Submission Preparation Checklist
As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.- The shipment is original, that is, the text and the data presented in it have not been previously published. All authors guarantee their participation and responsibility in the shipment. The shipment will not be under the consideration of another magazine simultaneously.
- The file complies with the instructions described in Ensuring an anonymous review, in the event that the submission is directed to a section with peer review.
- The file sent is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, RTF, or WordPerfect format.
- The text has simple line spacing; the font size is 12 points; italics are used instead of underlining (except for URL's, which must also be active); all illustrations, figures and tables are located within the text in the place that corresponds to them and not at the end of the document.
- The author must correctly complete all the metadata that are requested, including the ORCID of each author (mandatory).
- The text complies with the bibliographic and style requirements indicated in the Guidelines for authors.
- URLs have been provided in the references, for which they are available.
- The authors assume full responsibility for the bibliographic citations used, as well as on the ethical aspects related to the subjects of the study.
- The authors state that the opinions expressed in their submission do not necessarily represent the point of view of the editor of the magazine, who will not have responsibility and commitment on its content.
- The authors accept the collaboration in the editing expenses described in this page.
ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Word limit: maximum 5,000 words, excluding summaries and references.
Summary: 250 words maximum; It should be structured under the subheadings: Introduction; Objective/Question; Method; Results; Discussion; Conclusions.
Description: The journal welcomes methodologically, ethically, and theoretically rigorous original research that adds new knowledge to the field and promotes the development of policies and practices in Nursing. Qualitative and quantitative methodology studies are admitted. The work should report scientifically sound original research, and provide a substantial amount of new information. You should include the most recent and relevant references in the field. The structure should include sections of Summary, Keywords, Introduction, Material and Methods, Results, Discussion and Conclusions. Authors are encouraged to add a brief section on methodological rigor.
If the topic of Healthcare Quality and/or any of the dimensions that define it (Patient Safety, effectiveness, etc.) are addressed, different types of studies will be accepted that differ depending on the method used:
- Improvement Cycle. It must include all the phases that characterize it: identification and prioritization of the opportunity for improvement; quality problem analysis; construction of criteria to evaluate it; quality level or hypothetical causes study design; analysis and presentation of data from the first evaluation; design of interventions to improve; implementation of the action plan; reevaluation and documentation of the improvement achieved.
- Quality Evaluation with validated instruments (questionnaires, indicators, accreditation standards,...)
- Design of Processes, Clinical Pathways, etc. The working group that undertakes the design must be described: how it is formed and the methodology it uses to reach consensus; how potential customers, their needs and expectations are identified; and how the content validity of the activities or clinical or care indicators that are incorporated is guaranteed, if applicable.
REVIEWS
Word limit: maximum 7,000 words, excluding summaries and references.
Summary: 250 words maximum; It should be structured under the subheadings: Introduction; Objective/Question; Method; Results; Discussion; Implications for Practice; Recommendations.
Structure: Please see the specific details below for the type of review article. We strongly recommend authors register their detailed protocols, before data extraction begins, in a public registry such as Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/), Inplasy (https://inplasy.com/) or PROSPERO (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) . Authors should include a statement regarding adherence to PRISMA guidelines and registration information (if available) in the Methods section.
The Journal accepts five types of review studies:
- Meta-analysis
- Systematic review
- Qualitative evidence synthesis
- Panoramic review (Scoping Review).
- Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews.
Authors should follow the recommended PRISMA guidelines for meta-analyses and systematic reviews.
Meta-analysis.- A meta-analysis is a quantitative review of the literature with a view to answering a clearly and precisely formulated question, such as determining the effect of a treatment, training or prevention program, finding risk factors (or of protection) to contract a disorder and, in general, estimate relationships between variables and their moderating variables. A key topic in this type of study has to do with the search engines used to retrieve works that include the necessary information and that will be decisive for the appropriate use of this technique. Therefore, authors must explicitly specify the databases used and how the search for the works was carried out (keywords). The search should be exhaustive, incorporate the most recent work, and should present the results obtained in terms of a flowchart in accordance with the PRISMA statement (http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/prisma/ ). The structure of a work that presents a meta-analysis must be: Introduction, Method (Study selection criteria, study search procedures, Variable coding, effect size index/s and Statistical analysis), Results, Discussion, Conclusions and References. The references used directly to carry out the meta-analysis will be indicated with an asterisk (*) in the list of references.
Systematic reviews.- A systematic review is a synthesis of research on a particular aspect that is current and on which there is sufficient information, whether qualitative or quantitative, to carry out the review. In this sense, except for the presentation of results, the same procedure as in the meta-analysis will be followed. In this case, the databases used to compile the studies and the keywords that will allow their inclusion in the study will be of special interest. Authors should present the search results in a PRISMA statement flowchart. The sections that must appear in a qualitative systematic review are: Introduction, Method (study selection criteria, search procedures and coding of variables), Results, Discussion and Conclusions, and References. The references used directly to carry out the review will be indicated with an asterisk (*) in the list of references.
Qualitative evidence synthesis
Introduction: Include a scientific justification for the review based on what is already known and a statement of the objectives of the review.
Methods: include protocol and registry (if applicable), review question, design, eligibility criteria, information sources, search strategy, assessment of relevance for inclusion, quality assessment, data extraction and synthesis (including process for assess confidence in each finding if applicable).
Findings: selection of studies, characteristics of studies, findings of individual studies, synthesis of findings.
Discussion: summary of the evidence, what the review adds to the existing literature, limitations and strengths of the review, implications for future research, implications for Nursing practice that are linked to new knowledge from the review.
Conclusions: an interpretation of the impact of the findings in relation to the proposed objectives.
Scoping Review
Scoping reviews must strictly follow the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews Checklist https://www.prisma-statement.org/scoping and submit the checklist as unpublished material during the shipment. Templates for the flowchart can be downloaded from the PRISMA website and the diagram should be included in the main text.
Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines
The Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) are documents that include a set of recommendations based on a systematic review of the evidence and the evaluation of the risks and benefits of the different alternatives, with the aim of optimizing health care for patients. Additionally, CPGs have the potential to reduce variability and improve clinical practice.
As a review, the structure of these works follows, differing only in some methodological phases. A review of this type of resources implies a synthesis of the scientific evidence, the degree of recommendation in the activities to be carried out or the measurement indicators created.
In the Methods: include not only the bibliographic search carried out in the large databases for the Health Sciences (Pubmed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, etc.), but also the search in the scientific journals of Societies and in that carried out in the compiling organizations that compile them (GuiaSalud, NICE,...). Furthermore, the authors must describe the methodology used in evaluating the quality of the selected documents through the application of validated instruments (AGREE-II, etc.).
And in the designs in which the study of the extracted indicators is in-depth, also detail the methodology used in evaluating their quality, through the application of validated instruments (AIRE, etc.).
Copyright Notice
The works published in this magazine are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publications Service of the University of Murcia (the publisher) preserves the copyright of the published works, and encourages and allows the reuse of the works under the license for use stated in point 2.
© Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Murcia, 2011 (© Publications Service, University of Murcia, 2011)
2. The works are published in the electronic edition of the journal under Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 España(texto legal) “ a Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Spain license (legal text)”. They can be copied, used, broadcasted, transmitted and publicly displayed, provided that: i) the authorship and original source of their publication (journal, publisher and URL) are cited; (ii) are not used for commercial purposes; iii) the existence and specifications of this license is mentioned.
3. Conditions of self-archiving. Authors are allowed and encouraged to electronically disseminate the pre-print (pre-reviewed ) and / or post-print (reviewed and accepted for publication) versions of their works prior to publication, as it ensures a wider circulation and dissemination which may lead to a possible increase in its mention and a higher scope among the academic community. RoMEO color: green.
Privacy Statement
The names and emails on this journal will exclusively be used for the aims stated in its pages, and will not be available for any other purpose or person. The texts of these pages and their content shall only be used for non-commercial teaching and research purposes. It is not allowed to use, reproduce, publish or distribute it without the author-s’ permission, as Copyright owners of their articles.
