Reviewers give an informed or expert opinion on the work of an informed or expert author, which is why it is called ‘peer’ review.

It takes about 12 weeks from acknowledgement to receive a response. Responses may be:

• Acceptance without revision.
• A request for minor or major revision.
• A letter explaining that your manuscript has not been accepted for publication.

Accepted for publication

RCNi offers continuous online publishing so that, once your manuscript is accepted for publication, it will be published online first. Peer-reviewed articles will be posted as soon as they are accepted and edited to ensure that readers have access to new content as soon as possible. Please note that not all articles we publish online will appear in print.

Bear in mind that RCNi subscribers can read your article online even if they subscribe to another RCNi journal. This is because they can access ten free articles from other RCNi journals every month. So publishing online rather than only in print can mean that even more people can read, and act on, what you have written. 

Requests for revision

In most cases, authors are asked to revise their manuscripts in the light of the comments made by external reviewers and editorial staff. These comments are intended to be constructive and useful and to help to produce a high-quality article. The manuscript will be returned to you by email with a copy of the reviewers’ comments and a deadline for re-submission. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers to ensure the changes you have made are sufficient for the article to be accepted. 

Not accepted for publication

There are many reasons why your manuscript may not be accepted for publication and these may not necessarily reflect the quality of the submission. Where possible, we will to try to explain why but we retain the right not to engage in further correspondence on the matter. The review process may be a bit uncomfortable when you have spent many hours labouring over your first or even your tenth article but it is a healthy and constructive process that ensures quality in the journal. The author does not have to accept all the views in the review report. Most find the comments helpful but authors are free to respond with reasons for not making one or more of the changes suggested. Please contact the editor to discuss any questions that you have about your review feedback.