Journal of Neurosurgery Academy

Journal of Neurosurgery Academy (JNA) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and ethical research practices. The journal follows the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

Scope of Peer Review

All surgical procedure articles, case reports and accompanying surgical videos submitted to JNA undergo peer review prior to publication. The journal does not publish original research articles, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, or meta-analyses. The journal does not guarantee acceptance of any initial submission. All decisions are based on editorial assessment, reviewer feedback, manuscript quality, scientific merit, originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and compliance with ethical and reporting standards.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, manuscripts and videos are screened by the Editorial Office and Handling Editor to determine whether they:

• Fall within the scope of the journal.
• Adhere to the journal's author guidelines.
• Include appropriate patient consent documentation.
• Protect patient confidentiality and privacy.
• Meet minimum standards for scientific, clinical, and educational quality.
• Include a video of sufficient technical quality for review.

Submissions that do not meet these requirements may be rejected without external peer review.

Reviewer Selection

Whenever possible, reviewers are matched to the manuscript according to their expertise. The journal’s reviewer database is continuously updated. JNA may consider non-binding reviewer suggestions from authors, but such recommendations are not necessarily used.

Eligible submissions are assigned to a Handling Editor, who invites at least two independent external reviewers with expertise in the relevant surgical specialty and procedure. Reviewers are not members of the journal's editorial decision-making team for the assigned manuscript.

Reviewers must have no conflicts of interest with the authors or the submitted work.

Peer Review Model

The journal operates a double-anonymous peer review process:

• Reviewers do not know the identities of the authors.
• Authors do not know the identities of the reviewers.
• Editors have access to author and reviewer identities for administrative purposes.
• Authors are expected to prepare manuscripts in blinded form according to the journal’s submission guidelines and to submit a separate title page containing full author information.

Review of Manuscript and Video

The accompanying surgical video is considered an integral component of the submission and is reviewed together with the manuscript.

Reviewers are asked to evaluate:

• Clinical relevance and educational value of the case.
• Accuracy and appropriateness of the surgical technique.
• Clarity and completeness of the procedural description.
• Consistency between the manuscript and video content.
• Quality of operative visualization and narration.
• Demonstration of critical surgical steps and decision-making.
• Reporting of outcomes, complications, and limitations.
• Compliance with ethical standards and patient confidentiality requirements.

JNA does not publish reviewer reports alongside accepted articles. The peer review process remains confidential.

Reviewer Recommendations

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

Editorial Decision

The Handling Editor considers the reviewer reports and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief or designated Senior Editor. The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or delegated senior editorial authority.

Editorial decisions are based on:

• Reviewer assessments.
• Clinical and educational value of the submission.
• Quality and completeness of the accompanying video.
• Ethical and professional standards.
• Suitability for the journal's readership.

Revisions

Authors receiving a request for revision should submit:

• A revised manuscript.
• A revised video, if requested.
• A point-by-point response to reviewer comments.

Revised submissions may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

Peer Review of Supplementary Materials

All supplementary figures, videos, images, and supporting materials are included in the peer review process.

Exceptions to Peer Review

Editorial announcements, corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, and other editorial content may not undergo external peer review.

Timeliness

The journal aims to provide an initial editorial decision within a reasonable timeframe. However, acceptance is not guaranteed, and timelines may vary.

If delays occur, authors will be informed and may withdraw their manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when appropriate.

Ethical Requirements

All submissions must comply with ethical standards, including patient consent for publication of case details, images, and videos.