Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Ilmiah Mappadising (JIM) undergo initial editorial screening before entering the peer-review process. This screening evaluates the manuscript's relevance to the journal's focus and scope, originality, scientific quality, ethical compliance, and adherence to the journal's submission requirements.

Manuscripts considered suitable for further evaluation are assigned to reviewers with relevant expertise in nursing or the specific subject of the study. Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, research design, methodological quality, accuracy of reporting, clarity, and contribution to nursing knowledge, practice, or services.

Editorial Process

  1. Manuscript Submission: Authors submit their manuscript and complete the required metadata through the journal's online submission system.
  2. Initial Editorial Screening: The editor checks the manuscript's suitability for the journal, completeness, and compliance with the author guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned for correction or rejected.
  3. Similarity and Integrity Checking: The manuscript is checked for textual similarity and potential integrity concerns. Similarity findings are assessed in context and are not used as the sole basis for an editorial decision.
  4. Reviewer Assignment: Suitable manuscripts are assigned to reviewers with relevant expertise who can provide an impartial assessment and have no conflicts of interest that would compromise their review.
  5. Peer-Review Evaluation: Reviewers evaluate the research question, methods, findings, interpretation, ethical reporting, and contribution of the manuscript, and provide comments and recommendations.
  6. Editorial Assessment: The editor considers the reviewer reports and determines whether the manuscript requires revision, further evaluation, acceptance, or rejection.
  7. Author Revision: When revisions are requested, authors submit a revised manuscript and a response explaining how each comment has been addressed. Any disagreement should be supported by a clear explanation.
  8. Further Evaluation: Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers or assessed by the editor, depending on the nature and extent of the changes.
  9. Final Editorial Decision: The responsible editor makes the final decision based on the manuscript's quality, reviewer recommendations, ethical considerations, and compliance with the journal's policies.
  10. Production and Publication: Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout preparation, author proof checking, and publication.

Editorial Decisions

  • Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication and may proceed to production.
  • Minor Revision: Limited changes are required before the manuscript can be reconsidered.
  • Major Revision: Substantial changes are required, and the revised manuscript may undergo further peer review.
  • Reject: The manuscript is unsuitable for publication because of scope, scientific quality, methodological limitations, ethical concerns, or other substantive reasons.

A request for revision does not guarantee acceptance. Reviewer recommendations inform the editorial decision, but the final responsibility for that decision rests with the responsible editor.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts and review materials as confidential. Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest and decline assignments when they cannot provide an impartial assessment. Unpublished information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage.

An editor with a conflict of interest concerning a manuscript must not participate in its evaluation or decision-making. The manuscript should be handled by another editor who can assess it independently.

Authors should consult the Author Guidelines before submitting a manuscript.