Peer review

A manuscript is sent to the two most relevant investigators for a thorough review of the contents. The editor selects peer referees by recommendation of the Editorial Board members, or from the specialist database owned by the Editorial Board. For this review, the names and affiliations of the authors are blinded as a process. JNN adopts double blind review which means that the reviewer can not identify author information and authors can not identify reviewers, too. A manuscript is also reviewed for Korean or English.

Acceptance of the manuscript is decided based on the critiques and recommended decision of the referees.

The Editor may send the manuscript to another referee for additional comments and a recommended decision in that case. Three repeated decisions of “review after revision” are regarded as “rejection.” The reviewed manuscripts are returned back to the corresponding author with accompanying comments and recommended revisions. The names and decisions of the referees are masked and are not provided to the submitting party. A final decision on acceptance or rejection of the manuscript for publication is forwarded to the corresponding author from the Editorial Office.

Failure to resubmit the revised manuscript within 2 months is regarded as a withdrawal. The corresponding author must indicate clearly what alterations have been made in response to the referee’s comments on a point by point basis. The author should resubmit any acceptable reasons which would be given for explaining the noncompliance with any recommendation of the referees.

All manuscripts from editors, employees, or members of the editorial board are processed the same way as other unsolicited manuscripts. During the review process, they will not engage in the selection of reviewers and decision process. Editors will not handle their own manuscripts even if they are commissioned ones. 

 Reviewer ethics and responsibilities

All assigned reviewers are expected to follow the following ethics and responsibilities during the review process:

 Confidentiality

The review process is strictly confidential and all reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality about the manuscript they are reviewing. This not only includes the contents of the manuscript, but also the disclosure of their identities to the authors or to other colleagues. It is therefore inappropriate to share or discuss the contents of a manuscript with others before publication, unless permission is obtained from the editors. The editor may approve the consultation of a third person if he/she has the necessary expertise to significantly improve the quality of review, is ready to maintain confidentiality and has not been excluded by the editor for review previously. Reviewers should not use the knowledge or idea obtained from the manuscript for any purpose (scientific, personal or financial) unrelated to the review process before the manuscript is published.

 Integrity

Reviewer's comments and conclusions should be objective, free from any personal or professional biases. The contents should be considered based on the facts that are being presented and comments should be based solely on the paper's originality, quality and scientific merits. Reviewers should report for ethical concerns regarding plagiarism, fraud, duplicate publication or unethical study execution to the editor, with specific supporting evidence for their concerns.

 Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest that may arise for reviewers may include one of the following:

- Have recent or ongoing collaborations with any of the authors

- Have commented on drafts of the manuscript

- Are in direct competition with any of the authors

- Have a history of dispute with any of the authors

- Have a financial interest in the outcome

 Timeliness

Reviewers are responsible for providing a review in a timely fashion, based on the journal's policy for review. This includes 1) deciding to review the manuscript and 2) completing the review within the requested time frame. Every effort should be made for the timely publication of submitted manuscripts.