Accessibility / Report Error
(Updated: 2022/06/28)

About the journal


Basic Information


Revista CEFAC was created in 1999 by Doctors Irene Queiroz Marchesan and Jaime Luiz Zorzi, directors of CEFAC – Saúde e Educação. The materialization of this old idea took place in the celebration of the CEFAC’s 15-year existence and it was just possible thanks to the tenacity and partnership of those that always believed in Speech Therapy, in producing and disclosing new knowledge.

In 2016, ABRAMO (Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial) became responsible for the publishing of the CEFAC Journal. All the articles published in Revista CEFAC are on-line with open access, available in integral text and with no cost for readers.

The abbreviation of its title is Rev. CEFAC that should be used in bibliographies, footnotes and in bibliographical references and legends.



Indexation Sources

  • Lilacs (Literatura Latino-America e do Caribe em Ciência da Saúde);
  • SciELO (Scientific Eletronic Library Online);
  • Latindex (Sistema Regional de Información En Línea para Revistas Científicas de América Latina, el Caribe, España y Portugal);
  • Sumá (Sumários de Revistas Brasileiras);
  • GALE (CENGAGE Learning);
  • EBSCO (Electronic Journals Service);





  • All content of the journal, except where identified, is licensed under a Creative Commons attribution-type BY.

The on line journal has open and free access.





From 1999 to 2015, the publication received financial support from CEFAC - SAÚDE E EDUCAÇÃO.

In 2016, the Journal started to count on ABRAMO´s support.

Rua Uruguaiana, 516
CEP: 13026-001 Campinas - SP - Brasil
Phone: (19) 3254-0342
E-mail of the Journal:




Editorial Board


Scientific Editors



Associated Editors



Editorial Committee



Editorial Production




Instructions to authors


Scope and Policy


The CEFAC JOURNAL - Speech, Language, Hearing Sciences, and Education Journal (Rev. CEFAC.), ISSN 1982-0216, which is indexed in the LILACS, SciELO, BVS, Sumá, Gale, Electronic Journals Service - Redalyc, and ABEC databases, publishes annual volumes and bimonthly numbers in continuous flow, with the mission of disseminating scientific advances related to different areas of Speech-Language Therapy and its interfaces with other areas of knowledge, contributing to the growth and improvement of the quality of Speech-Language Therapy Science at the national and international levels.

The goal of CEFAC Journal is to record scientific production on issues relevant to Speech-Language Pathology (SLP) and Audiology in the following areas: Language, Fluency, Orofacial Myology, Voice, Audiology, Dysphagia, Public Health, Neurofunctional Speech Therapy, Gerontology, Neuropsychology, Work Speech Therapy, Speech-Language Therapy in Schools, Speech Expertise, and related areas, as well as other productions that address the SLP and Audiology interface with other educational and health sciences.

Only original full papers are accepted for consideration, preferably written in English, but either Portuguese or Spanish is acceptable; they must not have been published previously nor be under review by another journal. Papers such as original research articles, review articles, brief communications, case reports, and letters to the editor can be submitted.

Initially, the submission may be in the Portuguese or Spanish, but if the article is approved, an English version is mandatory and must be certified by a specialized company or translator that is responsible for it (declaration form presented below). It should be noted that the authors are fully responsible for the content of the manuscript as a whole, as well as for its translation into English by a qualified translator.

During the selection of the articles for publication, the criteria will be based on the article’s originality, relevance of the theme, and the quality of the scientific methodology applied, as well as compliance with the editorial norms adopted by the Journal. Papers that neither meet the technical requirements nor comply with the standards for publication will not be accepted for review, and the authors will be so informed. Authors may forward the paper for consideration one more time after the appropriate changes have been made, whereupon the paper will receive a new submission number.



Open Access Policy


CEFAC Journal provides complete and immediate open access to its content.

Every article approved by the editorial team of this journal will be published in open access, which means that the article will be available free of charge throughout the world perpetually via the Internet.

CEFAC Journal maintains electronic backup to preserve access to all its content through a partnership with SciELO, via LOCKSS—Cariniana / IBICT.



Data Sharing Policy


CEFAC Journal encourages authors to share their research data if this does not violate protection of human subjects or other valid subject privacy concerns.



Advertising Policy


CEFAC journal currently does not reproduce or publish advertisements, preserving its sole purpose of disseminating relevant scientific articles related to different areas of Speech Therapy and its interfaces with other areas of knowledge.





After publication of the manuscript in CEFAC Journal, the authors agree that copyright transfers to CEFAC Journal.



Manuscripts Submission and Publication Fee


Only articles submitted by the online publishing system will be accepted for consideration. The system may be accessed at:

CEFAC Journal does not charge any submission fee and allows open access to its scientific content. There is a publication fee to be paid by the authors whose articles have been approved of US $ 200.00 (commercial dollar). When the manuscript has been accepted, the author will receive an electronic message regarding payment. This should be performed through the ABRAMO  (Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial) account at Banco Itaú – Agência 4271 C/C 23820-8 – CNPJ 022.196.630/0001-16. Foreign authors can render payment via PayPal after completing the form available at:

Proof of deposit must be e-mailed to along with the version of the article, as well as the name and ID of the leading author for the receipt to be issued. The issue in which the article is to be published is chosen upon receipt of proof of payment. For further information, please contact us by email.

The declaration for the English version must be sent along with the article. See form below:

_____________________________,  ____________  ______, 20___.
(City, month, day, year)

I, _______________________________(full name of the company/translator), ID number _____________________, hereby certify the quality of the English version of the manuscript entitled _______________________________________________________________, to be published in the CEFAC Journal - Speech, Language, Hearing Sciences and Education Journal.




Manuscript Evaluation Process


The evaluation of manuscripts submitted to CEFAC Journal comprises three steps:


All submitted manuscripts are evaluated regarding whether they are in compliance with the instructions described in the submission rules. Those that do not comply or for which all the requested documents have not been submitted are returned to the authors for revision. Articles conforming to the submission rules and for which all the requested documents have been submitted proceed to Step 2.


Manuscripts that have passed the technical evaluation are sent to the Chief Editors, together with a similarity report (Crossref Similarity Check by iThenticate). The Chief Editors evaluate the similarity report and carry out a preliminary scientific assessment regarding the scope, relevance, and interest for publication. Manuscripts that do not fit the scope or that lack scientific interest or relevance to the mission and/or goal of CEFAC Journal can be “Immediately rejected” by editorial decision. Manuscripts considered appropriate are passed on to peer review, Step 3.


The manuscripts are evaluated by at least two referees with expertise in the area of knowledge of the study from national and international educational and/or research institutions, with proven scientific production. Anonymity is guaranteed throughout the evaluation process. Referees’ opinions on the manuscripts can be as follows: “Accepted,” “Accepted with minor revision,” “Accepted with major revision,” “Rejected and resubmit,” and “Rejected.”

Opinions of rejection or acceptance with revision are always accompanied by the referees’ evaluation comments. After corrections, the manuscript will be accepted if it has two favorable opinions and rejected if it receives two unfavorable opinions. In the event of conflicting opinions, one of the associate editors of the area and/or the chief editors may be consulted. In case of doubt or contestation of any editorial decision, the authors can contact the chief editors, who will receive the justifications, clarify the doubts in the process, and confirm the status of the manuscript as accepted or rejected for publication.

Manuscripts may not be submitted for consideration in other national or international journals while they are undergoing editorial evaluation.

In case of doubts about the evaluation process, the authors should contact the editorial review by email:



Form and Preparation of Manuscripts


Types of Papers

Original research articles:  Papers for dissemination of new results of scientific research, either quantitative or qualitative, constituting full papers. Their formal structure must present the following topics:  Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion and References. A maximum of 40 references, of which 70% must be articles published in national and international journals, preferably from the last 5 years. Subtitles, citations of clinical implications, and limitations of the study, particularly in the discussion of the article, are recommended. It is suggested, whenever appropriate, to detail under the "Methods" the approval of the Ethics Committee and state the case number, study design, place where it was performed, participants, clinical outcomes of interest, and intervention. The abstract should be within 200 words and structured as follows:  Purpose, Methods, Results and Conclusion.

Literature review articles:  Literature reviews, possibly integrative, systematicor scoping reviews, making critical and commented reviews of a subject of scientific interest in the Speech-Language Therapy/Audiology and related areas, which must bring new insights on the theme, point out gaps of knowledge on the subject, raise new discussions or indicate paths to be researched. Other categories of literature reviews will be accepted at the discretion of the editors, requiring prior consultation by the authors. Their formal structure must include the following:  Introduction, which justifies the theme of the review, including the clinical question and the objective; Methods, with the search strategy applied (manual search and electronic search, sources of information, search strategies with keywords, filters, etc.), details on the selection criteria of the researched literature (selection steps, eligibility criteria, number of evaluators, procedures, selection diagram, etc.), analysis of methodological quality in systematic reviews (instrument, number of evaluators, procedures), collection and extraction (extraction procedures, types of data extracted) and data analysis (qualitative data synthesis strategy and presentation of results, if applicable, quantitative data synthesis strategy, heterogeneity assessment, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, publication bias analysis, etc.); Literature Review, commented with discussion;  Conclusion; and References. Amaximum of 40 references to articles published in national and international journals. In case of need for a greater number of references, the editors may be consulted. The abstract should not exceed 200 words and should state the Purpose, Methods, Literature Review and Conclusion. Systematic review articles registered in PROSPERO will be preferred (

The scientific writing of Systematic Reviews should follow the PRISMA checklist – (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and that the Scope Reviews follow the PRISMA-ScR checklist (Preferred Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews).

Literature review protocols will be accepted in the category of literature review articles. They will be accepted only in cases where the study has not started or the data extraction phase has not begun. The protocols must contain the following topics: introduction with a description of PICO or PCC, research question, hypothesis and objectives; methods containing eligibility criteria, information sources, search strategy, data selection and extraction, outcomes, risk of bias assessment, data synthesis, meta-analysis (if applicable) and assessment of certainty of evidence; and, discussion containing the relevance of the proposed revision, weaknesses and strengths. Literature review protocols registered on other platforms must report the registration number in the methodology. The protocols must include all items and be accompanied by the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) checklist. The abstract must be structured within 200 words and contain the following topics: Purpose, Methods, and Final Considerations/Conclusions.

Brief communication: Brief reports of research or professional experience with methodologically appropriate evidence; manuscripts that describe new methods or techniques will also be considered. Their formal structure must include the following: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Final Considerations/Conclusions, and References. The abstract must be structured within 200 words and contain the following topics: PurposeMethodsResults, and Final Considerations/Conclusions.

Reports of clinical cases: Rare or uncommon cases, particularly interesting or that yield new knowledge and treatment techniques or reflections. They must be original and unpublished. Their formal structure must include the following:  Introduction, short and supported by the literature that justifies the presentation of the case;  Case Report, description of the history, procedures, and treatments performed;  Results, clearly showing the progress achieved;  Discussion, based on facts;  Conclusion/Final Considerations, and References, regarding the report. Maximum of 30 references to articles published in national and international journals, preferably from the last 5 years. The abstract should not exceed 200 words and should not be structured. The scientific writing of clinical cases reports should follow the recommendations of The CARE Guidelines: Consensus-based Clinical Case Reporting Guideline Development.

Letters to the editor: Comments and criticisms regarding published articles, in a constructive, objective, and educational way, or discussions of current specific issues. The letters must be brief (not to exceed 1,000 words) and are published according to the Editors’ criteria.
The author responsible for the submission must inform the ORCID of each author of the paper. In case they do not have it, they can create it upon submission of the article.

The journal's guidelines are based on the format proposed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and published in the article: Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals, version from February 2006 available at:

CEFAC Journal supports the policies for registration of clinical trials of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), recognizing the importance of these initiatives for the registration and international dissemination of information on clinical trials in open access. A clinical trial is any study that prospectively assigns human beings to intervention or comparison groups to evaluate the cause and effect between a medical intervention and a health outcome. Clinical trials must be registered in one of the following registries:

Australian Clinical Trials Registry 
Clinical Trials 
ISRCTN Register 
Nederlands Trial Register 

Authors are encouraged to consult the guidelines relevant to their specific research design. For randomized clinical trials, authors should consult the CONSORT Statement (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) recommendations; for observational studies, STROBE Statement (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology); and, for diagnostic studies, STARD (Standards for Reporting Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy).


CEFAC Journal accepts manuscripts that have been deposited on a non-commercial preprint server, as long as they are not in the process of being evaluated by another journal. The submission to the preprints server can be carried out before or in parallel with the submission to CEFAC Journal.

The author responsible for the submission must inform if the manuscript has been deposited in a preprints server and must provide the corresponding DOI.


a) MS Word file, Arial font, size 12, single-spaced on 212 × 297 mm (A4 size) pages with 2.5 cm margins at the top, bottom, and left margin, with pages numbered in Arabic numerals, and ordered in the following sequence: title page abstract and keywords; text; acknowledgments; references; tables and figures with their legends.

The manuscript must be up to 15 pages, typed single-spaced (from the introduction to before the references), maximum of 10 tables (or figures). Graphics, photographs, and illustrations are characterized as figures. Questionnaires can be included as Annexes and must necessarily be framed.

b) Permission to reproduce the photographic material of patients or another author, in which case an attached copy of the “Informed Consent” is required with approval to use the images in scientific publications.

c) Approval of the Research Ethics Committee (REC), when reporting human research. It is mandatory to provide the approval of the Ethics Committee of the institution where the research issue was held, as well as information on the signatures of the "Informed Consent" forms for all those involved or their guardians (Resolution CNS 466/2012).

d) Letter signed by all authors in the Statement of Responsibility stating that the manuscript is original and that the authors are responsible for the uploaded content, stating that the article was never published or submitted elsewhere, granting exclusive rights to CEFAC Journal, and authorizing the editing of the text to the journal's format, preserving its contents. The lack of signature will be interpreted as disinterest in or refusal of publication, determining the editorial exclusion of the name of this person from the list of authors. Every person designated as author should have participated sufficiently in the paper to take public responsibility for its content. Authorship credit should be based only on 1) substantial contributions to the conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; 3) final approval of the version to be published. Editors may request justification when the total number of authors exceeds eight. It will not be allowed to include a new author after first peer review is received.


We, name(s) of author(s), are responsible for the content and authenticity of the paper entitled ______________________, and we declare that this article has never been published and is not under analysis by another journal , and grant exclusive rights to the CEFAC Journal regarding marketing, editing and publishing it either in print or online on the Internet. We authorize editors to adapt the text to the journal's format, preserving its contents. We also declare that we have read and complied with all the requirements presented in the Declaration of Responsibilities and Duties of the Authors, which can be accessed through the link.

Date, Signature of every Author


1. Title page: Should contain: a) the title of the manuscript in English, which should be concise and informative; b) running head no longer than 40 characters, including spaces; c) full name of each author, with the institutional affiliation of the author during the period when all or most of the research was done, City, State, and Country; d) name, full address, and e-mail of the author, to whom the correspondence should be sent; e) area the paper addresses: Language, Fluency, Orofacial Myofunctional Disorders, Voice, Audiology, Dysphagia, Public Health, Neurofunctional Speech Therapy, Gerontology, Neuropsychology, Work Speech Therapy and Audiology, Speech Expertise, SLP in Schools, and Related Areas; f) identification of the type of manuscript: original research article, literature review article, brief communications, case reports, letter to editor; g) the sources of grants for research or study-related funding indication, if there is one; h) conflict of interest (if there is none, write “Nonexistent”);  i)  indicate the participation of substantial contributions in the following phases: (1) conception and design of the study, or the acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of the data, (2) elaboration of the article or critical review for relevant intellectual content, (3) final approval of the version to be presented for publication.

In short:

Title of the manuscript:
Running head: no longer than 40 characters.
Lead Author (1), First Co-Author (2)...
(1)Institutional affiliation of the author where the research was done, city, state, country:
Name, address and e-mail of the lead author:
Type of manuscript:
Funding: only if there is any.
Conflict of interests:
Participation of substantial contributions:

 2. Title: It must adequately indicate the issue treated in the article, being general/comprehensive, as by not identifying the city or institution in which the research was carried out, for example.

3. Abstract and Keywords: The second page must contain the abstract, no longer than 200 words. It must be structured according to the type of study described above. The abstract is intended to provide a clear view of the main parts of the study, highlighting the most significant data, new aspects of the content, and conclusions. Symbols, formulas, equations, and abbreviations should not be used.

Underneath the abstract, specify the keywords that define the subject of the study: a minimum of three and a maximum of six words. The descriptors must be based on the DeCS (Descritores em Ciências da Saúde - Descriptors in Health Sciences) published by Bireme, which is a translation of the MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) from the National Library of Medicine, available at the website: (go to: health terminology – DeCS search; or straight to the following address: In the case of clinical trials, underneath the abstract, indicate the registration number at the Clinical Trials base.

4. Text: Must follow the structure required for the respective type of manuscript. Abbreviations should be avoided. When the use of acronyms is required, they must be preceded by the term in full at the first appearance in the text. References should be cited, numbered consecutively in the order they appear on the text, using superscript Arabic numerals. Avoid indicating the name of authors.

The introduction must contain data that introduce the theme to reader in a concise and clear way; the objective must be clearly stated in the last paragraph of the introduction. For example: “The objective(s) of this study was (were)...” and it must match the objective proposed in the abstract.

The Method must be described in detail. The first paragraph must start by stating the project approval by the Research Ethics Committee (REC), with the protocol number. The inclusion and exclusion criteria must be specified in each case. The procedures must be clearly described so as to enable replication of the study or complete understanding of what and how it was accomplished. The relevant protocols to understand the method must be incorporated into the methodology at  the end of this item and not as an attachment, and must state the theoretical approach on which the research was based (protocols adapted from authors or used in full, etc.). The last paragraph must include the type of statistical analysis used, describing the tests used and the significance value set. In case hypothesis tests were not used, specify how the results will be presented.

Results can be displayed in a descriptive way with tables or figures (graphs, photographs, and illustrations are all called figures), choosing those that are most convenient. We request that the data presented not be repeated in graphs or text.

5. Footnotes: There should be no footnotes. If the information is important for the understanding or reproduction of the study, it must be included in the article.

6. Acknowledgments: Include collaborators who must be acknowledged but do not have to be included as authors, and acknowledgment of financial support, technical aid, and so on.

7. References:  Articles cited must indexed in national and international databases. Articles with a complete version in English must be referenced. References must be formatted in “Vancouver Style”, as shown in the examples below, and the titles of journals must be abbreviated in accordance with the List of Journal Indexed in Index Medicus, of the National Library of Medicine and available at:

References  should be numbered consecutively in the   order in which they are cited in the text, and citations are written as   superscript Arabic numerals. If they are sequential, they need to be separated by a hyphen. If they are  non-sequential, the separation must be done by commas.

The author(s) should be referenced to by his/her last or family names, and only the first letter is to be capitalized, followed by the abbreviations of given name(s)  without periods.

For all references, mention every author up to six. If there are more than six, list the first six, followed by et al.

Personal communications and unpublished or in-progress studies may be quoted when absolutely necessary, but they should not be included in the list of references, only mentioned in the text.

Journal Articles
Author(s) of the article. Title of the Article. Abbreviated title of the journal. Year of publication; volume (number): initial-final page of the article.
For example: Shriberg LD, Flipsen PJ, Thielke H, Kwiatkowski J, Kertoy MK, Katcher ML, et al. Risk for speech disorder associated with early recurrent otitis media with effusions: two retrospective studies. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2000;43(1):79-99.
Note: When the pages from the consulted article include repeated numbers, give only those that differ. For example: pp. 320-329; use 320-9.
For example: Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;25(4):284-7.

Lack of Authorship
Title of the Article. Abbreviated title of the journal. Year of publication; volume (number): initial-final page of the article.
For example: Combating undernutrition in the Third World. Lancet. 1988;1(8581):334-6.

Author(s) of the book. Title of the book. Edition. City of publication: Publisher; Year of publication.
For example: Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Kobayashi GS, Pfaller MA. Medical microbiology. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002.

Book chapters
Author(s) of the chapter. Title of the chapter. "In": name(s) of author(s) or editor(s). Title of the Book. Edition. City of publication: Publisher; Year of publication. Initial-final pages of the chapter.
For example: Meltzer PS, Kallioniemi A, Trent JM. Chromosome alterations in human solid tumors. In: Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, editors. The genetic basis of human cancer. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002. pp. 93-113.
Notes: In the identification of the city of publication, the abbreviation of the state or province can also be added between parentheses. For example: Berkeley (CA); if it is a country it can be added in full. For example: Adelaide (Australia);
If it is the first edition of the book, there is no need to identify it. The indication of the edition number will use the abbreviation in English. For example: 4th ed.

Conference proceedings
Author(s) of the article. Title of the article. Title of the event; date of the event; place of the event. City of publication: Publisher; Year of publication.
For example: Harnden P, Joffe JK, Jones WG, editors. Germ cell tumours V. Proceedings of the 5th Germ Cell Tumour Conference; 2001 Sep 13-15; Leeds, UK. New York: Springer; 2002.

Conference papers
Author(s) of the article. Title of the presented article. "In": responsible editor(s) for the event (if any). Title of the Event: Proceedings or Annals of the title of the event; date of the event; place of the event. City of publication: Publisher; Year of publication. Initial-final pages of the article.
For example: Christensen S, Oppacher F. An analysis of Koza’s computational effort statistic for genetic programming. In: FosterJA, Lutton E, Miller J, Ryan C, Tettamanzi AG, editors. Genetic programming. EuroGP 2002: Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Genetic Programming; 2002 Apr 3-5; Kinsdale, Ireland. Berlin: Springer; 2002. pp. 182-91.

Dissertation, thesis and course completion assignment
Author. Title of the study [type of document]. City of the institution (state): institution; Year the study was formally presented at the institution.
For example: Borkowski MM. Infant sleep and feeding: a telephone survey of Hispanic Americans [dissertation]. Mount Pleasant (MI): Central Michigan University; 2002.
For example: Tannouri AJR, Silveira PG. Campanha de prevenção do AVC: doença carotídea extracerebral na população da grande Florianópolis [course work completion]. Florianópolis (SC): Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Curso de Medicina. Departamento de Clínica Médica; 2005.
For example: Cantarelli A. Língua: que órgão é este? [dissertation]. São Paulo (SP): CEFAC – Saúde e Educação; 1998.

Unpublished Sources (in press)
Author(s) of the article. Title of the Article. Abbreviated title of the journal. Indicate, in press, and the probable year of publication, after acceptance.
For example: Tian D, Araki H, Stahl E, Bergelson J, Kreitman M. Signature of balancing selection in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. In press 2002.

Audiovisual materials
Author(s). Title of the material [media type]. City of publication: Publisher; year.
For example: Marchesan IQ. Deglutição atípica ou adaptada? [Video tape]. São Paulo (SP): Pró-Fono Departamento Editorial; 1995. [Video course].

Electronic documents
ASHA: American Speech and Hearing Association. Otitis media, hearing and language development. [cited 2003 Aug29]. Available at:

Online Journal article
Author(s) of the article. Title of the Article. Abbreviated title of the journal. [journal on the Internet]. Date of publication [Access date with the expression "accessed on"]; volume (number): [approximate number of pages]. Website address with the expression "Available at".
For example: Abood S. Quality improvement initiative in nursing homes: the ANA acts in an advisory role. Am J Nurs [journal on the Internet]. 2002 Jun [accessed on 2002 Aug 12]; 102(6):[about 3 p.].Available at:

Dissertation on the Internet
Author(s). Title [dissertation on the Internet]. City of publication: Publisher; date of publication [Access date with the expression "accessed on"]. Website address with the expression "Available at".
For example: Foley KM, Gelband H, editors. Improving palliative care for cancer [dissertation on the Internet]. Washington: National Academy Press; 2001 [accessed on July 9 2002]. Available at:

Cd-Rom and DVD
Author(s). Title [type of equipment]. City of publication: Producer; year.
For example: Anderson SC, Poulsen KB. Anderson’s electronic atlas of hematology [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.

Author(s) of the website (if any). Title of the homepage [homepage on the Internet]. City: Institution; Date(s) of registration* [date of last updating with the expression "updated on"; access date with the expression "accessed on"]. Website address with the expression "Available at".
For example: [homepage on the Internet]. New York: Association of Cancer Online Resources, Inc.; c2000-01[updated on May 16, 2002; accessed on July 9, 2002]. Available at:

Online databases
Author(s) of the database (if any). Title [database on the Internet]. City: Institution. Date(s) of registration [date of last update with the expression "updated on" (if any); access date with the expression "accessed on"]. Website address with the expression "Available at".
For example: Jablonski S. Online Multiple Congenital Anomaly/Mental Retardation (MCA/MR) Syndromes [database on the Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine (US).1999 [updated on Nov 20, 2001; accessed on Aug 12, 2002]. Available at:

8. Tables and Charts:  Tables and charts should be formatted in Word or Excel, being fully editable and unlocked. No tables or charts will be accepted if they are pasted into the text, or without the original database in which they were created. In the case of formatted charts in Excel, the original files (xls) in which they were created must be sent. Each table must be sent on a separate page after the references. They should be self-explanatory, avoiding references to the text or other tables, and numbered consecutively with Arabic numerals in the order they are mentioned in the text. They should present the title at the top, in capital letters, without a period, aligned with the left edge of the table, after the indication of the table number. Below each table, the same title alignment must be used to present the legend, statistical tests (test name and p-value), and the source from which the information was obtained (when not from the author). The layout should be simple, with the top, bottom, and division lines between the header and content in bold. External vertical lines should not be drawn, as these constitute charts and not tables. Charts must follow the same guidelines as tables, differing only in the presentation format, since they may have vertical lines and must be closed laterally.

9. Figures (photographs, illustrations, and Graphs): The approximate locations figures should be indicated in the text, and they should be sent as separate attachments in TIF or JPG format with a minimum resolution of 300 dpi, and consideration should be given to the maximum width of the journal, which is 16.5 cm. They can be colored or black and white (grayscale). They must be saved and named by the article and their order within it: articleX_fig_1, articleX_fig_2. Each figure must be sent on a separate page after the references. They should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals in the order they are mentioned in the text. Legends should be presented clearly and described under the figures, out of the frame. When using statistical tests, describe the test name, p-value, and the source from which the information was obtained (when they are not the author himself). Graphs should be called Figures and should preferably be presented in the form of columns. In the case of graphs formatted in Excel, the original files (xls) from which they were created must be provided. For still images, indicate details with arrows, letters, numbers and symbols, which should be clear and large enough to withstand reduction. They must be in JPG or TIF (Tagged Image File Format) formats, and sufficiently high-resolution (minimum 300 dpi) for fully legible reproduction. Permission of the publisher and author for the use of reproductions of illustrations already published should be submitted.

10. Statistical Analysis: The authors must show that the statistical procedures employed were not only appropriate to test the hypotheses of the study but also correctly interpreted. Levels of statistical significance (for example: p <0.05; p <0.01; p <0.001) should be mentioned.

11. Abbreviations and Acronyms: These must be preceded by the full phrase at first mention. In the legends of tables and figures, they should be followed by the full phrase. When present in tables and figures, abbreviations and acronyms should be included with their meanings in subtitles. They should not be used in the title and abstract.

12. Units: values of physical quantities should be listed following the International System of Units patterns, available at:

13. ORCID: The author responsible for the submission must provide the ORCID of all authors. It is possible to create them at the time of manuscript submission (Open Researcher and Contributor ID).



Ethics and Statement of Good Practices in Publication



CEFAC Journal - Speech, Language, Hearing Sciences and Education Journal has adopted the " Guidelines on Best Practices for Strengthening Ethics in Scientific Publication" recommended by Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO)(1), which promote integrity and transparency in the dissemination and reproducibility of research.

Responsibilities and Duties of Editors, Referees, and Authors

CEFAC Journal complies with ethical standards and good practices and follows the COPE Code of Conduct available at The responsibilities and duties of Editors, Referees, and Authors can be accessed through the link.  Chief editors follow and indicate its detailed reading by associate editors, referees, and authors. After reading it, authors must complete Statement of responsability, which must be sent during the submission of the manuscript.

Declaration of Responsibilities and Duties of Editors, Referees and Authors(1-5)

Responsibilities and duties of editors:

  • Ensure the quality of the published material.
  • Defend freedom of expression.
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and excuses whenever necessary.
  • Guide the decision regarding the acceptance of articles on the importance, originality, clarity, and relevance of the study, not allowing commercial interests to interfere in this decision.
  • Publish guidelines for authors regarding the preparation and submission of the article and keep them regularly updated.
  • Publish guidelines for referees and keep them regularly updated.
  • Ensure the confidentiality of the identity of the referees.
  • Protect the confidentiality of the information contained in the articles throughout the review process.
  • Seek to meet the needs of readers and authors and respond promptly to complaints.
  • Ensure that published material complies with internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  • Take appropriate action if there is a suspicion of misconduct, whether in published, under analysis, or submitted manuscripts. In addition to the rejection of manuscripts for which there is a suspicion of misconduct, editors must ensure that an appropriate investigation is conducted and ensure the resolution of the problem.
  • Allow the authors of criticized articles to respond to criticisms.

Responsibilities and duties of referees:

  • Prepare a written, impartial, and constructive opinion about the article, as to the wording, relevance, originality, accuracy, and adequacy regarding the scope of the journal and interest to readers.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of the information in the article.
  • Meet the deadlines agreed with the editor and notify the editor immediately if it is not possible to accomplish the revision within the agreed period.
  • Report to the editor when feeling disqualified to review the article assigned.
  • Report to the editor ethical deviations related to the article, including suspected plagiarism.
  • Conduct reviews objectively, without personal judgment.
  • Consult the editor before agreeing to review an article where there are potential conflicts of interest and refuse to carry out the review in case of conflicts.

Responsibilities and duties of authors:

  • Describe the methodology of the article in a detailed, transparent, and precise manner.
  • Present the results accurately, without hiding or falsifying information.
  • Be prepared to provide public access to the research data on which your article is based.
  • Make sure that the work is original and does not contain plagiarism. If you have used the words or ideas of others, ensure that they have been properly cited.
  • Do not copy references from other publications if the cited work has not been read.
  • Obtain written permission from other authors and/or editors to reproduce previously published material and reference it appropriately.
  • Provide the complete list of references used to prepare the article.
  • Do not submit the same article or articles that describe essentially the same research to more than one journal.
  • Inform the editor if you have previously published the research data, even if only in part.
  • Ensure that co-authors meet the essential criteria of authorship.
  • Ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed with its submission for publication.
  • If the work involves the participation of subjects or humans, the author must ensure that the article contains a statement that all procedures have been carried out in compliance with laws and ethical guidelines and approved by the appropriate institutional committee(s).
  • Declare all potential conflicts of interest.
  • Declare all financial support received.
  • Respond to the referees’ comments professionally and within the agreed deadline and inform the editor if you want to remove the article from the review process.
  • Notify the editor immediately upon discovering a significant error or inaccuracy in your article, whether it has been submitted, is under analysis, or has already been published.
  • Cooperate with the editor if errors or omissions have been discovered in your article, providing all the material requested.
  • Provide retractions or corrections of errors detected in the article. 


Each of the authors of a scientific article assumes responsibility for the scientific quality of the work as a whole, as well as the professional, public, ethical and social responsibility of the publication.

Only researchers who have made direct and substantial intellectual contributions to the conception or conduct of the research, as well as those who have carried out its review and acceptance, thereby demonstrating responsibility for the content, are considered authors. It is also necessary to clearly present the contribution of each author at the end of the manuscript.

Authors should state all sources of material support related, directly or indirectly, to the research development and dissemination process.

Conflict of Interests

Authors should state whether the scientific work presents results of research carried out in a situation of conflict of interest, declaring clearly and prominently the existence of this conflict.

“There is a potential conflict of interest in situations where the coexistence of the interest that researchers must have in advancing science and interests of another nature, even if legitimate, can reasonably be perceived, by themselves or by others, as conflicting and harmful to the objectivity and impartiality of their scientific decisions, even regardless of their knowledge and will”(2).

Peer Review

All content published by CEFAC Journal is subject to peer review. Every referee appointed by CEFAC Journal to evaluate the scientific merit of the works sent for the review of the referred journal must do so with rigor, objectivity, impartiality, integrity and confidentiality, prioritizing constructive criticism and meeting the deadlines agreed with the journal.

“Scientific advisors must, before proceeding with an evaluation of scientific merit that has been requested, consider the possibility that carrying out this evaluation places them in a situation of potential conflict of interest. Unequivocal situations of potential conflict of interest will be considered,  among others, the following:

(a) The advisor participates, has participated or intends to participate in the development of a research project or proposal of activities submitted to his/her evaluation. (b) The advisor maintains or has maintained regular scientific collaboration, in research activities or publications, with any of the researchers responsible for the proposal submitted to his/her evaluation. (c) The advisor maintains or has maintained formal tutoring relationship (guidance or supervision) with any of the researchers responsible for the proposal submitted to his/her evaluation. (d) The advisor has commercial or financial interest in the development or not of the proposal submitted to his/her evaluation. (e) The advisor has a family relationship with one of the researchers responsible for the proposal submitted to his/her assessment. (f) Any kind of relationship that can be reasonably perceived as harmful with respect to the objectivity and impartiality of this evaluation, between the advisor and one of the researchers responsible for the proposal submitted to his/her evaluation”(2).


Scientific editors are responsible for the journal's editorial policy, ensuring that all necessary steps for the quality of published materials are followed, respecting the information obtained through peer review, and conducting the entire process with transparency.

They are responsible for analyzing whether works meet the scope of the journal, as well as the interest of readers, adopting the following flow: The works are received by the Chief Editor and sent to an Associate Editor, who will send it to at least two referees for evaluation.

The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript is the responsibility of the editors-in-chief of the CEFAC Journal, and the responsibility for the scientific quality of the work will also be shared with the editors, who will be considered co-responsible for the publication.

CEFAC Journal values the maintenance of good scientific practices and publication ethics. All articles, after initial technical evaluation, will be forwarded for similarity analysis using the Crossref Similarity Check by iThenticate plagiarism detector. It should be noted that plagiarism is a crime punishable by Brazilian law. Fraudulent information or plagiarism is not accepted. In the case of detection of plagiarism or self-plagiarism, the authors will be notified and the Journal will adopt the Retraction measures guided by SciELO(1). CEFAC Journal permanently adopts the policy of correction and quality of articles. Editors have a strong commitment to clarify, prevent, and correct any errors made by authors and even those made by their editors or resulting from the editing process. CEFAC Journal accepts comments and criticisms of published articles in a constructive, objective, and educational manner. The authors of criticized articles or those with any errors will be notified and will be afforded the opportunity to publish responses to comments, criticisms, and clarifications of errors. The editorial board is permanently guided by these guidelines, so that the editors’ conduct ensures ethics in publication.


1. SCIELO. Guia de boas práticas para o fortalecimento da ética na publicação científica, 2018 [viewed 05 April 2020]. Available from:
2. FAPESP. Código de boas práticas científicas, 2014 [viewed 05 April 2020]. Available from:
3. COPE - Committee on publication ethics, 2018 [viewed April 2020]. Available form:
4. CSE - Council of Science Editors, 2018 [viewed April 2020]. Available from:

5. WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM - Code of ethics for researchers, 2018 [viewed April 2020]. Available from:

ABRAMO Associação Brasileira de Motricidade Orofacial Rua Uruguaiana, 516, Cep 13026-001 Campinas SP Brasil, Tel.: +55 19 3254-0342 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil