSF or Figshare, and cited in the manuscript as described in the Open Data and Reproducibility policy.

Section Policies

Research Articles

This section includes original research, essays and reviews. Original research may use quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods; essays may be theoretical or methodological; and reviews may be systematic, scoping or integrative. Traditional narrative reviews are not considered research articles; see sections Clinical Review and Perspectives.

The abstract should have up to 400 words, and be structured in Introduction, Objective, Methods, Results and Conclusions. The main text should be written objectively, with a recommended size of up to 3,500 words, and be structured in Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion and (optionally) Conclusion. The discussion should address the following issues: (1) summary of the main findings; (2) strengths and limitations; (3) comparison with the literature; and (4) implications for research and/or practice. The structure of the abstract and main text can be adapted following guidelines from EQUATOR Network (see Open Data and Reproducibility) or by justification, presented in a comment to the editor during the completion of the submission form. Essays have greater flexibility in the structure of the main text, but should bring robust analyzes and clear messages.

Manuscripts submitted to this section must comply with policies on Research Ethics and Open Data and Reproducibility.

Clinical Reviews

This section includes narrative reviews to update the clinical practice. While systematic reviews (published in the Research Articles section) answer well-delineated questions, clinical reviews update the reader on some clinical topic of interest.

Clinical review articles link the best clinical evidence be to the authors' professional experience, with an emphasis on patient-oriented outcomes. Clinical reviews should cite the main and most recent systematic reviews and systematically derived clinical guidelines, as well as original research when necessary. Optionally, clinical reviews can provide a formal evaluation of the evidence, in a table listing the key recommendations, citations, and the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT). RBMFC has published a guide on how to write prepare clinical reviews. “Evidence-based reviews” will be considered for publication if they answer broad questions. Narrow questions are usually better answered with systematic reviews; see section Research Articles.

The abstract should have up to 250 words, condense the content of the article and not be structured. The main text should have up to 2,500 words, and be written keeping in mind the clinical practice of the family and community physician. The main text consists of Introduction, Methods, other sections, and Final Considerations. The introduction delimits the theme ("what it is") and justifies its importance (epidemiology in the community or in the office, impact on the quality of life, etc.). The methods describe the search strategy, the databases consulted and the search date. Instead of "Results and Discussion", the clinical review should have sections more suited to the specific theme, articulating professional experience to the collected evidence; a frequently useful set are sections "Evaluation" (or "Diagnosis") and "Recommendations". It is strongly recommended that the article has a flowchart for evaluation or management, among other illustrations. The final considerations may tackle uncertainties or discrepancies and suggest future prospects.

Submissions to this section should preferably be made in Portuguese.

Clinical Cases

This section publishes clinical case studies (also known as case reports) that contribute significantly to medical knowledge, for example indicating the need for changes in clinical practice. Case series are considered research, and should be submitted to the Research Articles section.

Clinical case should report the information recommended by the CARE guidelines. The abstract should have up to 200 words, and be structured in Introduction, Case Presentation and Conclusions. The main text should have up to 2,000 words, and be structured in Introduction, Case Presentation, Discussion and Conclusion.

The Research Ethics section provides important instructions for submitting case reports – even though these are not considered research.

Quality Improvement

This section publishes experience reports on improvement of healthcare delivery or medical education in primary care, as long as they contribute significantly to knowledge on the subject. Health services research should be submitted to the Research Articles section.

The experience should be reported following the SQUIRE guidelines 2.0. The abstract should have up to 300 words, and be structured in Introduction (background, local problem), Methods (intervention, study of the intervention), Results and Conclusions. The main text should have up to 3,000 words and be divided into Introduction (problem description, available knowledge, rationale, specific aims), Methods (context, intervention, study of the intervention, measures, analysis, ethical considerations), Results and Discussion (summary, interpretation, limitations, conclusions), as explained in the aforementioned guidelines.

Perspective

This section publishes analyses, reflections, views and discussions on topics relevant to family and community medicine or primary care, including (but not limited to) themes previously directed to sections “Front-line Stories" and “Optimizing Care.” The articles should add significant knowledge to the literature and provide clear messages.

Abstracts should have up to 150 words, and not be structured. The main text should have up to 2,000 words, and the format is free.

Book Reviews

This section publishes critical analyzes of books, films and other productions, published in the last 3 years, in Brazil or in other countries, related to family and community medicine, primary care or correlated issues relevant to the development of health systems and practices of interest to primary care.

Reviews should open with the bibliographic reference of the publication being analyzed, and have up to 1,500 words and up to 10 references. Abstracts should have up to 150 words, and not be structured.

Letters to the Editor

This section publishes brief communications discussing articles published by RBMFC. It serves the purpose of post-publication peer review, for example highlighting implications or limitations not discussed by the authors.

Letters to the editor should be succinct (up to 600 words), and the article being discussed should be the first (or only) one to be quoted. There is no summary.

SBMFC Documents

This section publishes official documents of collegiate members linked to the Brazilian Society of Family and Community Medicine (SBMFC).

Copyright Notice

By submitting a manuscript to the RBMFC, authors retain ownership of the copyright in the article, and authorize RBMFC to publish that manuscript under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license and identify itself as the vehicle of its original publication.

Privacy Statement

The names and addresses informed in this journal will be used exclusively for the services provided by this publication and are not available for other purposes or to third parties.