Interdisciplinary Journal of Nursing and Health (eISSN 3103-537X) continues Infermieristica Journal (eISSN 2785-7018).

Guidelines for Reviewers

Guidelines for Reviewers

Contents

Initial Screening

All submissions to Interdisciplinary Journal of Nursing and Health (IJNH) undergo an initial technical screening by the Editorial Office. The journal operates a strict double-anonymous peer-review process. Authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the review process, and all identifying information is removed from manuscripts prior to review.

This process ensures that the manuscript:
a) is complete in all its required components;
b) is correctly anonymized for double-blind review;
c) does not contain plagiarized or improperly reused content.
All manuscripts are screened using Crossref Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate.

Editorial Assessment

Eligible submissions are assigned to the Editor-in-Chief, who assesses:

a) suitability for the journal’s aims, scope, and article section;
b) originality, scientific relevance, and methodological quality;
c) relevance and potential contribution to the journal’s readership.
Manuscripts not meeting these criteria may be promptly rejected. If deemed appropriate, the Editor-in-Chief sends the manuscript for peer review by assigning at least two independent reviewers.

Peer Review Process

The journal adopts a double-anonymous peer-review system: reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other; only the Editorial Manager and Editor-in-Chief can access their identities.
All research manuscripts are evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are not members of the journal’s editorial team. Author-suggested reviewers may be considered at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, provided that they are independent, appropriately qualified, and free from conflicts of interest.

Reviewers have 7 days to accept or decline the assignment and 2–4 weeks to return their evaluation. Review reports remain confidential. Editorials and correspondence may be reviewed at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Reviewer Selection and Verification

The journal verifies the identity, expertise, and institutional affiliation of all reviewers before assigning a manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, publication record, and academic credentials. Suggested reviewers provided by authors are subject to independent editorial evaluation and are not automatically selected. The journal does not rely exclusively on author-suggested reviewers.

General Principles and Ethics of Peer Review

  • The reviewer supports the Editor by evaluating the quality, originality, and scientific rigor of the manuscript.
  • Maintain objectivity, confidentiality, and declare any conflicts of interest.
  • Confidential comments to the Editor may be added when appropriate.
  • Do not accept a review assignment if the topic is outside your expertise or if a conflict of interest exists.

Before Starting the Review

  • Check IJNH’s author and reviewer guidelines (peer-review type, report structure, required format).
  • Decline the review if you do not have sufficient time to complete it adequately.
  • Do not use generative AI tools to produce or edit the review text. Reviewers must ensure that their reports are their own intellectual work and must not use external tools in a way that compromises confidentiality or the integrity of the review process. For full details regarding confidentiality, permitted uses, and reviewer responsibilities, please refer to the journal’s Artificial Intelligence Policy.

Criteria for Manuscript Evaluation

  • Scientific originality and relevance.
  • Methodological soundness and quality of reporting.
  • Adequacy of statistical analyses (if applicable).
  • Consistency between objectives, methods, results, and conclusions.
  • Completeness and currency of references.
  • Presence of ethical statements and proper handling of sensitive data.
  • For review papers: completeness of the literature search, transparency of methods, and balanced discussion.

Structure and Tone of the Review

  • Begin with a brief summary of the manuscript (aim, methods, main findings).
  • Clearly distinguish between major issues and minor issues.
  • Provide constructive, actionable comments to help authors improve the manuscript.
  • Maintain a professional, objective, and respectful tone.
  • Insert confidential comments to the Editor separately if needed.

Presentation and Reporting Quality

  • Assess clarity and quality of figures, tables, and supplementary files.
  • Verify that results and conclusions are presented transparently.
  • Request additional information when necessary (supplementary data, methodological details).

Timeline and Communication

  • Accept or decline the review invitation within the requested timeframe.
  • Inform the Editor promptly in case of delays.
  • Submit the review through the journal’s manuscript management system.

Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final editorial decision based on the reviewers’ reports, the authors’ responses and revisions, the methodological rigor of the manuscript, and its overall scientific contribution.

Possible editorial decisions include:

  • acceptance;
  • minor revision;
  • major revision;
  • resubmission for full review;
  • rejection.

Additional reviewers may be invited when necessary. Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial, financial, institutional, or other external interests.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must decline the invitation when a conflict could reasonably affect, or be perceived to affect, their impartiality. Any uncertainty must be disclosed to the Editor before accepting the assignment.

Ethical Considerations During Review

Reviewers should alert the Editor if they suspect:

  • plagiarism or overlap with existing publications;
  • data fabrication or manipulation;
  • ethical violations involving human subjects;
  • breaches of confidentiality.

Reviewers must not discuss the manuscript with colleagues or share its content in any form. Reviewers are expected to provide independent, objective, and evidence-based evaluations. Any attempt to manipulate the peer review process, including suggesting fabricated identities or misrepresenting expertise, is considered a serious breach of publication ethics.

Quality, Language, and Professional Conduct

Comments must remain polite, constructive, and evidence-based. Even in the case of rejection, reviewers should aim to help authors improve their research. While manuscripts should be understandable, the journal provides language editing for accepted papers.

Submission of Reviewer Comments

The review form includes:
A) text boxes for comments to authors and confidential notes to the Editor;
B) a rating card with five evaluation levels (Excellent → Unacceptable);
C) an optional file upload area;
D) a final recommendation dropdown:

  • Accept submission
  • Revision required
  • Resubmit for review
  • Resubmit elsewhere
  • Decline submission
Interdisciplinary Journal of Nursing and Health (eISSN: 3103-537X) continues Infermieristica Journal (eISSN 2785-7018).