Peer Review Process

The Nursing Case Insight Journal applies a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and scientific contribution of every submitted manuscript.

1. Initial screening

  • Upon submission, each manuscript is reviewed by the editorial office to check compliance with the journal’s scope, author guidelines, plagiarism policy, and ethical standards.

  • Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements will be returned to authors for revision or rejected without external review.

2. Double-blind peer review

  • Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent peer reviewers with relevant expertise in nursing or healthcare.

  • Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process (double-blind).

  • Reviewers are selected based on subject expertise, previous publications, and absence of conflicts of interest.

3. Review criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope and contribution to nursing knowledge

  • Originality, clarity, and accuracy of the case or study

  • Adequacy of methodology and ethical considerations

  • Quality of discussion, literature review, and implications for nursing practice

  • Proper referencing (APA 7th edition) and adherence to formatting guidelines

4. Editorial decision

After receiving reviewer feedback, the Editor-in-Chief will make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept (with or without minor revisions)

  • Revise and resubmit (major revisions required before further consideration)

  • Reject (unsuitable for publication)

5. Revision process

  • Authors are given sufficient time to revise manuscripts based on reviewer comments.

  • Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the same or additional reviewers if necessary.

6. Final decision and publication

  • The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, based on recommendations from reviewers and the editorial board.

  • Accepted manuscripts will proceed to copyediting, layout, and proofing before online publication.

7. Ethical responsibilities of reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback

  • Maintain strict confidentiality of all reviewed materials

  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest

  • Identify possible plagiarism, duplicate publication, or ethical concerns