Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Innovation follows a single-blind peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, scientifically rigorous, and original research. In this process, the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers, but the reviewers' identities are known to the authors.

Step-by-Step Peer Review Process:

  1. Initial Submission and Screening:

    • Upon submission, all manuscripts are first screened by the editorial team to ensure they align with the journal’s scope and meet basic formatting and quality standards.

    • Manuscripts that do not meet these initial criteria may be returned to authors for revision or rejected outright.

  2. Assignment of Reviewers:

    • Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to two independent reviewers who have expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript.

    • Reviewers are selected based on their academic background, research experience, and familiarity with the manuscript's topic.

    • If necessary, additional reviewers may be consulted to provide additional expertise on specialized areas.

  3. Single-Blind Review:

    • In the single-blind peer review process, the reviewers know the identities of the authors, but the authors are unaware of the reviewers' identities. This allows reviewers to evaluate the manuscript based on its content rather than the authors' reputations or affiliations.

    • Reviewers are asked to provide objective and constructive feedback on the manuscript’s quality, originality, clarity, methodology, and relevance to the field of nursing and midwifery.

  4. Reviewer Feedback:

    • Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several key criteria, including:

      • Originality and significance of the research

      • Clarity and structure of the manuscript

      • Soundness and rigor of the methodology

      • Relevance to the field of nursing and midwifery practice

      • Ethical considerations and compliance with research standards

    • Reviewers then make one of the following recommendations:

      • Accept (no or minor revisions required)

      • Minor revisions required

      • Major revisions required

      • Reject (due to poor quality or lack of originality)

  5. Editorial Decision:

    • Based on the reviewers' feedback, the editor-in-chief or managing editor will make a final decision on the manuscript. Authors will be notified of the decision, along with any comments or suggestions from the reviewers.

    • If revisions are requested, authors must address the reviewers' comments and resubmit the revised manuscript. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

  6. Revisions and Final Acceptance:

    • Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewers' comments and submit the revised version, along with a point-by-point response addressing the feedback.

    • After the manuscript meets the journal's standards and the revisions have been adequately addressed, it will be accepted for publication.

  7. Publication:

    • Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes final editorial and technical checks, including formatting, reference validation, and proofreading.

    • The article is then published online and made freely accessible as part of the journal’s open-access policy.

Reviewer Responsibilities:

  • Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within [X] weeks. If they are unable to review within the designated time frame, they should inform the editor promptly.

  • Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide clear, objective, and constructive feedback to help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts.

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat the manuscript as confidential and must not share it with others or use it for personal advantage.

  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest (financial, personal, or professional) and recuse themselves from reviewing a manuscript if such a conflict exists.

Author Responsibilities:

  • Originality and Integrity: Authors are expected to submit original research that has not been published elsewhere and is free of plagiarism. All sources and data should be properly referenced.

  • Ethical Compliance: Authors must ensure that their research follows ethical guidelines, particularly when involving human subjects or animals, and provide necessary ethical approval documentation.

  • Revision Process: Authors should respond to reviewers’ comments in a professional and thorough manner, making necessary revisions and submitting the updated manuscript in a timely fashion.

  • Transparency: Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest, funding sources, or affiliations that could influence the research.