Processes for Manuscripts

Receipt of Manuscripts

When the Editor in Chief (EIC) receives a manuscript it is assessed for compliance with journal standards, such as referencing style, and suitability of content. There are also some specific formats such as research reports, which should conform to uniform requirements.

If a manuscript is lacking in any of these style or content requirements it is returned to the author with explanations. Manuscripts conforming to style and of suitable content are forwarded to the Associate Editors (AEs) for peer review. A letter is sent to the author by the EIC acknowledging receipt of manuscript.

Papers which do not meet the requirements included in “Instructions for Authors” , which do not contain the declarations listed, and for which no copyright form signed by all the authors will not be sent to the AEs for peer review.

Please see Specific Instructions for Authors

Confirmation of Submission

Once you have submitted your manuscript, you will receive an email from the editorial team to confirm its receipt. If you do not receive this confirmation after 24 hours, please check your email address in our system. If the email address is correct please contact your IT department, as an error may be caused by spam filtering software on your server.

Review Process

All manuscripts are accessed by the EIC via the Cambridge website. The EIC maintains a log of all manuscripts received, and their eventual outcome. Sending for peer review is contingent on the author/s signing a transfer of copyright/order of authors/authenticity of work form.

If this has not already been sent by the corresponding author (guarantor), this form shall be sent once the manuscript is received by the EIC, with the acknowledgment of receipt of manuscript.

Upon receiving a manuscript, the AE sends the de-indentified manuscript to two reviewers. A deadline for the review is four weeks from the date the reviewer received the manuscript.

Should the EIC be an author or co-author of a paper, one of the AEs will manage the review process, and similar processes will occur for an AE.

Blinded Review

We will send all manuscripts submitted to NPCHN to at least two experts in the field for double-blinded review. The names of the reviewers will not be disclosed to the author submitting a paper and the name(s) of the author(s) will not be disclosed to the reviewers.
To allow for this, please submit (upload) your main manuscript and title page as separate files. Please upload:
All documents uploaded under the file designation "title page" will not be viewable to any but the editorial team.

When the reviews are returned, the AE then:

Notes the recommendations of the reviewer on the Comments to editor box on the publisher’s website and makes recommendations to the author based on these and the AE’s own opinion. www.cambridgemedia.com.au
Sends, via the publisher’s website, the Comments to author and annotated manuscripts to the author/s
Two months are specified for the return of amended manuscripts.
The publisher’s system will automatically send a copy of each peer reviewer’s reviews to the other reviewer to provide confidential feedback. The AE maintains a copy of all reviews until the paper is published or the author/s have indicated in writing that they intend to withdraw the manuscript. The AE advises author/s during the rewriting period. Once rewritten to journal standard, the revised manuscript is submitted in electronic form to the AE for the second stage, during which the EIC prepares it for publication by the publishers. If an amended manuscript is not returned within six months, the EIC contacts the author and advises that the manuscript will be considered for publication for a further six months only.

Assessment of Manuscripts

The following is a guide for the editors and peer reviewers when assessing manuscripts.

General:

The topic of the paper is appropriate for NPCHN readers.
The paper makes a significant contribution to nursing knowledge.
The purpose of the paper is stated.
The information is presented in logical order.
There is evidence of knowledge of the subject.
The literature has been well reviewed, both past and current, with landmark papers included.
Arguments/statements are supported appropriately by the literature.
Relevance/importance of subject presented clearly.
Implications for clinical practice are stated.
Consideration given to more than one point of view, and the paper is well rounded.
Information is not repeated unnecessarily, and is presented concisely.
The paper concludes with a summary of the main points.
The abstract (250 words) reflects the content of the paper.

Literature reviews:

The review is comprehensive.
Review contains critical evaluation.
Recommendations given.
Literature representative of last 10 years.
Clear implications/link for practice.
Clear review history/process.

Research reports:

Title appropriately presents the concept of the paper.
There is a clear statement of the problem, hypothesis or research question, with description of theoretical framework where appropriate.
The relevant literature has been surveyed with emphasis on papers that are closely associated with the research.
The method is presented clearly and in sufficient detail for replication.
Ethics approval was given prior to study (where appropriate).
Design of the study is appropriate.
Evidence of the reliability and validity of research tools is given.
Results are presented clearly, with use of figures /tables where appropriate, missing data noted.
Comparison with results of other researchers has been made.
Conclusions drawn from results are appropriate.
Results and discussion have been related to the hypothesis/research question.
Limitations have been identified and discussed.
Directions for future research have been noted.
Implications for clinical practice have been discussed (where appropriate).

Case study:

Confidentiality has been maintained.
The disease/condition has been well described.
Information is current.
Clinical aspects have been well presented and add to the knowledge of readers.

Submission of Revised Manuscripts

Once you have revised your manuscript in accordance with the advice you will receive from the editorial team, revised manuscripts must be uploaded within 3 months. This is conditional acceptance pending satisfactory revision. Locate your manuscript under "Manuscripts with Decisions" and click on "Submit a Revision" to submit your revised manuscript. Please remember to delete any old files uploaded when you upload your revised manuscript. Please also remember to upload your manuscript document separate from your title page. Please make sure you have removed any “track changes” marking from your manuscript, and that “track changes” is turned off.

Sending for Publication after Peer Review

Once the paper has been accepted by the AE following peer review and revision as necessary, the paper will be resubmitted via the publisher’s website and the EIC notified. The EIC will check the paper, and, if in good order, will send the paper to the Editorial Assistant for typographical checking. Once that is complete, the copyright form has been signed, and the declarations included in the manuscript, it will be resubmitted via the publisher’s website, for electronic production and printing. The journal will sit on the publisher’s website, and will be accessible through the relevant organisations’ websites, and the publisher’s website, using individual passwords. The websites will be linked.

Manuscript Status

You can check any time to see the status of your manuscript on the publishers website www.cambridgemedia.com.au. The editorial team will inform you by email once a decision has been made about your paper.

Acceptance of Manuscripts

The author/s are advised of acceptance and projected publication month. They are sent electronic proofs of the final version of the manuscript as formatted by the printer, and advised of the expected publication date. This is contingent on the EIC having received a transfer of copyright/order of authors/authenticity of work form signed by all authors*. The EIC reviews the whole issue proofs before publication.

* It may transpire that in some instances, such as the death of an author before publication or their moving to another country without reliable communication systems, it is not possible for all authors to sign the copyright form. In this case, responsibility for the content of the manuscript and the rights and responsibilities of the missing author will be held by the guarantor, or corresponding author.