Introduction
These guidelines are designed to help reviewers conduct a thorough, objective, and constructive review of manuscripts submitted to the Zarqa International Journal of Nursing Research (ZIJNR). Reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript's quality, clarity, originality, and relevance to the field of nursing research.
General Responsibilities of Reviewers
• Maintain confidentiality and avoid discussing the manuscript with others except with the journal editor's permission.
• Disclose any conflicts of interest to the editor immediately.
• Complete reviews within the specified timeframe (typically two weeks) unless an extension is requested and approved.
• Provide constructive, respectful, and unbiased feedback focused on improving the manuscript.
Manuscript Evaluation Criteria
• Title and Abstract: Evaluate whether the title is clear, concise, and reflective of the content. Does the abstract provide an accurate summary of the study?
• Introduction: Assess if the introduction clearly states the research problem, objectives, and significance. Are relevant and recent references cited?
• Methodology: Examine if the research design, sampling methods, data collection tools, and ethical considerations are clearly described and appropriately applied.
• Results: Evaluate if the results are presented logically, with clear tables, figures, and appropriate statistical analysis.
• Discussion: Determine if the discussion effectively interprets the results, addresses limitations, and compares findings with existing literature.
• Conclusion and Recommendations: Review whether the conclusions are justified by the results, and if recommendations are practical and relevant.
• References: Ensure that references are current, relevant, and correctly formatted according to the journal’s style.
Comments for the Authors
The reviewer's report (Comments for the Authors) is essential to the editorial process. Use the following format to provide clear and consistent feedback:
• Significance: Is the research question or problem important? Are the aims/hypotheses clearly stated?
• Originality: Is the study novel and likely to add to existing knowledge?
• Title and Abstract: Are they accurate and reflective of the manuscript content?
• Approach/Methods: Are the methods clearly described, and do they fit the research question? Are validity and reliability addressed?
• Analysis: Are statistical methods appropriate? Are assumptions (e.g., normality, independence) met?
• Results: Are they presented clearly, with appropriate use of tables/figures?
• Context and Discussion: Are results compared with existing literature? Are limitations discussed?
• Conclusion: Are conclusions supported by results? Do they align with the study aims?
• References: Are they accurate, relevant, and up to date?
Confidential Comments to the Editors
• Provide any additional confidential comments for the editors.
• Do not repeat comments already shared with the authors.
Reviewer Feedback Submission
• Submit feedback through the online manuscript review system.
• Provide clear, detailed, and constructive feedback in a respectful tone.
• Focus on enhancing the manuscript quality rather than criticizing the authors.
Review Decision Categories
• Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication with minimal or no revisions.
• Minor Revision: Requires minor improvements but is generally sound.
• Major Revision: Needs substantial changes and should be re-reviewed.
• Reject: Not suitable for publication.
Contact Information
For any questions or issues regarding the review process, please contact the editorial office at ZIJNR (insert contact details here).
