Nursing Target Journal
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59786/NTJ
Instructions to Authors
Language and Format
All manuscripts submitted to Nursing Target Journal must be written in clear, concise, and grammatically correct American English. Authors whose first language is not English, or whose manuscripts require refinement for linguistic accuracy, are strongly encouraged to use a professional English language editing service prior to submission, especially when recommended by the editorial team. Manuscripts must be written in a formal, objective, and unbiased tone, free from grammatical errors, cultural bias, stereotypes, colloquialisms, or references to dominant cultural assumptions. Gender-neutral and inclusive language is required throughout the manuscript; for example, use of passive constructions such as "a study was conducted" is preferred over "we conducted a study."
All manuscripts must include the following standard sections in the correct order: Author Information, Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Methods, Results, Conclusions, Discussion and Declarations, as outlined in the journal’s official manuscript templates. Tables and figures must be embedded within the main text in appropriate positions, not submitted as separate files. Authors are expected to adhere strictly to the specific formatting and structural requirements according to the type of submission (e.g., Original Article, Review Article), as detailed in the journal’s Author Guidelines. Submissions that fail to comply may be returned without review.
Article types
Nursing Target Journal accepts original articles (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods), reviews (narrative review, scoping review, systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis and bibliometric studies), editorials, opinions, and correspondence articles.
Structure of the Manuscript
For Original and Review Articles
Title Page
Title: The title must be precise, informative, and suitable for indexing in international databases. It should clearly reflect the study’s content while remaining concise. Avoid the use of abbreviations, acronyms, formulae, or promotional language. Titles should not include claims of novelty unless justified within the manuscript.
Author names and affiliations: List each author’s full given name, middle name as an initial (no period), and full family name. All names must be verified for correct spelling and publication consistency. Each author’s name must be followed by their ORCID iD in parentheses using the full URL format (e.g., https://orcid.org/0000-0002-XXXX-XXXX). Assign a lowercase superscript letter to each author’s name, corresponding to their institutional affiliation. Present complete institutional affiliations below the author list, including department, institution name, city, region (if applicable), and country.
Corresponding author: One author must be clearly designated as the corresponding author by an asterisk following their name. This author must be the submitting author and will serve as the primary contact throughout the peer review, publication, and post-publication phases. Provide the corresponding author’s full name, institutional affiliation, professional email address, and ORCID iD.
Present address: If any author’s current institutional affiliation differs from the one at which the work was conducted, include the present address as a numbered footnote to that author’s name. The superscript Arabic numeral should appear immediately after the author’s affiliation letter. The original affiliation must be retained as the primary affiliation. The present address should be listed at the bottom of the title page and include department, institution, city, region (if applicable), and country.
Abstract
Background: Briefly outline the clinical, professional, or public health context driving the study. Define the core problem or gap in evidence, and justify the investigation’s relevance to nursing, midwifery, or healthcare systems. Clearly state the study’s primary objective.
Methods: Outline the study design, setting, population or data sources, sampling or recruitment strategies, and data collection procedures. Describe the analytic approach, including statistical models for quantitative studies, thematic or grounded theory techniques for qualitative inquiries, or integration strategies for mixed-methods research. Emphasize methodological transparency and rigor.
Findings: Report the principal results with clarity and precision. For quantitative studies, include absolute values, relative risks, Odds ratio, confidence intervals, and p-values. For qualitative studies, identify dominant themes or constructs with interpretive depth. For mixed-methods designs, describe how findings were triangulated or integrated. Only findings essential to interpretation should be included.
Interpretation: Offer a concise interpretation of the findings in relation to existing evidence, theoretical frameworks, or practice. Highlight the implications for nursing care, education, management, or health policy. Indicate the study’s contribution to advancing knowledge and, where relevant, propose directions for future research or practice innovation.
Keywords
A maximum of five keywords must be provided immediately after the abstract. Keywords should accurately reflect the study’s content, context, and methodology to ensure effective indexing and retrieval across international databases. Select terms from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) taxonomy where possible. Do not repeat words already used in the title; instead, choose distinct and meaningful terms that enhance the paper’s discoverability and classification within relevant subject domains.
Introduction
The introduction should establish the relevance, urgency, and context of the research problem within nursing, midwifery, public health, or healthcare practice. Begin by outlining the broader issue, then narrow the focus to the specific gap in knowledge, clinical need, or policy challenge the study addresses. Summarize the most current and pertinent literature to demonstrate what is known and where uncertainty or inconsistency remains. Maintain a clear, logical progression of ideas that builds a compelling case for the study. Avoid including methodological detail or summarizing results. Conclude the section with a precise, standalone statement of the study’s aim(s) or research objective(s), directly linked to the identified gap.
Methods
The Methods section must be structured using appropriate subheadings and must provide comprehensive and transparent details to enable replication, critical appraisal, and indexing of the research. The section should reflect the study’s methodological integrity and scientific rigor. Authors are required to clearly state the study design and align their reporting with internationally recognized guidelines appropriate for that design. The rationale for the chosen methodology must be clearly articulated, and the section should be written in a clear, organized manner to support evaluation of internal and external validity.
For quantitative studies, authors must adhere to the STROBE guidelines for observational research (cross-sectional, case-control, or cohort designs) and the CONSORT 2025 checklist for randomized controlled trials. The Methods must include detailed descriptions of the study design, population characteristics, inclusion and exclusion criteria, study setting, and study duration. Authors should clearly define the sampling method (e.g., probability, stratified, cluster, or convenience sampling) and justify its appropriateness in context. Sample size must be determined using formal power calculations or effect size estimation, including all underlying assumptions (expected prevalence or effect, alpha level, power threshold). The rationale for selecting specific measurement instruments must be included, along with detailed psychometric information (validity evidence, reliability coefficients, prior use in similar populations, cross-cultural adaptation if applicable). Define all primary and secondary variables and explain the operationalization of constructs. Provide a thorough description of the data collection process, instruments used, and data management procedures (e.g., coding, entry, cleaning). Statistical analysis methods must be described in detail, including descriptive and inferential techniques, model assumptions, adjustment for confounding variables, sensitivity analyses, and statistical significance thresholds. Authors should indicate the software used (e.g., SPSS, SAS, R, STATA) and address procedures for handling missing data (e.g., listwise deletion, imputation, sensitivity checks).
For quasi-experimental studies, authors must specify the design type (e.g., non-equivalent control group design, pretest-posttest, interrupted time series) and provide a justification for its use in the absence of full randomization. The Methods should describe the intervention in full, including content, format, frequency, delivery mechanism, providers, fidelity assurance, and theoretical underpinnings. Comparison or control conditions must be detailed, including recruitment, allocation, baseline equivalence (or lack thereof), and strategies for mitigating bias. Measurement of outcomes, including validity and reliability of instruments, must be provided. Authors must explain the timing of measurement points, handling of dropouts or non-adherence, and analytic strategies (e.g., repeated measures ANOVA, difference-in-differences models, or regression adjustment). Internal validity threats and limitations should be acknowledged.
For qualitative studies, authors must follow the COREQ (for interviews and focus groups) or SRQR (for broader qualitative designs) guidelines. The Methods should state the epistemological or theoretical orientation (e.g., constructivist, interpretivist), and clearly explain the rationale for selecting the qualitative approach (e.g., phenomenology, ethnography, grounded theory, case study). Participant selection strategies must be fully described (e.g., purposive, theoretical, snowball), including inclusion/exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and sample size rationale. Authors must justify sample size using the principle of data saturation, with explanation of how saturation was assessed (e.g., iterative review, codebook stability, thematic redundancy). Provide detailed descriptions of the data collection process, including setting, duration, instruments (e.g., topic guides), recording procedures, transcription, and researcher positioning or reflexivity (where applicable). The data analysis process must be fully outlined, including how codes and themes were developed, software used (e.g., NVivo, Atlas.ti), and procedures for analytic rigor such as peer checking, audit trails, member checking, triangulation, and reflexivity.
For qualitative meta-synthesis, authors must adhere to the ENTREQ or eMERGe guidelines. The Methods should specify the synthesis methodology used (e.g., meta-ethnography, thematic synthesis, narrative synthesis, grounded theory synthesis) and provide a rationale for its use. Describe the research question, inclusion criteria, and scope of the synthesis. Provide details of the systematic search strategy including databases searched, search terms, Boolean operators, date restrictions, language filters, and study selection procedures. Include the number of reviewers involved in screening, conflict resolution processes, and whether software tools were used for study management. Report on the appraisal of study quality using tools such as CASP or JBI-QARI, and describe how quality influenced inclusion or interpretation. Describe the approach to data extraction, translation of findings, and synthesis of concepts across studies. Reflexivity and efforts to maintain conceptual transparency should be reported.
For mixed-methods studies, authors must follow the GRAMMS reporting standards. The Methods must define the mixed-methods design type (e.g., convergent, explanatory sequential, exploratory sequential) and describe the rationale for its use in addressing the research question. Clearly outline the sequence, timing, and priority of each component (qualitative and quantitative), as well as how the components were integrated across design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Sampling and analysis strategies must be detailed separately for each component and then for the integration process. Provide examples of how integration enhanced insight, increased validity, or resolved contradictions between datasets.
For systematic reviews and meta-analyses, authors must follow the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Describe the review question and protocol registration (e.g., PROSPERO ID). Provide a comprehensive search strategy including all databases searched (e.g., PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, CINAHL), keywords, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), Boolean operators, and filters. State the timeframe and language restrictions. Describe the screening process in detail (title/abstract and full-text review), number of reviewers, and resolution of disagreements. Include a PRISMA flow diagram and completed checklist. Define the inclusion/exclusion criteria using the PICOS framework. For data extraction, provide templates or tools used, and specify risk of bias tools employed (e.g., ROBIS, Cochrane RoB, AMSTAR 2). For meta-analyses, explain data synthesis methods, selection of effect measures, choice of model (fixed or random effects), methods of heterogeneity assessment (e.g., I², Q-statistic), subgroup analyses, meta-regression, and publication bias assessment (e.g., funnel plot, Egger's test). Indicate software used (e.g., RevMan, R, Stata).
For concept analysis studies, authors must identify the methodological framework applied (e.g., Walker and Avant, Rodgers' evolutionary method, Chinn and Kramer) and justify its relevance to the study objective. Outline each step of the analytic process, including selection of the concept, clarification of definitions, identification of surrogate terms, defining attributes, antecedents, consequences, model cases, and empirical referents. Describe the literature search process, including databases searched, timeframe, inclusion and exclusion criteria, search strategy, and any appraisal methods used. Clearly state how rigor, transparency, and theoretical consistency were maintained throughout.
For scoping reviews, authors must rigorously adhere to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines to ensure methodological transparency, reproducibility, and scientific integrity. A completed PRISMA-ScR checklist must be submitted with the manuscript as a mandatory supplementary file. The Methods section must begin with a clear justification for using a scoping review approach, distinguishing it from other review types by its exploratory purpose, mapping scope, and identification of knowledge gaps. Authors must define the review objective(s), eligibility criteria, and search framework using an accepted structure such as PCC (Population, Concept, Context). A fully reproducible search strategy is required, specifying all databases searched (e.g., PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science), search terms, Boolean operators, filters applied, language and date limits, and any manual searching or grey literature sources. The screening process must be conducted by at least two independent reviewers, with a defined conflict resolution strategy. Authors must present a PRISMA-ScR-compliant flow diagram outlining the selection process from identification to inclusion. The data charting process (i.e., data extraction) must be described in detail, including charting variables, tools used, pilot testing, and reviewer roles. Authors must clearly state the analytical method (e.g., thematic grouping, narrative synthesis, content mapping) used to summarize the data. If a critical appraisal of included studies is performed, the rationale and tools used (e.g., JBI, CASP) must be explicitly detailed. Authors are expected to discuss reflexivity, methodological limitations, and conceptual boundaries, and provide justification for how the findings advance the field.
Bibliometric studies submitted to Nursing Target Journal must be methodologically robust, analytically rigorous, and contribute meaningful insights into the structure, development, or trends of nursing and health-related research. The Methods section must begin with a clearly defined objective, research question, and rationale for the bibliometric approach. Authors must explicitly identify the data source(s) (e.g., Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, Dimensions, PubMed, CrossRef), including subscription versions and specific indexes accessed (e.g., SSCI, ESCI). The search strategy must be fully transparent and reproducible, including search terms, Boolean logic, truncation symbols, filters (e.g., language, document type, publication year), inclusion/exclusion criteria, and date of data retrieval. All data extraction and cleaning procedures must be described in detail, including deduplication, normalization of author names and institutions, removal of irrelevant entries, and treatment of missing data. Authors must define all bibliometric indicators (e.g., total publications, total citations, h-index, co-citation frequency, bibliographic coupling) and provide the parameters and thresholds used in the analysis (e.g., minimum citation counts, node inclusion thresholds). Clearly specify all software tools used (e.g., VOSviewer, Bibliometrix R-package, CiteSpace, Gephi, Microsoft Excel, Python), including version numbers and visualization techniques. For network analyses (e.g., co-authorship, co-citation, keyword co-occurrence), describe the algorithms used (e.g., fractional counting, LinLog layout, modularity clustering) and provide interpretation guidance. Authors must address potential limitations of bibliometric methods, including database bias, citation lag, name disambiguation, and exclusion of non-indexed sources. Ethical data use, reproducibility, and alignment with responsible research metrics principles (e.g., DORA, Leiden Manifesto) are expected.
General Requirements: All original studies must report the setting, duration, and geographic location of the research. Provide detailed information about data management procedures, including data coding, anonymization, encryption, storage, access control, and long-term retention plans. If any proprietary instruments, reagents, software, or devices were used, provide the manufacturer’s name, city, and country. If methods were previously published, cite the original source and describe any adaptations or modifications made.
Ethical Considerations: A dedicated subsection on ethics is mandatory. Authors must state the name of the ethics committee or institutional review board that approved the study, include the approval number or reference code, and confirm that written informed consent was obtained from all participants (or assent from minors and consent from guardians, where applicable). Describe measures to protect participant confidentiality, data security, and compliance with international ethical standards such as the Declaration of Helsinki or institutional codes of conduct. If the study was exempt from formal ethical review, provide justification for the exemption in accordance with local regulatory guidelines.
Results
The Results section must present the findings of the study clearly, accurately, and without interpretation. Results should be structured using appropriate subheadings to enhance readability and alignment with the research objectives or phases of analysis. The presentation of results must follow a logical sequence corresponding to the study design, research questions, and methods described earlier. Avoid duplicating data across text, tables, and figures.
For quantitative and quasi-experimental studies, begin with a clear description of the participant flow (e.g., total screened, eligible, excluded, and analyzed). Include baseline characteristics of the sample using descriptive statistics (e.g., means, standard deviations, frequencies, percentages). Report outcomes in the order specified in the methods, providing effect sizes, confidence intervals, p-values, and measures of variance as appropriate. Subgroup, stratified, or adjusted analyses should be clearly labeled. Address missing data, dropouts, or protocol deviations using appropriate flowcharts (e.g., CONSORT-style). State the statistical software used for analysis. All statistical results must be reported in accordance with accepted conventions (e.g., exact p-values, confidence intervals, test statistics).
For qualitative studies, present the major themes, subthemes, and patterns that emerged from the analysis, supported by direct participant quotations. Provide identifiers (e.g., participant number, role) to preserve anonymity while demonstrating credibility. Use thematic subheadings and describe the relationships between themes. Visual tools such as thematic maps, diagrams, or tables summarizing theme frequency or development stages are encouraged for clarity and structure.
For mixed-methods studies, results from the quantitative and qualitative components must be reported in parallel or sequentially, depending on the design. Integration of findings should be explicitly demonstrated, either narratively or through joint displays (e.g., matrices, merged tables) showing how data sources converge, diverge, or complement each other. The relationship between datasets and how integration enhances understanding of the research problem should be emphasized.
For systematic reviews and meta-analyses, begin by summarizing the study selection process using a PRISMA-compliant flow diagram. Describe the characteristics of included studies, methodological quality, and risk of bias assessments. For meta-analyses, present forest plots, effect sizes (e.g., odds ratios, mean differences), heterogeneity statistics (I², Q), and results of sensitivity or subgroup analyses. Report findings for each outcome and across study types or populations. Include publication bias assessment results (e.g., funnel plots, Egger’s test) if applicable.
For qualitative meta-synthesis, present the synthesized findings according to the selected analytic framework (e.g., themes, third-order constructs, lines-of-argument). Clearly distinguish between first-order (participant quotes), second-order (authors' interpretations), and third-order (synthesized) concepts. Present conceptual relationships among studies visually when appropriate, and provide examples from included literature to support interpretive depth and conceptual clarity.
For concept analysis studies, present the defining attributes, antecedents, consequences, surrogate terms, model and contrary cases, and empirical referents. Tables or diagrams summarizing the defining features and comparative terminology across disciplines are recommended. The analysis should be reported in a structured format consistent with the chosen conceptual framework (e.g., Walker and Avant, Rodgers, Chinn and Kramer).
For scoping reviews, the Results section must begin with a PRISMA-ScR flow diagram detailing the screening and selection process, from initial identification to final inclusion, with clear justification for excluded records. Authors should report the number and characteristics of included sources, including publication year, geographic distribution, study design, populations studied, and conceptual focus. Results of data charting should be presented in a structured and descriptive manner, using tables or figures to summarize key findings across the included studies. The findings should be organized through thematic groupings, narrative syntheses, or content maps, depending on the analytical approach outlined in the Methods. If a critical appraisal was performed, results should be summarized, but without evaluative interpretation. The Results section must remain descriptive and avoid speculative commentary or conclusions, which should be reserved for the Discussion section.
For bibliometric studies, the results section of a bibliometric study should begin with a descriptive overview of the dataset, including the total number of publications analyzed, publication trends over time, and geographic, institutional, or author-level distributions. Authors should report standard bibliometric indicators such as total citation counts, h-index values, most cited authors or documents, and citation density. Findings should be presented in tables and visual figures, including bar graphs, trend lines, and network maps, as appropriate. In cases of network or clustering analyses (e.g., co-citation, co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence), the visualizations must be accompanied by a narrative description of network structures, clustering patterns, and thematic groupings. Parameters for inclusion in the network (e.g., minimum citation thresholds) and interpretation of nodes and edges must be clearly explained. Any software-generated metrics should be interpreted in relation to the study objectives. Authors must acknowledge and briefly discuss potential methodological limitations within the results section, such as citation lag, database coverage bias, or author name disambiguation, while reserving deeper critical reflection for the Discussion.
Tables and Figures: Tables and figures must be used to present complex or detailed data in a clear, accessible format. All tables and figures must be numbered consecutively in the order of appearance and must be referenced within the text. Titles should be concise yet descriptive, and all abbreviations used in tables or figures must be defined in a footnote. Tables and figures must be embedded in the text near the point of relevance, not placed at the end of the manuscript. Do not duplicate information across text, tables, and figures.
Units, Measures, and Reporting Standards: All measurements must be reported in standard international (SI) units. Results must be presented with appropriate statistical notation, and decimal places should be consistent and relevant. P-values should be exact and reported to three decimal places unless p < 0.001. Confidence intervals should accompany all major estimates.
Data Transparency and Supplementary Material: If extensive datasets, additional tables, or supplementary figures are included, they must be submitted as supplementary material with appropriate labeling and cross-referencing in the main text. The authors are encouraged to share anonymized data in repositories and provide a data availability statement in accordance with open science standards.
Discussion
The Discussion section must provide a critical, coherent, and scholarly interpretation of the study’s findings in relation to the research question, study objectives, and broader context. Authors should focus on explaining the meaning, relevance, and implications of the results rather than repeating numerical data already presented in the Results section. The narrative must demonstrate how the findings contribute to nursing, midwifery, public health, or healthcare knowledge and practice.
Begin with a brief restatement of the key findings, explicitly linking them to the original aim or hypothesis. Discuss patterns, relationships, or unexpected outcomes observed in the results and offer reasoned interpretations based on theory, context, or prior research. Avoid over-reliance on previously published literature or excessive citation; the emphasis should remain on the author’s own interpretation and integration of findings. Where relevant, compare results with prior studies but focus on explaining similarities, discrepancies, or novel contributions.
Highlight the practical, clinical, educational, or policy implications of the study, clearly stating how the findings may inform future practice, intervention development, or decision-making in nursing, midwifery, or healthcare systems. If applicable, discuss the relevance of the findings across different populations, settings, or cultural contexts.
Limitations of the study must be acknowledged with transparency. Authors should explain how methodological constraints, sample characteristics, measurement tools, or contextual variables may have influenced the findings, and suggest ways these limitations could be addressed in future research. However, the tone should remain constructive and focused on advancing knowledge.
Conclude the discussion with a strong, evidence-based closing paragraph that synthesizes the study’s main contribution, its implications, and directions for future inquiry. The discussion must be concise, insightful, and grounded in the data presented—without subheadings or repetition of results
Conclusions
The conclusion should present a clear, concise, and self-contained summary of the study’s key findings and their implications, based strictly on the results. It must convey the main message of the research without repeating detailed data or referencing prior literature. Authors should briefly state what the study contributes to knowledge, practice, education, or policy in nursing, midwifery, or health sciences. Conclusions must avoid overgeneralization, speculation, or unsupported claims, and must not introduce new information. The final statement should confidently reflect the significance of the findings while pointing to meaningful directions for future research or practical application.
Research Methods and Reporting (RMR) Articles
The Research Methods and Reporting section in Nursing Target Journal is dedicated to high-quality articles that improve the design, conduct, analysis, reporting, or evaluation of health and nursing research. Articles should present methodological innovations, critical appraisal of existing frameworks, new or revised research instruments, or guidance on applying reporting standards (e.g., STROBE, CONSORT, COREQ, PRISMA, GRAMMS, TIDieR).
We welcome submissions focused on quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, and implementation science methodologies, as well as those tailored to nursing, midwifery, public health, or interdisciplinary healthcare research.
We accept a variety of methodological and reporting-focused papers, including but not limited to:
- Novel methodological frameworks or designs in nursing and health research
- Critiques or enhancements of reporting guidelines (e.g., STROBE, CONSORT, COREQ, PRISMA, TIDieR, GRAMMS)
- Meta-method analyses or meta-syntheses (qualitative or quantitative)
- Practical guidance on statistical methods, sampling, saturation, or analytic rigor
- Conceptual or theoretical model development in research design
- Guidance for improving transparency, reproducibility, or research ethics
Articles must demonstrate methodological clarity, rigor, and broad applicability. Authors should justify the need for the method or guideline proposed, provide reproducible steps, and discuss its potential impact. Use precise language, define all terms and acronyms, and provide full details on tools, software, or protocols. Authors are strongly encouraged to submit a completed reporting guideline checklist as supplementary file.
An unstructured abstract of no more than 300 words is required. The content and structure of the abstract should be flexible, depending on the type and focus of the methodological or reporting contribution.
Editorial Articles
Editorials in Nursing Target Journal are commissioned articles written by members of the editorial board or invited experts in nursing, midwifery, public health, or health policy. These concise articles offer critical insights, expert reflections, or strategic commentary on timely issues relevant to the journal’s mission.
Editorials may accompany featured research, address policy and practice debates, highlight pressing healthcare challenges, or explore trends in methodology, ethics, or education. All editorials published in NTJ are by invitation only and are not open for unsolicited submission.
Manuscript Components and Requirements (Editorial Article)
|
Title |
Must be clear, concise, and indicative of the article’s key message. Avoid abbreviations or technical jargon. |
||
|
Abstract |
Required. Submit an unstructured abstract of no more than 250 words summarizing the main argument. |
||
|
Keywords |
|
||
|
Main text |
Narrative style; authors may use subheadings to organize arguments logically. Length: 1,000–1,500 words (maximum 2,000). |
||
|
Tables and figures |
Up to three (3) items total, including any combination of tables and/or figures. All must directly support the text. |
||
|
References |
Up to 20 references,]. Prioritize current, relevant literature. |
Opinion Articles
Opinion articles in Nursing Target Journal (NTJ) provide a scholarly platform for authors to present timely, reflective, and well-argued perspectives on emerging, controversial, or underexplored topics in nursing, midwifery, public health, and healthcare systems. These articles should offer critical insights, challenge prevailing assumptions, and foster dialogue across clinical, academic, policy, and methodological domains. In addition to thematic issues, NTJ welcomes opinion submissions focusing on methodological challenges, reporting guideline limitations (e.g., STROBE, CONSORT, COREQ, PRISMA), and research integrity within quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies.
Manuscript Components and Requirements (Opinion Article)
|
Title |
Must be clear, concise, and indicative of the article’s key message. Avoid abbreviations or technical jargon. |
||
|
Abstract |
Required. Submit an unstructured abstract of no more than 250 words summarizing the main argument. |
||
|
Keywords |
|
||
|
Main text |
Narrative style; authors may use subheadings to organize arguments logically. Length: 1,500–2,500 words (maximum 3,000). |
||
|
Tables and figures |
Up to three (3) items total, including any combination of tables and/or figures. All must directly support the text. |
||
|
References |
Up to 40 references,]. Prioritize current, relevant literature. |
Opinion articles should reflect critical thinking, professional insight, and scholarly depth. A first-person voice is acceptable, but claims must be well-supported by logical reasoning, existing evidence, or reflective clinical experience. The tone must remain respectful, balanced, and free of promotional or inflammatory content, even when addressing contentious issues.
Correspondence Articles
Correspondence articles in Nursing Target Journal provide a forum for brief, scholarly communication related to recently published articles, emerging scientific issues, professional disagreements, or public health topics relevant to nursing, midwifery, public health or healthcare systems. These letters should be constructive, evidence-based, and concise, and may:
- Comment on articles recently published in NTJ
- Respond to previously published Correspondence
- Raise new insights, observations, or professional concerns
- Clarify or correct scientific information relevant to NTJ’s readership
All Correspondence submissions are subject to editorial review and must meet the journal’s standards of clarity, respect, and academic relevance.
Manuscript Components and Requirements (Correspondence Article)
|
Title |
|
||
|
Abstract |
Not Required. |
||
|
Keywords |
|
||
|
Main text |
Up to 600 words. Subheadings are not required but may be used for clarity. |
||
|
Tables and figures |
1 item maximum (only if essential to the letter’s content). |
||
|
References |
Up to 10 references |
Correspondence articles should be focused, scholarly, and respectful. Critiques should be evidence-informed and avoid personal attacks or speculative language. Authors should support claims with references and ensure factual accuracy. The tone must remain professional and avoid inflammatory or promotional statements.
If the Correspondence refers to a previously published NTJ article, it should be submitted within 6 weeks of the article’s publication. Letters submitted beyond this period may be declined unless addressing major factual or scientific concerns.
Declarations
All manuscripts submitted to Nursing Target Journal must include the following declarations, regardless of study type or design. These statements ensure transparency, ethical integrity, and adherence to international standards for scholarly publishing.
Ethics approval and consent to participate: All research involving human participants must include a clear statement of ethical approval. Authors must provide the name of the institutional ethics committee or review board, the country where approval was granted, and the ethics approval reference number or protocol ID. If ethical approval was not required, a justified explanation must be included in accordance with national or institutional regulations. Authors must also confirm that informed written consent was obtained from all participants.
Consent for publication: If the manuscript includes identifiable data, images, or quotations from participants, authors must confirm that written informed consent for publication was obtained. If not applicable, please state: “Not applicable.”
Availability of data and materials: Authors must include a data availability statement. If data are publicly available, provide the name of the repository and a persistent link or DOI. If data are not publicly accessible, include one of the following:
|
1 |
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available in [repository name] at [DOI/link]. |
|
2 |
The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. |
|
3 |
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article. |
|
4 |
No new data were generated or analyzed during this study. |
Competing interests: Authors must declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may influence the study. These may include financial relationships, advisory roles, institutional affiliations, or personal relationships. If no competing interests exist, the following must be stated:
“The authors declare no competing interests.”
Funding: All sources of financial support for the research must be disclosed. Include the name of the funding agency and the grant number, if applicable. If no funding was received, please include one of the following:
|
1 |
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors |
|
2 |
This study received no external funding |
|
3 |
This study was supported by [Funder Name] under Grant No. [XXX], Country name |
Authors’ contributions: Each author’s role must be described using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT), such as: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, formal analysis, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, supervision, and project administration. Author initials or full names must be used. All authors must meet ICMJE authorship criteria and have approved the final version of the manuscript.
Clinical Trial registration: All clinical trials must be prospectively registered in a publicly accessible trial registry. Accepted registries include ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, the EU Clinical Trials Register, and the Open Science Framework (OSF). The manuscript must include the registry name, registration number, and date of registration. If the study is not a clinical trial, please state:
“This study is not a clinical trial and is not subject to trial registration requirements.”
Acknowledgements: Authors may acknowledge individuals or organizations that provided non-authorial contributions, such as assistance with data collection, translation, software, technical support, or manuscript editing. All acknowledged individuals must give permission to be named.
Tables and Figures
All tables submitted to Nursing Target Journal must be presented in a clean, clear, and editable format using Microsoft Word or Excel. Tables must be embedded directly within the manuscript at the appropriate location, not submitted as images or separate files. Use consistent formatting, appropriate column headings, and standard font (Georgia) for legibility. Each table must be numbered consecutively, titled descriptively, and include all necessary footnotes and definitions for abbreviations used. Tables must not duplicate content presented in figures or text. Authors are responsible for ensuring accuracy, clarity, and proper alignment of all data. The editorial team reserves the right to request formatting or content revisions for any tables that do not meet NTJ’s publication standards.
All figures submitted to Nursing Target Journal must be of high visual and technical quality, using Georgia font for all text elements. Figures should be designed with NTJ’s official color palette; if multiple colors are used, at least one color must match the NTJ brand color to maintain visual consistency. Figures created using Microsoft Office applications (Word, PowerPoint, Excel) must be submitted in their original editable formats. Figures generated from non-Microsoft programs must be converted to TIFF or JPEG format at a minimum resolution of 300 dpi. The editorial office reserves the right to request figure revisions to ensure compliance with visual and publishing standards.
References
All authors are required to use the APA 7th edition referencing style for in-text citations and reference lists. To ensure accuracy and consistency, we strongly encourage the use of reference management tools such as EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley. Using APA style enhances the clarity and professionalism of your manuscript and aligns with the journal's formatting standards.
Journal article
Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (year). Article title. Journal Name, vol. no.(issue no.), page range. DOI or URL
Ahmed, S. K. (2024). The pillars of trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 2, 100051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2024.100051
Ahmed, S. K., Mohammed, R. A., Nashwan, A. J., Ibrahim, R. H., Abdalla, A. Q., Ameen, B. M. M., & Khdhir, R. M. (2025). Using thematic analysis in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 6, 100198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2025.100198
Book
Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (year). Book title. Publisher.
Miller, A. J., Thomson, F., & Callagher, D. (1998). Affluence in suburbia. BL Books.
Chapter in book
Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (year). Chapter title. In A. Editor, B. Editor, &
- Editor (Eds.), Book title (pp. xxx–xxx). Publisher.
Miller, A. J., Thomson, F., & Callagher, D. (1998). Epping case study. In C. Carter (Ed.),
Affluence in suburbia (pp. 200–250). BL Books.
Website
Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (date). Title of work. Site Name. URL
Avramova, N. (2019, January 3). The secret to a long, happy, healthy life? Think age- positive. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/03/health/respect-toward-elderly-leads-to- long-life-intl/index.html
World Health Organization. (2018, March). Questions and answers on immunization and vaccine safety. https://www.who.int/features/qa/84/en
Conference paper
Contributor, A. A., Contributor, B. B., & Contributor, C. C. (date). Title of contribution [Type of contribution]. Conference name, location. DOI or URL
Fistek, A., Jester, E., & Sonnenberg, K. (2017, July 12–15). Everybody’s got a little music in them: Using music therapy to connect, engage, and motivate [Conference session]. Autism Society National Conference, Milwaukee, WI, United States. https://asa.confex.com/asa/2017/webprogramarchives/Session9517.html
Nursing Target Journal is licenced under a 