LANGUAGE AND EDITING
Authors should seek professional assistance for the correction of grammatical, scientific, and typographical errors before submission of the revised version of the article for publication.
Please note that we accept a language certificate, only from one of the above two language editing organizations.
Authors are required to proofread the PDF versions of their manuscripts before submission. To avoid delays in publication, proofs should be checked immediately for typographical errors and returned within 48 hours. Major changes are not acceptable at the proof stage. If unable to send corrections within 48 hours due to some reason, the author(s) must at least send an acknowledgement on receiving the galley proofs or the article will be published exactly as received and the publishers will not be responsible for any error occurring in the manuscript in this regard.
The corresponding author will be solely responsible for ensuring that the revised version of the manuscript incorporating all the submitted corrections receives the approval of all the authors of the manuscript.
REVIEWING AND PROMPTNESS OF PUBLICATION
All papers submitted to Bentham OPEN for publication are immediately subjected to preliminary editorial scrutiny by the Editorial Staff and Editor-in-Chief in connection with their suitability. The Editor-in-Chief determines if the manuscript:
(a) falls within the scope of the journal and
(b) meets the editorial criteria of Bentham OPEN Publishers in terms of originality and quality.
Manuscripts that appear to be suitable are then subjected to double-blind peer review by, usually two to three, neutral eminent experts. The services of eminent international experts are sought through invitations to conduct the peer review of a submitted manuscript, keeping in view the scope of the manuscript and the expertise of the reviewers. The identities of both the reviewer and author are kept undisclosed to each other, ensuring anonymity and maintaining confidentiality throughout the entire review procedure. The anonymity of reviewers ensures an objective and unbiased assessment of the manuscript by the reviewers.
Before sending the manuscripts to reviewers, Bentham OPEN seeks consent from potential reviewers about their availability and willingness to review. Correspondence between the editorial office of the journal and the reviewers is kept confidential. The reviewers are expected to provide their reports in a timely fashion since a prompt review leads to the timely publication of a manuscript which is beneficial not only to the authors but to the scientific community as well.
The editorial process and peer-review workflow for each journal are taken care of by a team of Senior Editors, Editorial Board Members (EBMs) and dedicated Journal managers who have the required expertise in their specific fields.
Bentham OPEN Publishers carries out independent reviews of all articles. The reviewers are selected according to their expertise, from our, regularly updated, referee database.
On the basis of reviewer comments, the Editors may recommend acceptance, revision or rejection of a manuscript.
After a review of the manuscript by at least two or three independent experts, in addition to the views of the Editor, the decision is relayed to the authors, which may be categorized as:
● Requires minor changes
● Requires major changes
● Rejected with no resubmission
If an article receives two contradictory reports, the Editor-in-Chief retains the right to request additional comments and the discretion to make the final decision without waiting for additional reports, taking into consideration the content and conclusions presented in all reports. This proactive approach ensures promptness in conveying the Editor's decision, thereby facilitating swift communication with the author.
Bentham OPEN requests not to have the manuscripts peer-reviewed by those experts who may have competing interest with the author(s) of a submitted manuscript. It is not possible for Editors to be aware of all competing interests; it is therefore expected that the reviewers would inform the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor if they notice any potential competing interest during the course of review of a manuscript. Moreover, the reviewers are expected to inform the Editors or editorial office of the journal if they have a conflict of interest in carrying out the review of a manuscript submitted by any author/contributor of the manuscript.
The authors are usually requested to resubmit the revised paper within 15 days and it will then be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation. The publishers normally allow one round of revision and, in exceptional cases, a second round of revision may be allowed. If further revision is needed, then the manuscript is rejected and the author is requested to resubmit the manuscript for fresh processing.
The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is that of the Editor-in-Chief, depending on the quality of the revision and his assessment of the quality of the manuscript. In rare cases, manuscripts recommended for publication by the referees may be rejected in the final assessment by the Editor-in-Chief.
The time frame for revision of any article may vary from one to four weeks, depending on the nature of the revision required (minor or major). However, authors who need extra time for revision should consult the Editor-in-Chief/Handling Editor with valid reasons and the submission date of the revised manuscript may be extended if the request is genuine.
After the successful completion of the review and acceptance of the article, the articles are typeset and proofs are dispatched to authors for any corrections prior to final publication.
Plagiarism means copying or paraphrasing another writer’s content, be it a text, a result or an observation, and stating it as one’s own, without citing a reference to the original source. Therefore, authors should acknowledge and cite references to the work of other scientists in their manuscripts. The author should ensure that all the sources are authentic and that there is no discrepancy in the content of the manuscript.
Bentham OPEN is vigilant in checking and identifying the primary sources of the data within the content by using the iThenticate software to detect instances of overlapping and similarity of text in submitted manuscripts. iThenticate software verifies the content against a database of periodicals, materials on the Internet, and a comprehensive article database. The software generates a similarity report in percentage that matches the article in process and the published material. This similarity is further scrutinized for suspected plagiarism according to the publisher’s Editorial Policies. The generated report comprises the overall percentage of the content reused.
The Credibility of Sources- Acknowledgments
The study of an author has to be original. If there are credible sources of the content referred to in the manuscript, the author needs to cite all of them. Authors are advised to use iThenticate before submitting a manuscript to ensure that there are no instances of plagiarism. Authors are required to provide proper consent from the individuals and contributions of other authors should be acknowledged.
Bentham OPEN has different editorial policies for authors who have more than one publication. Following those policies, the authors need to specify the sources of the submission in their recent work. For further details, please visit the following link of Editorial Policies for Concurrent Publication/Simultaneous Submission at https://benthamopen.com/editorial-policies.php
Bentham OPEN strictly follows COPE guidelines to detect plagiarism. For clearer insight, authors may refer to the flowcharts provided by COPE by clicking here or visiting the COPE website.
FABRICATING AND STATING FALSE INFORMATION
To ensure the scholarly integrity of every article, Bentham OPEN will publish post-publication notices. The authors of the published articles, or those who have submitted the manuscripts with false information, or fabricated the supporting data or images, will be liable for sanctions, and their papers will be retracted. For further details, please visit complete guidelines at: https://opennursingjournal.com/Fabricating-and-stating-false-information.php