Double-Blind Review And Evaluation Process - Journal of Education and Research in Nursing
Double-Blind Review And Evaluation Process
The decision to publish all articles submitted to the journal belongs to the editor in chief. However, editors shape these decisions in line with the reviewers' recommendations.
The double blind review process is the process of evaluating the work completely anonymously. In this system, only the editor knows each stage. In this system authors do not know who the reviewer is, and the reviewers do not know whose work they are evaluating. Thus, biased evaluation of the work by the reviewers is prevented. In addition, since the author does not know the reviewers, he/she can not possibly get contact with the reviewer, and influence him/her through ‘special routes’. From this point of view, the double- blind review process is thought to provide objective evaluation and increase the equal opportunity.
For these reasons, all studies submitted to Journal of Education and Research in Nursing are subject to double-blind review. At least two reviewers expert in their fields, will evaluate each submitted work. Every effort is spent by the editors for quick evaluation of the articles. The editor is the final decision-making authority in the evaluation processes of all articles.
The journal secretary examines the work at the beginning. The secretary checks whether the article file is fully and correctly uploaded. If there are missing files, the secretary redirects to the author, if not sends the file to the editor.
Preliminary Evaluation Process
The editor examines the originality and actuality of the article in terms of its suitability for the purpose and scope of the journal. In this preliminary evaluation process; the editor examines the work in terms of both scientific conformity (abstract, introduction, methods, findings, discussion and conclusions) and formal conformity. As a result of this examination, if it is found a candidate to be published in the journal, but the revision was considered necessary, the editor would send it back to the author (In this case, the process will return to the beginning), and if the revision is not considered necessary, three referees would be invited from the database according to the field of interest. If the editor does not find a candidate for publication in the journal, he / she returns it to the author.
Reviewers’ Evaluation Process
The reviewers evaluate the article and send their opinions and suggest revision if necessary.
If a revision is requested, the editor sends this request to the author (in this case the process returns to the beginning). If no revision is required, the editor sends the acceptance letter to the author after the last check. If the reviewers do not find the article as a candidate for publication in the journal, the editor submits the letter of refusal to the author by adding his / her own opinions (explaining the reason).
Reports of the Reviewers
The reviewers evaluate the objective, material / method, results and discussion sections of the study, and its conformity to scientific principles. The work may be accepted directly, its revision may be requested or rejected. If correction in the manuscript is required, the suggestions coming from the reviewers are communicated to the authors and the authors are asked to revise their work.The results of correction coming from the authors are reexamined by the reviewers and their decisions are reported to the editor. In case of disagreement between the assigned reviewers, the manuscript is sent to a designated third reviewer.
Manuscripts deemed appropriate for publication by the reviewers are sent to the statistical editor. Articles that are approved by the statistical editor are accepted for publication.
Publication Printing Process
Clinical studies or experimental research articles accepted for publication are usually published between 6-12 months. Case presentations and review articles can wait 12-24 months according to the intensity.