Peer Review Process/ Policy

Journal of Applied Nursing and Health (JANH) in the publication of the author's article through a fast and precise publication process through an initial assessment by the editor and the editorial team. The goal is to decide whether the submitted manuscript can be peer-reviewed or rejected for the right reasons.

The Chief Editor decides to publish the manuscript based on the assessment of the editorial team and/or peer review. A committee of editors and members of the reviewer team assesses manuscripts. Its purpose is to decide whether the manuscript will continue to be sent to peer reviewers and provide a quick decision for evaluation or assessment. Acceptance of manuscripts is based on novelty or relevance to scope at JANH.

If there is a condition, a manuscript is returned to the author with a request for manuscript improvement to make it easier for editors and reviewers to decide whether the manuscript can be reviewed. The decision-making process includes:

  • Initial Editorial Assessment: The Journal Applied of Nursing and Health (JANH) conducts an initial assessment by the editorial committee and editors consisting of editorial team members to decide whether the submitted manuscript will be submitted for peer review. The primary purpose is to decide whether to send the paper for peer review or to reject it. The main point is scope, originality, compliance with the guideline, and language. Sometimes a paper will be returned to the author with a request for revisions to help editors decide whether to send it out for reviews. Authors may expect the decision of the Initial Editorial Assessment from this stage of the review process will be given approximately 3 weeks after submission.
  • Review Process: Manuscripts that pass the initial Editorial Assessment through a minimum of two reviewers based on their expertise with a double-blind review process, which means the authors and peer-reviewers do not know each other’s identity. The review process is approximately 3 weeks from review to completion of one stage of the review process. If there is a difference in indecision between the two reviewers, the editor will seek the consideration of a third reviewer. The reviewers should complete the review within three weeks in each reviewing round after the review request was sent.
  • Editor's Decision: The decision to accept for publication is based on the peer reviewer's recommendations, based on which two acceptance recommendations are required. If there is a difference between the two reviewers’ recommendations, the editor has the right to seek the third reviewer's consideration. The final decision to publish is made by the editor-in-chief and editorial committee (national or international advisory board), considering the reviewers' advice. The final decision of the manuscript (accepted, accepted with minor revision, accepted with major revision, rejected or re-submit) is made by Editor in Chief (together with Editorial Board if required) based on the reviewers’ critical comments. The editor’s decision is final. The decision will be given approximately 3 weeks after the review.
  • Final Report:  final report of the decision on whether to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the reviewers that may include verbatim comments.