Peer Review Process

Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Science (IJNMS) is committed to upholding the highest standards of peer review and publication ethics. All manuscripts submitted to IJNMS undergo a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process to ensure academic quality, novelty, and scientific integrity.

1. Initial Desk Review Upon submission, every manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the Managing Editor or Editor-in-Chief to assess:

  • Compliance with the journal's scope, template, and formatting guidelines.

  • Plagiarism level (screened using Turnitin / Plagiarism Checker; maximum similarity index allowed is 20%).

  • Overall scientific quality, relevance, and originality.

Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum requirements, fall outside the scope, or exhibit high similarity indices will be rejected immediately (Desk Reject) without external review.

2. Review Method IJNMS implements a Double-Blind Peer Review process. In this process:

  • The identity of both the authors and the reviewers is kept confidential throughout the review.

  • Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are completely anonymized prior to submission.

3. Reviewer Assignment & Timeline

  • Each manuscript is independently evaluated by at least two expert peer reviewers in the relevant field of nursing or midwifery.

  • Reviewers are given 2 to 4 weeks to complete their evaluation and provide detailed feedback via the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

4. Review Criteria Reviewers evaluate submissions based on the following key aspects:

  • Originality, relevance, and contribution to nursing and midwifery science.

  • Soundness of methodology and research design.

  • Ethical considerations (e.g., ethical approval, informed consent).

  • Accuracy and clarity of data presentation and statistical analysis.

  • Logical flow, structure, and quality of English language/writing.

  • Relevance and recency of references (preferably primary sources within the last 5–10 years).

5. Editorial Decisions Based on the reports and recommendations of the peer reviewers, the Section Editor / Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following final decisions:

  • Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted as is, without any further changes required.

  • Revisions Required: The manuscript is acceptable subject to minor corrections as suggested by the reviewers. Authors are typically given 1–2 weeks to submit the revised manuscript and a point-by-point response.

  • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and restructuring. The revised draft will undergo a second round of peer review (usually by the same reviewers) before a decision can be made.

  • Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to significant scientific flaws, lack of novelty, or failure to address review comments adequately.

6. Final Decision & Confidentiality

  • The Editor-in-Chief holds the ultimate authority for the final decision regarding publication.

  • All manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence are treated with strict confidentiality.