Peer Review Policy
The Journal of Integrative Nursing and Palliative Care employs a rigorous double-blind peer review system, ensuring that neither the authors nor the peer reviewers know each other's identities. This multi-stage process maintains the objectivity, integrity, and scientific quality of all published work.
All submitted manuscripts must be original, must not be under consideration elsewhere, and must not have been previously published. The journal utilizes a secure digital submission, review, and production system.
The Review Process Stages
|
Stage |
Description |
Key Focus and Responsibility |
|
1. Initial Editorial Pre-Check |
Immediately upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) or a designated Associate Editor conducts a preliminary assessment. |
Focus is on alignment with the journal’s scope, adherence to ethical research standards (e.g., ethical approvals, informed consent), and initial screening for plagiarism. Noncompliant submissions are subject to immediate Desk Rejection. |
|
2. Subject Expert Assignment & Reviewer Selection |
Manuscripts that pass the pre-check are assigned to a qualified Associate Editor (or International Editor) who acts as the subject expert for that submission. This editor conducts a detailed internal quality check on the methodology and scientific premise. |
The Associate Editor verifies the manuscript's suitability and is responsible for selecting and inviting at least two independent external expert reviewers whose expertise closely matches the manuscript’s topic. |
|
3. External Peer Review |
At least two qualified external reviewers independently assess the manuscript based on scientific quality, methodological rigor, novelty of findings, and clarity of presentation. |
Reviewer reports and recommendations are submitted to the Associate Editor and the EIC. Reviewer and author identities remain strictly blinded throughout this stage. |
|
4. Final Decision-Making |
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision, considering the recommendation of the assigned Associate Editor and the comprehensive reports received from the external reviewers. |
At least two favorable expert reviews are required for acceptance. If reviewer recommendations conflict (e.g., one recommend accept, one recommend reject), a third qualified expert reviewer is consulted to resolve the conflict. Decisions based on a single review are only made in rare, exceptional cases where obtaining a second qualified reviewer is impossible (in less than 5% of all reviewed cases), and must be fully documented and justified by the EIC. |
Editorial Decisions and Revision
- Accept after Minor Revisions: Authors must address all reviewer comments within the specified timeframe.
- Reconsider after Major Revisions: Authors must submit point-by-point responses to all reviewer comments. Generally, up to two rounds of substantial revision are permitted.
- Reject and Encourage Resubmission: Manuscripts requiring major additional experiments or extensive data collection are rejected with an invitation to resubmit as a new manuscript once the work is completed.
- Reject: Manuscripts with serious scientific flaws, significant ethical breaches, or a lack of original contribution are rejected without the possibility of resubmission.
All reviewer comments must be addressed point-by-point. Authors must clearly justify any disagreements with the reviewers' critiques in their response letter.
Review Duration and Complaints Policy
- Duration: The review process typically spans 2–3 months, depending on reviewer responsiveness and the complexity of the manuscript.
- Complaints Policy: The journal strives to resolve all complaints fairly and constructively. Authors may appeal editorial decisions by contacting the Editor-in-Chief. Complaints regarding policies, procedures, or editorial conduct are acknowledged within six working days, and updates are provided every two weeks until a final resolution is reached. The Editor-in-Chief’s decision on complaints is final.
- Becoming a Reviewer: Qualified experts interested in serving as a peer reviewer may contact the editorial [email protected]
