INDOGENIUS JOURNAL is committed to maintaining a fair, independent, rigorous, and transparent peer-review process to ensure the scientific quality, originality, and ethical integrity of published manuscripts.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor to assess their relevance to the journal's aims and scope, compliance with author guidelines, scientific quality, methodological appropriateness, and ethical requirements. Manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using iThenticate, Turnitin, or equivalent similarity detection software. The maximum acceptable similarity index is 25%, subject to editorial assessment of the similarity report. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements may be returned for technical revision or rejected without external peer review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

INDOGENIUS JOURNAL  applies a double-blind peer-review system, in which authors' and reviewers' identities are concealed from one another. Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript's subject area and research methodology. Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, scientific contribution, methodological rigor, validity of findings, ethical compliance, and relevance to nursing science and healthcare practice. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality, disclose potential conflicts of interest, and provide objective and constructive recommendations.

Review Outcomes and Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewers' recommendations, the editorial team evaluates the manuscript and determines one of the following decisions:

1. Accept: The manuscript meets publication requirements without requiring substantial modifications.

2. Accept with Revisions: The manuscript requires minor or major revisions before final acceptance.

3. Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial revision and an additional round of peer review.

4. Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's scientific, methodological, or editorial standards.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor following editorial evaluation.

Manuscript Revision and Re-Review

Authors receiving revision requests must submit a revised manuscript accompanied by a point-by-point response addressing reviewers' and editors' comments. Minor revisions may be evaluated directly by the handling editor, while major revisions may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to additional reviewers when necessary. Submission of a revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance.

Review Timeline

The journal aims to complete the review process within a maximum of approximately 12 weeks, depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and revision requirements. Additional time may be required when substantial revisions, further peer review, or ethical investigations are necessary. Authors will be informed of editorial decisions through the journal's online submission system.

Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents throughout the editorial and peer-review process. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, reproduce, or use unpublished manuscript content without appropriate authorization. Any potential financial, institutional, personal, or professional conflicts of interest must be declared and appropriately managed. Editors and reviewers must also comply with the journal's Statement on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI). Confidential manuscript content must not be uploaded to external AI systems without explicit authorization and appropriate safeguards.

Research Ethics and Publication Integrity

Editors and reviewers are responsible for identifying potential concerns related to plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, falsification, unethical research procedures, and other forms of research misconduct. Suspected violations will be handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics, Plagiarism Policy, and Allegations of Research Misconduct Policy, with reference to relevant Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance. Editorial decisions must be based on scientific merit and ethical compliance, without discrimination or inappropriate external influence.

Appeals and Editorial Correspondence

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal when they believe an editorial decision involves a factual misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, or significant oversight. Appeals will be evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately independent editor. All manuscript-related correspondence should be conducted through the journal's online submission system or directed to the editorial office at [email protected]. The corresponding author is responsible for communicating editorial decisions and revision requirements to all co-authors.

Final Acceptance and Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout editing, proofreading, and final publication preparation. Authors may be requested to review article proofs before publication. Any substantial changes to authorship, research findings, or manuscript content after acceptance require editorial approval. Genius Journal maintains editorial independence and applies consistent scientific and ethical standards throughout the publication process.