Reviewers’ Guidelines

 Holistic Nursing Journal (HNJ)

Reviewers’ Guidelines

We appreciate the time, expertise, and professional commitment you dedicate to reviewing manuscripts for the Holistic Nursing Journal (HNJ). The peer review process is fundamental to maintaining the scientific quality, credibility, and integrity of the journal. Reviewers play a vital role in ensuring that the research published by the journal is scientifically sound, ethically conducted, and valuable to the field of holistic nursing.

The journal follows a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process.

1. General Principles

Confidentiality

The manuscript under review is a confidential document. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose its content to anyone outside the peer review process, nor use the information for personal or professional advantage before publication.

Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively, fairly, and constructively. Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript based on its scientific quality, methodological rigor, clarity, originality, and relevance to the field of holistic nursing.

Ethical Integrity

Reviewers are expected to adhere to the highest ethical standards. Any concerns regarding plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, unethical research practices, or other ethical issues should be reported promptly to the journal editor.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including financial, institutional, collaborative, or personal relationships that may influence the review process. In such cases, reviewers may decline or be excused from reviewing the manuscript.

Editorial Policy

Manuscripts should not be rejected solely based on lack of novelty, provided that the study is scientifically sound, methodologically rigorous, and ethically conducted.

2. Review Process

Reviewers are requested to assess manuscripts in a thorough, constructive, and timely manner. The review should address the following key areas:

A. Originality and Relevance

  • Does the manuscript present meaningful findings relevant to the field of holistic nursing?
  • Are the research objectives or questions clearly stated and aligned with the journal’s scope?
  • Does the study contribute useful scientific or clinical knowledge?

B. Methodology

  • Is the study design appropriate for research objectives?
  • Are the methods clearly described, including sampling, data collection, and data analysis procedures?
  • Are the methods scientifically rigorous and reproducible?
  • If applicable, does the study comply with ethical standards such as informed consent, Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, and participant privacy protection?

C. Results and Interpretation

  • Are the results presented clearly and logically?
  • Are statistical or analytical methods appropriately applied?
  • Do the conclusions logically follow from the results?
  • Are interpretations supported by evidence and relevant to the study objectives?

D. Clarity and Organization

  • Is the manuscript well-organized and clearly written?
  • Does the manuscript maintain a logical scientific flow?
  • Are tables and figures appropriate, properly labeled, and adequately discussed in the text?
  • Does the abstract accurately summarize the study aims, methods, results, and conclusions?

E. Contribution to the Field

  • Does the manuscript make a meaningful contribution to holistic nursing research or practice?
  • Are the practical implications clearly discussed?
  • Do the authors identify recommendations or future directions for research? 

F. References

  • Are the references current, relevant, and appropriate?
  • Have important references or landmark studies been overlooked?
  • Are references formatted according to the journal guidelines? 

3. Providing Feedback

Constructive Comments

Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive, specific, and actionable comments that may help authors improve the quality of their manuscript.

Professional Tone

Comments should be written respectfully and professionally. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Confidential Comments to the Editor

Reviewers may provide confidential comments to the editor when necessary, particularly regarding ethical concerns, publication suitability, or major scientific issues.

4. Review Decision

Based on the overall assessment, reviewers are requested to recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept as Submitted
    The manuscript is suitable for publication without revision.
  • Minor Revisions
    The manuscript requires small modifications before acceptance.
  • Major Revisions
    Significant revisions are required, and the revised manuscript should undergo further evaluation.
  • Reject
    The manuscript does not meet the scientific, ethical, or methodological standards required for publication.

5. Plagiarism and Research Misconduct

All manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using similarity detection software. Reviewers should report any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, manipulated images, or unethical research practices to the editor immediately.

6. AI-Assisted Content Policy

Reviewers should report any suspected inappropriate use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, including AI-generated scientific content, fabricated data, manipulated images, or undisclosed AI assistance that may compromise the integrity of the manuscript.

7. Timeliness

Reviewers are requested to submit their reviews within the timeframe specified by the editorial office. If reviewers are unable to complete the review within the requested timeframe, they should inform the editorial office promptly.

8. Reviewer Recognition

Acknowledgment

The journal values the important contributions of reviewers. Reviewer names may be acknowledged annually by the journal as recognition of their academic service.

Certificates and Recognition

Reviewers may receive certificates of appreciation or additional recognition based on their contribution and reviewing activity.

Final Statement

The editorial team of the Holistic Nursing Journal (HNJ) sincerely appreciates the expertise, integrity, and commitment of its reviewers. Through rigorous and ethical peer review, reviewers contribute significantly to advancing holistic nursing knowledge, research quality, and evidence-based practice.