Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration (간호행정학회지)

Korean Academy of Nursing Administration (한국간호행정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis of Manuscripts Rejected by the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration [2012~2015 Jun]

간호행정학회지 게재불가논문 분석 [2012년~2015년 6월]

  • Jeong, Seok Hee (College of Nursing, Research Institute of Nursing Science, Chonbuk National University) ;
  • Lee, Taewha (Department of Nursing Environments & Systems, Mo-Im Kim Nursing Research Institute, College of Nursing, Yonsei University) ;
  • Yu, Soyoung (College of Nursing, CHA University) ;
  • Seo, Myoung Hee (Division of Infectious Diseases, Chonbuk National University Hospital)
  • 정석희 (전북대학교 간호대학.간호과학연구소) ;
  • 이태화 (연세대학교 간호대학.김모임간호학연구소) ;
  • 유소영 (차의과학대학교 간호대학) ;
  • 서명희 (전북대학교병원 감염내과)
  • Received : 2015.11.15
  • Accepted : 2015.12.04
  • Published : 2015.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to analysis the manuscripts rejected for publication in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration during the last three years six months (2012~2015 Jun). Methods: Seventy eight rejected manuscripts were analyzed focusing on manuscripts characteristics, such as rejection rates, year of submission, occupation of first author and corresponding author, number of authors, funding, thesis or dissertation, article type, study participants, number of reviews prior to rejection, and 3rd reviewer. Also reviewers' quantitative evaluation scores and subjective comments were analyzed. Reviewers' subjective comments were analyzed using content analysis methodology. Results: The mean rate for manuscript rejection was 28.9% and for quantitative research, qualitative research, and review papers the quantitative evaluation scores were $2.54{\pm}0.70$, $2.39{\pm}0.69$, and $2.39{\pm}0.69$ out of 5 points, respectively. The most frequent subjective comment on rejected manuscripts was 'lack of rationale for research need'. Conclusion: In this study the characteristics and the reasons for rejecting manuscripts were identified. These findings can be used in developing effective strategies for researchers, reviewers and editors to improve the quality of research and research reviews of nursing administration research.

Keywords

References

  1. Jang KS, Kim BN, Kim YM, Kim JS, Jeong SH. Analysis of research articles published in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration for 3 years (2010-2012). Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2013;19(5):679-688, http://dx.doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2013.19.5.679
  2. Kang MY. Korea Journal Citation Report 2014 (KJCR 2014). Daejeon: Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information; 2015.
  3. Hwang SY, Yong JS, Kim NS, Park MH, Park YH, Oh EG et al. Direction for development of the Journal of Korean Academy of Adult Nursing through analysis of accepted and rejected papers (2007-2009). Journal of Korean Academy of Adult Nursing. 2010;22(1):103-112.
  4. Kim HW, Chung M, Park JS, Suh YO, Suk MH, Shin H et al. Developmental direction for review system of the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing. Taehan Kanho Hakhoe Chi. 2007;37(3):422-430.
  5. The Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. Revision notification: The guide for authors, and the review rules of the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration [Internet]. [updated October 19 2012; cited 2015 October 10]. Available from: http://society.kisti.re.kr/board/detail2.php?board=kana_8&tid=1&did=111303&count=10&type=b1
  6. Murthy US, Wiggins CE. Why manuscripts are rejected: An analysis of JIS rejections. Journal of Information System. 2002;16(1):41-48. https://doi.org/10.2308/jis.2002.16.1.41
  7. Lee CC, Yun H, Hwang SH. Why your manuscripts were rejected or required a major revision: An analysis of Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems. 2009;19(2):179-193.
  8. The Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. Notification: Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration, Special edition [Internet]. [updated October 17 2012, cited 2015 October 30]. Available from: http://society.kisti.re.kr/board/detail2.php?board=kana_8&tid=1&did=111364&count=10&type=b1.
  9. Kim JK, Jung MS, Jang KS, Kim J, Kim EK, Lee H, et al. Analysis of the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration for 3 years(2007-2009). Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2010;16(4):517-526. http://dx.doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2010.16.4.517
  10. Seomun GA, Koh MS, Kim IA. Classification of keywords of the papers from the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration (2002-2006). Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2007;13(1):118-122.
  11. Daft RL. Why I recommended that your manuscript be rejected and what you can do about it. In: Cummings LL, Frost PJ, editors. Publishing in the organizational sciences. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 1995. p. 164-182.
  12. Song K. Use and misuse of statistical methods in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2013;19(1):146-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2013.19.1.146

Cited by

  1. Analysis of Qualitative Research Published in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration (First publication to the end of 2016) vol.23, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2017.23.4.427