Manuscript peer review: A guide for advanced practice nurses
- 5 November 2010
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners
- Vol. 23 (1), 15-22
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-7599.2010.00572.x
Abstract
Dissemination of scholarly findings in peer-reviewed journals is critical for sustaining optimal evidence-based practice standards for advanced practice nurses (APNs). However, many schools of nursing do not teach the process or significance of peer review. The purpose of this article is to describe the peer review process and provide practical suggestions for APNs reviewing a research-based manuscript. This article was prepared by reviewing both theoretical and data-based literature concerning editorial peer review. Reviewing manuscripts requires a high level of professional expertise and commitment. This article describes the history and benefits of peer review and provides a practical overview of the peer review process. A template has also been developed to serve as a checklist for critical elements relating to peer review. Peer review has a critical role in improving the quality of nursing's published knowledge base and ultimately the quality of patient care. The ability to provide sound critique of nursing manuscripts is essential to the continued development of advanced practice nursing.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Blinding in peer review: the preferences of reviewers for nursing journalsJournal of Advanced Nursing, 2008
- Beyond objective and balanced: Writing constructive manuscript reviewsResearch in Nursing & Health, 2006
- Nurse editors' views on the peer review processResearch in Nursing & Health, 2005
- HOW TO REVIEW A PAPERAdvances in Physiology Education, 2003
- Peer Review for Journals as it Stands Today—Part 1Science Communication, 1998
- Qualitative research in health care: II. A structured review and evaluation of studiesJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 1996
- Peer review. Crude and understudied, but indispensableJAMA, 1994
- How well does a journal's peer review process function? A survey of authors' opinionsJAMA, 1994
- The evolution of editorial peer reviewJAMA, 1990
- Reviewer Status and Review QualityThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1985