Clinical Learning in Nursing (CLN) is committed to ensuring the quality, integrity, and scientific merit of every published article through a rigorous, fair, and transparent double-blind peer review process. All manuscripts are evaluated solely on their academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, ethical standards, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.
Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.
Editorial Workflow
Step 1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscript through the journal's Online Submission System (OJS), together with all required supporting documents, including the Title Page and any supplementary files.
Step 2. Initial Editorial Screening (1 Week)
The Editorial Office performs an initial assessment to ensure that the manuscript:
• Fits the journal's aims and scope.
• Complies with the Author Guidelines.
• Meets formatting requirements.
• Includes all required submission documents.
• Demonstrates sufficient academic quality.
Manuscripts failing to meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or rejected before peer review.
Step 3. Plagiarism Screening (1 Week)
All manuscripts undergo plagiarism screening using similarity detection software.
Submissions with unacceptable similarity or evidence of plagiarism will be rejected in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Plagiarism Policy.
Step 4. Editor Assignment (1 Week)
The Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to an Associate Editor or Handling Editor with expertise relevant to the subject area.
The assigned editor oversees the entire peer-review process.
Step 5. Double-Blind Peer Review (6–8 Weeks)
Eligible manuscripts are sent to at least two independent reviewers.
Clinical Learning in Nursing adopts a double-blind peer review model:
• Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
• Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:
• Originality and novelty
• Scientific significance
• Methodological rigor
• Ethical compliance
• Data analysis
• Interpretation of results
• Clarity of presentation
• Relevance to nursing education and clinical practice
Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommend one of the following:
• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject
Step 6. Editorial Decision (1 Week)
The assigned editor evaluates the reviewers' recommendations and submits a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief.
The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision.
Step 7. Author Revision (Up to 4 Weeks)
Authors receiving revision requests should submit:
• A revised manuscript.
• A point-by-point response to each reviewer comment.
Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers when necessary.
Step 8. Final Decision (1 Week)
Following satisfactory revision, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision.
Possible outcomes include:
• Accept
• Reject
The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final.
Step 9. Production Process (3 Weeks)
Accepted manuscripts proceed to:
• Copyediting
• Language editing (if necessary)
• Proofreading
• Layout editing
• DOI assignment
• Final author approval
Step 10. Publication
The final version of the article is published online in the scheduled issue of the journal.
Estimated Timeline
Clinical Learning in Nursing aims to complete the editorial and publication process within approximately six months.
|
Editorial Stage |
Estimated Time |
|
Initial Editorial Screening |
1 week |
|
Technical & Plagiarism Check |
1 week |
|
Editor Assignment |
1 week |
|
Reviewer Invitation |
2 weeks |
|
Double-Blind Peer Review |
6–8 weeks |
|
Editorial Evaluation |
1 week |
|
Author Revision |
Up to 4 weeks |
|
Final Editorial Decision |
1 week |
|
Copyediting & Proofreading |
2 weeks |
|
Layout Editing & DOI Assignment |
1 week |
|
Online Publication |
1 week |
Estimated Total Processing Time: Approximately 24 Weeks (6 Months).
Processing times may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript quality, and the timeliness of author revisions.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
• Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
• Provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based comments.
• Declare any potential conflicts of interest.
• Complete reviews within the requested timeframe.
• Notify the editor if they are unable to review the manuscript.
Editorial Responsibilities
Editors are responsible for:
• Ensuring an impartial and confidential review process.
• Selecting qualified reviewers.
• Making publication decisions based solely on scientific merit.
• Handling conflicts of interest appropriately.
• Following the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Appeals
Authors who disagree with an editorial decision may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, explaining the reasons for the appeal and providing supporting evidence where appropriate.
Appeals will be reviewed objectively, and additional reviewers may be consulted if necessary. The Editor-in-Chief's decision after the appeal process is final.
Note: The journal strives to complete the review and publication process within approximately six months. However, the actual processing time may vary depending on the availability of reviewers, the quality of the submitted manuscript, and the timeliness of authors' revisions.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Manuscript Submission │
│ (Online Submission via OJS) │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Initial Editorial Screening │
│ • Scope │
│ • Format │
│ • Completeness │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Plagiarism Screening │
│ Similarity Check │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
Pass? ───┴─── No
│ │
Yes ▼
│ Reject / Return
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Editor Assignment │
│ Handling Editor │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Double-Blind Peer Review │
│ Minimum Two Reviewers │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Editorial Decision │
└──────┬─────────┬─────────┬────┘
│ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼
Accept Minor Rev. Major Rev.
│ │ │
│ ▼ ▼
│ Author Revision
│ │
│ ▼
│ Reviewer Re-evaluation
│ │
└────────────┐
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Final Editorial Decision │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Copyediting │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Proofreading │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Layout Editing & DOI │
└───────────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌───────────────────────────────┐
│ Online Publication │
└───────────────────────────────┘
