Authors

  1. Fulton, Janet S. PhD, RN, ACNS-BC, FAAN

Article Content

It's a great feeling of accomplishment to submit a manuscript and an even better feeling when that accepted-for-publication notice arrives weeks later! What happens in the time between submission and acceptance is the review process where an editor sends the manuscript to experts for review and critique. Reviews are critical in journal publication, although reviewers are frequently underappreciated and disparaged in absentia by authors denied. Reviewers are trusted advisors to the editor and essential for scholarly publications. In this, the 25th anniversary of Clinical Nurse Specialist: The Journal for Advanced Nursing Practice, it's timely to reflect on the contributions of reviewers.

 

Peer review is a hallmark of scholarship. Peer review is the process whereby knowledgeable colleagues in a designated area of inquiry judge the merits of academic or clinical work. Scholarly journals use peer review to ensure the problem is significant, the methods are rigorous, and conclusions are logical and scientifically grounded. Reviewers do not need to agree with the author, but they do need to be convinced of the importance of the topic and that conclusions drawn by the author are sound and based on the data or evidence provided. Peer review helps ensure that the best of cutting-edge ideas and innovations are put forth. Peer review contributes to building consensus for the purpose of expanding understanding and creating new information. Peer review is what makes scholarly publications scholarly.

 

Who are the reviewers? Reviewers are volunteers. They are expert scientists, researchers, and clinicians who donate time to review manuscripts for the advancement of science and practice. The job of the editorial office is to match reviewer expertise with manuscripts topics. The Table lists the expert content areas for this journal. Reviewers can log into Editorial Manager, the journal's Web-based manuscript program, at any time and update their individual expertise profile. During the manuscript submission process, authors are given the option of suggesting the expert content areas that are a match to the manuscript.

  
Table. Reviewer Area... - Click to enlarge in new windowTable. Reviewer Areas of Expertise

What do reviewers do? Reviewers critique a manuscript and make recommendations to the editor. For this journal, reviewers are asked to make 1 of 5 possible recommendations: publish as is, publish with minor revisions, resubmit for a second review, reject, or refer to another journal.

 

What parameters do reviewers use in conducting a review? Reviewers are given a list of items to specifically address in the review. The Figure lists the review parameters used by this journal. Reviewers may add comments about any other element of the manuscript.

  
FIGURE. Parameters f... - Click to enlarge in new windowFIGURE. Parameters for manuscript reviews.

What is blind review? Blind review typically means that a reviewer does not know the identity of an author and an author does not know the identity of the reviewer. The double-blind review procedure has been the norm in peer review of many years, although lately it has come into question with journals, such as Nursing Research, experimenting with more open reviews. Currently, this journal maintains a double-blind review process.

 

Who sees the review? A reviewer submits confidential feedback directly to the editor, but is offered the opportunity to submit feedback to the author. Reviewers typically elect to share feedback with authors when the topic is important and the reviewer is recommending the manuscript be revised and resubmitted. When revising a manuscript, it is not required that authors incorporate any of a reviewer's suggestions, but it is imperative that the author consider the feedback. Reviewer feedback is an opportunity for an author to view the manuscript through the eyes of an expert in the field.

 

What reviewers donotdo. Reviewers do not correct grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors. Reviewers may note that a manuscript has multiple errors, but a reviewer is not asked to make tedious line-by-line corrections. Minor errors will be picked up by the copyeditor. Gennaro1 cautions reviewers with excellent skills in grammar, punctuation, and spelling to not spend time correcting writing errors in a manuscript. Reviewers do not reorganize content, rewrite paragraphs, revise tables, correct errors in calculations, or fix citation errors. Multiple errors in the mechanics of writing and reporting are distracting and likely obscure the author's intended message. A reviewer may recommend rejection because of writing even when the topic is important and timely. A reviewer's focus is on scientific or clinical merit.

 

Why praise for reviewers? Reviewers give generously of their time and talent. A thoughtful and thorough review can take several hours to complete. Every published manuscript has been reviewed by a minimum of 2 and usually 3 reviewers. There is no monetary compensation for serving as a peer reviewer. Reviewers are otherwise employed with associated job responsibilities. They make time to donate their intellect to the advancement of knowledge by participating in the peer-review process. Where peer review is a hallmark of scholarship, peer reviewers are the bedrock. To each reviewer, let us sing our praise. Thank you one and all!

 

Reference

 

1. Gennaro S. If you can differentiate your apostrophe from your elbow, should you? J Nurs Scholarsh. 2011;43(2):105-106. [Context Link]