Double-Blind Peer Review

Java Nursing Journal (JNJ) implements a rigorous double-blind peer-review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another throughout the process. Submissions that pass editorial screening are sent to at least two independent experts (or qualified external reviewers) to assess scientific quality and relevance. The Managing Editor and Editor-in-Chief make the final decision on acceptance or rejection.

To mitigate delays, the Managing Editor may invite editorial board members to review a manuscript. Authors may also be asked to suggest potential reviewers or, if necessary, may withdraw the submission. Letters to the editor and editorials are not peer-reviewed, as specified in the journal’s editorial process and section policies.

For double-blind review, authors must submit the following as separate files:

• Title page (with author details): article title; full author names and affiliations (with email addresses), and the complete correspondence address, acknowledgments, conflict of interest statement, funding,  data availability, and authors' contributions.
• Main Document (no author identifiers): the anonymous main document includes: introduction, methods, results, limitations, implications for nursing and health care, conclusion, and references.
• Table and Figure: Please include all tables and figures, each with its legend, within the main manuscript (A maximum of seven (7) figures and table in total is permitted)
• Supplementary materials: subject to peer review when provided.

Peer-Review Process

Invited reviewers receive an email containing response links to accept or decline the invitation. Upon acceptance, reviewers can access the manuscript and complete the Manuscript Review Form, which allows structured and free-form comments.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and professional evaluations, considering originality, methodological rigor, contribution to current knowledge, scientific content, and clarity of expression. Inappropriate or offensive language is not permitted.

While reviewers provide recommendations, the final editorial decision rests with the Managing Editor and Editor-in-Chief. Possible outcomes include:

• Accept Submission: suitable for publication and proceeds to copyediting.
• Revisions Required: minor changes that can be verified by the editor.
• Resubmit for Review: major revisions necessitating another review round.
• Resubmit Elsewhere: out of scope and better suited to another venue.
• Decline/Reject Submission: substantial weaknesses preclude publication.