Reviewer Guidelines
Instructions for Manuscript Reviewers
Rehabilitation Nursing uses a blind review process to maintain anonymity of the author. Reviewer comments are compiled by the editor and shared as a summary, rather than shared directly with the authors.
1. The manuscript should be evaluated for overall quality using the following criteria:
• relevance-to rehabilitation nursing practice and to readers;
• originality-builds on existing literature; is new to RNJ; serves as an update or review;
• writing style-format and language appropriate to a scientific journal and RNJ format;
• organization-thoughts are logically developed, follow well, and are clearly expressed;
• accuracy-information is current and specific, rather than vague or superficial; correctly reflects current practice and scholarship; includes appropriate and correct references; and
• completeness-addresses all important aspects of a topic and/or the stated goals of the article and provides complete references.
2. Specific aspects to be evaluated include:
• abstract-should reflect content, be in active voice, and have a length of 150 words or less;
• introduction-should address purpose and scope of the manuscript as well as catch readers' interest;
• summary-should reflect content; usually one page or less;
• references-should be current (within the last 5 years unless of historical significance), complete, and in proper format (APA, 5th edition); primary references are preferred;
• nursing implications-should be clearly stated and acceptable to current nursing practice; and
• tables/figures-if present, should contribute to understanding of the manuscript and enhance appearance; should be appropriately cited in manuscript. If not present, would addition of such enhance the manuscript?
3. For research papers, the following criteria should be evaluated:
• Is the study design valid, and methods appropriate?
• Has the study been approved by an ethical review committee?
• Are methods described in sufficient detail?
• Are statistical methods appropriate, valid, and reported in sufficient detail (including such descriptive statistics as mean, standard deviation, etc.?
• Are the results presented in a clear and understandable manner?
• Are the results credible, and calculations correct?
• Do tables, text, and figures agree with and complement, rather than duplicate, each other? Are all the tables and figures even necessary, or could the information be presented in another form?
• Are results presented in the manuscript prior to mention in the discussion?
• Are all conclusions supported by the results?
• Does the manuscript address the significance of the findings to rehabilitation practice?
4. Make recommendations for disposition of the manuscript. If you believe revisions are necessary, state specifically those you think are essential.
The manuscript review form should be completed to indicate your recommendations regarding the publication of the manuscript (accept, accept if revised, revise and resubmit, do not accept and low or high priority for publication). Please use the review form for your typed comments. Typed comments regarding the quality and content of the manuscript are recommended. Detailed comments are highly encouraged. If you wish to type comments directly on the manuscript, please transfer them to the space provided at the end of the review form. Keep in mind that reviewers' comments are not edited at all before they are sent to the author, so be sensitive to authors' reactions to your comments.
|
