Iran Journal of Nursing
For editors

For Editors

 | Post date: 2026/02/22 | 
1. Purpose
This document describes the roles and responsibilities of the editorial team of the Iran Journal of Nursing (IJN), including the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, and other editors. It is intended to promote transparency, consistency, and high ethical standards in the editorial decision-making process.
IJN follows established principles of publication ethics and good editorial practice, and aligns its policies with guidance from organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

2. Editorial independence
2.1. Independence from owners and sponsors 
The editorial team has full responsibility for deciding which articles are accepted for publication, based solely on:
  • The scientific quality and rigor of the work
  • Its relevance to the aims and scope of the journal
  • Ethical considerations
  • The overall balance of content in the journal
Decisions are not influenced by commercial interests, institutional affiliation, political considerations, or personal relationships. Editors should support academic freedom and allow well-argued papers to be published, even if their conclusions are controversial, provided that the methods are sound and ethical standards have been met.

3. Roles within the editorial team
3.1. Editor-in-Chief 
The Editor-in-Chief (EIC):
  • Provides overall leadership and strategic direction for the journal.
  • Ensures that the journal’s policies and practices align with international standards.
  • Makes final decisions on manuscripts, especially in complex or disputed cases.
  • Represents the journal in communication with authors, institutions, and indexing services.
  • Select suitable peer reviewers and oversee the review process. 
3.2. Associate Editors / Section Editors 
Associate Editors and Section Editors:
  • Conduct initial screening of submissions within their area of expertise.
  • Evaluate reviewers’ comments and make recommendations to the EIC.
  • Contribute to the development and implementation of editorial policies.
3.3. Managing or Executive Editor 
Where applicable, a Managing or Executive Editor:
  • Coordinates daily editorial office activities.
  • Manages communication with authors and reviewers.
  • Oversees manuscript tracking, copyediting, and production processes.

4. Handling of manuscripts
4.1. Initial editorial assessment 
Upon submission, each manuscript is assigned to the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor, who will:
  • Check the manuscript for fit with the journal’s aims and scope.
  • Ensure basic compliance with author guidelines.
  • Conduct an initial assessment of methodological soundness and originality.
  • Screen for ethical issues and potential misconduct (including using similarity-checking tools).
Editors may reject manuscripts at this stage (desk rejection) if they:
  • Clearly fall outside the scope of the journal.
  • Lack sufficient originality or scientific contribution.
  • Have obvious ethical problems.
  • Are of insufficient quality in terms of methods, reporting, or language.
4.2. Peer review process 
For manuscripts that proceed to peer review:
  • The handling editor selects at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise.
  • The double-blind process is maintained by ensuring that authors’ and reviewers’ identities are not disclosed to each other.
  • Reviewers are given clear instructions and deadlines.
Editors should aim to:
  • Use reviewers from diverse institutions and locations when possible.
  • Avoid over-reliance on a small group of reviewers.
  • Monitor the quality and timeliness of reviews.
4.3. Editorial decisions 
After receiving reviewers’ reports, the handling editor evaluates:
  • The strength and consistency of the reviewers’ comments.
  • The methodological and ethical soundness of the study.
  • The clarity and impact of the work.
Editors may recommend one of the following decisions:
  • Accept
  • Minor revision
  • Major revision
  • Reject
The Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editor makes the final decision, taking into account the reviewers’ recommendations and the journal’s editorial priorities.
4.4. Revisions and resubmissions  
For manuscripts requiring revision:
  • Editors provide authors with clear, consolidated instructions based on reviewers’ and editorial comments.
  • Authors are expected to submit a detailed point-by-point response.
  • Editors evaluate revised manuscripts and responses, and may seek further input from the original reviewers if needed.
Revised manuscripts that do not adequately address major concerns may be rejected, even after one or more rounds of revision.

5. Ethical responsibilities
5.1. Conflicts of interest 
Editors must declare and manage their own conflicts of interest. They should not be involved in decisions on manuscripts:
  • Authored by themselves or close colleagues.
  • Originating from their own department or research group when this may compromise impartiality.
  • Where they have any financial or personal interest in the outcome.
In such cases, another editor or an external guest editor should handle the manuscript.
5.2. Misconduct and questionable practices 
Editors must take all allegations of misconduct seriously, including:
  • Plagiarism and duplicate publication
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Unethical research practices
  • Inappropriate or undisclosed authorship
When concerns arise:
  • Editors should gather relevant information and, when appropriate, contact the authors for an explanation.
  • If necessary, they may consult institutional authorities or follow COPE flowcharts and recommendations.
  • Possible actions include rejection of the manuscript, publication of a correction, expression of concern, or retraction of a published article.
Editors should ensure that investigations are fair, thorough, and respectful of due process, while prioritizing the integrity of the scientific record
5.3. Corrections and retractions 
If significant errors or misconduct are identified in published articles:
  • Minor issues may be addressed through a corrigendum or erratum.
  • Serious issues that invalidate the findings may require retraction or an expression of concern.
Editors should ensure that:
  • Corrections and retractions are clearly labelled and linked to the original article.
  • The reason for the correction or retraction is stated transparently.
  • The record in indexing databases is updated where possible.

6. Transparency and communication
6.1. Communication with authors 
Editors should:
  • Provide clear, respectful, and constructive feedback to authors.
  • Communicate decisions in a timely manner.
  • Explain the main reasons for rejection when appropriate.
  • Be open to reasonable appeals or requests for clarification.
6.2. Appeals and complaints 
  • The journal should have a procedure for handling:
  • Appeals from authors who disagree with editorial decisions.
  • Complaints about editorial or peer review conduct.
Appeals should be evaluated by an editor who was not directly involved in the original decision, or by the Editor-in-Chief. Decisions on appeals are final.
6.3. Communication with reviewers 
Editors should:
  • Treat reviewers with respect and acknowledge their contribution.
  • Provide feedback where possible (e.g. decision outcome, anonymized comments from other reviewers).
  • Monitor reviewer performance and maintain an up-to-date reviewer database.

7. Quality improvement and journal development
Editors play a central role in the continuous improvement of the journal by:
  • Monitoring key indicators such as submission numbers, acceptance rates, processing times, and citation patterns.
  • Encouraging high-quality submissions, including from underrepresented regions and topics.
  • Identifying emerging areas of interest in nursing and midwifery.
  • Periodically reviewing and updating author and reviewer guidelines.

8. Editorial board membership and duties
8.1. Selection and appointment 
Editorial board members are selected based on:
  • Scientific expertise and publication record.
  • Ethical standing and professional reputation.
  • Willingness to contribute actively to the journal.

Appointments are typically for a defined term, which may be renewed based on performance and mutual agreement.

8.2. Expected contributions 
Editorial board members are expected to:
  • Review manuscripts within their expertise.
  • Recommend qualified reviewers and potential authors.
  • Provide advice on journal strategy and policy.
  • Promote the journal within their professional networks.
  • Support efforts to increase the international visibility and impact of the journal.
8.3. Removal or resignation 
Board members who are consistently inactive, repeatedly fail to meet review commitments, or are found to have engaged in unethical behavior may be asked to step down from the board.

9. Relationship with readers and the broader community
Editors should:
  • Ensure that published content is accessible and relevant to practitioners, educators, researchers, and students in nursing and midwifery.
  • Encourage submissions that address regional and global health priorities.
  • Be open to publishing editorials, commentaries, or special issues on timely and important topics.

10. Review of editorial policies

This document and other editorial policies should be reviewed periodically and updated when necessary to reflect evolving standards in scholarly publishing and the needs of the nursing community. Questions or suggestions regarding editorial policies may be directed to the Editor-in-Chief through the contact information provided on the journal’s website.”
 
View: 77 Time(s)   |   Print: 21 Time(s)   |   Email: 0 Time(s)   |   0 Comment(s)

Iran Journal of Nursing

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb