Characteristics analysis of nursing manuscripts rejected by external review from Health Medicine Research and Practice in 2022-2023
Objective This study aimed to explore the characteristics of nursing manuscripts rejected by external review from Health Medicine Research and Practice in 2022-2023,to provide support for clinical nursing staff's research,and to pro-mote the quality and acceptance rate of nursing manuscripts.Methods The study selected 130 nursing manuscripts rejected by external review from this journal in 2022-2023.The basic information of each manuscript was collected,including the region where the first author's institution is located,the nature of the institution[medical and health institutions(grade lev-el,whether affiliated with a university)or higher education institutions],whether there was a funding project,the first au-thor's educational background,the first author's professional title,the type of manuscript,the number of collaborators,and detailed rejection comments.Results The province with the most first author affiliations was Henan,accounting for 52.31% .The institutions of the first authors were primarily medical institutions,accounting for 99.23% .Regarding fun-ding projects,the majority did not have any,representing 80.00% .Among these,primary hospitals accounted for 1.55% (2/129),secondary hospitals for 11.63% (15/129),and tertiary hospitals for 86.82% (112/129);university-affiliated hos-pitals accounted for 27.13% (35/129),and non-affiliated hospitals for 72.87% (94/129).The first author's education level was predominantly undergraduate,making up 94.61% .The primary professional title of the first authors was intermediate,accounting for 58.46%;the main type of manuscript was research papers,accounting for 96.92% .The top three reasons for manuscript rejection by external review were a lack of innovation,inappropriate or incomplete selection of observation in-dicators,and intervention methods in the study group(all intervention groups were uniformly named study groups)being similar or confused with the control group,accounting for 98.46%,92.31%,and 84.62%,respectively.The main inter-vention measures in 124 research papers were targeted nursing,predictive nursing,bundled nursing,continuing nursing,humanized nursing,multidisciplinary collaborative nursing models,and evidence-based nursing,accounting for 11.29%,6.45%,5.64%,6.45%,4.83%,4.83%,and 4.03%,respectively.The reasons for rejection in 120 papers included inap-propriate or incomplete selection of observation indicators.Specific reasons included:isolation between observation indica-tors and intervention measures,the indicators measured were not the content of the intervention(92.50% );the indicators measured had little significance(21.67% );lack of prioritization among indicators(99.17% );dubious causal relationship between indicators and intervention measures(49.17% );low feasibility of the indicators(31.67% );and overly simplistic selection of indicators(19.17% ).Conclusion The research literacy of clinical nurses needs marked improvement.It is cru-cial to train them in topic selection,observation indicator selection,and intervention plan writing.