Review Form

For Reviewers

Review Form

The JRTN review form is completed through the OJS online submission system. This page describes the form structure, the criteria assessed in each section, and guidance for completing each part of the assessment.

Accessing the Review Form

When you accept a review invitation, the OJS system sends a link to the manuscript and to the online review form. Log in to the JRTN submission system with your reviewer account, locate the manuscript in your review queue, download the anonymized manuscript file, and complete the form through the system's review interface.

Review submissions must be made through the OJS system

Reviews submitted by email are not accepted. If you experience technical difficulties accessing the review form, contact the editorial office at editorial@pekamerawatnegeri.com.

Form Structure

The review form contains five sections. Sections 1 through 4 are transmitted to the authors; Section 5 is confidential to the editor.

Section 1 — Scope and Relevance Assess whether the manuscript addresses a topic within JRTN's scope: nursing or healthcare in rural, tropical, remote, underserved, agricultural, or resource-limited settings. Note any scope concerns that the editorial team should consider.
Section 2 — Scientific Quality Evaluate the originality of the contribution, the soundness of the study design and methodology, the adequacy of the analysis, the logical flow of the argument, and the accuracy of the references. Provide specific comments on each area assessed.
Section 3 — Reporting and Presentation Assess the application of the appropriate EQUATOR Network reporting guideline, the clarity and structure of the manuscript, the quality of tables and figures, and the completeness of declarations including ethics, consent, data availability, and authorship contributions.
Section 4 — Comments to Authors Provide your full written assessment in this section. Include major and minor comments, numbered for ease of response. Distinguish clearly between required changes and optional suggestions. This section is transmitted in full to the authors.
Section 5 — Confidential Comments to Editor Use this section for concerns that should not be shared with the authors: suspected ethical violations, undisclosed conflicts of interest, significant overlap with other publications, or your reasoning for recommending rejection. This section is not visible to the authors.

Submitting Your Recommendation

Accept The manuscript is suitable for publication in its current form. Minor editorial corrections may be noted.
Minor Revision The manuscript requires specific, achievable improvements. The revised manuscript may not need to be returned to reviewers.
Major Revision Substantial revisions are needed. The revised manuscript will typically be returned for re-review.
Reject The manuscript is not suitable for publication. Provide a clear explanation in the comments to authors and the confidential editor comments.
Your recommendation is advisory. The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, who considers all reviewer recommendations alongside editorial judgement.

Before Submitting Your Review

Confirm each item below before submitting the completed form.

All five sections of the review form have been completed.

Comments to authors are specific, numbered, and constructive.

The recommendation is supported by the written assessment.

Any concerns about ethics, misconduct, or competing publications have been entered in the confidential editor comments.

Any conflict of interest has been disclosed to the editorial office.

The review has been submitted through the OJS system before the agreed deadline.