The Netherlands Journal of Critical Care (Neth. J. Crit. Care) is committed to maintaining high standards of editorial integrity, academic quality, transparency, and publication ethics. Editors play a central role in ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated fairly, independently, and consistently.

1. Editorial Responsibilities

Editors are responsible for managing manuscripts throughout the editorial process and ensuring that decisions are based on academic merit, originality, relevance, scientific quality, and ethical standards.

Editors should:

• Handle manuscripts objectively and professionally.
• Ensure that the peer-review process is fair and appropriate.
• Protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.
• Identify and manage potential conflicts of interest.
• Maintain editorial independence.
• Ensure that publication decisions are not influenced by commercial, personal, or institutional interests.
• Address ethical concerns and allegations of research or publication misconduct appropriately.

2. Initial Manuscript Assessment

Upon submission, editors should assess whether the manuscript:

• Falls within the journal's aims and scope.
• Meets the basic submission requirements.
• Demonstrates sufficient academic and scientific quality.
• Presents original and relevant content.
• Complies with applicable ethical and publication standards.
• Contains the necessary declarations and supporting documentation.

Manuscripts that are unsuitable for the journal or do not meet minimum editorial requirements may be rejected without external peer review.

3. Reviewer Selection

Editors should select reviewers based on relevant subject expertise, research experience, academic qualifications, and suitability for evaluating the manuscript.

Reviewers should be independent and free from conflicts of interest that could compromise the objectivity of their assessment.

Editors should consider reviewer availability, expertise, previous reviewing performance, and potential conflicts when selecting reviewers.

4. Single-Blind Peer Review

The journal follows a single-blind peer-review process. Reviewers are provided with the authors' identities and affiliations, while reviewer identities are concealed from authors.

Editors should take appropriate measures to protect reviewer confidentiality throughout the editorial and publication process.

5. Editorial Decision-Making

Editors should make decisions based on the scientific and academic merits of the manuscript and the recommendations received through peer review.

Possible editorial decisions include:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

Editorial decisions should be communicated clearly and professionally to authors.

6. Confidentiality

Editors must maintain strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts, reviewer identities, reviewer reports, editorial discussions, and unpublished research information.

Information obtained through the editorial process must not be used for personal, professional, or commercial advantage.

7. Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose and appropriately manage any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest.

An editor should not handle a manuscript when personal, professional, financial, institutional, or academic relationships could compromise impartiality. Where necessary, the manuscript should be assigned to another qualified editor.

8. Research and Publication Ethics

Editors should follow recognized principles of publication ethics and research integrity, including relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Editors should remain alert to concerns involving:

• Plagiarism
• Duplicate or redundant publication
• Fabrication or falsification of data
• Authorship disputes
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest
• Ethical approval concerns
• Inappropriate image or data manipulation
• Unethical research practices

Where concerns arise, editors should investigate them appropriately and take corrective action when necessary.

9. Reviewer Conduct

Editors should ensure that reviewers understand their responsibilities regarding confidentiality, objectivity, conflicts of interest, and timely submission of reviews.

Reviewers who provide inappropriate, biased, offensive, or unsubstantiated comments may be replaced or excluded from the review process.

10. Handling Revisions

Editors should evaluate revised manuscripts carefully and determine whether the authors have adequately addressed the concerns raised during peer review.

Where necessary, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or sent to new reviewers for further assessment.

11. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by providing clear and substantive reasons for reconsideration.

Editors should consider legitimate appeals objectively and independently. An appeal should not automatically result in a change of decision unless there are valid academic or procedural grounds for reconsideration.

12. Corrections and Retractions

Editors should take appropriate action when significant errors, ethical concerns, or publication misconduct are identified after publication.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may publish a correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction in accordance with applicable publication-ethics principles.

13. Editorial Independence

Editors must maintain independence from advertisers, sponsors, commercial interests, authors, institutions, and other external influences.

Commercial relationships or advertising arrangements must not affect manuscript evaluation, peer review, editorial decisions, or publication content.

14. Transparency and Accountability

Editors should maintain accurate editorial records and ensure that the journal's policies and procedures are clearly communicated to authors, reviewers, and readers.

Editorial decisions should be defensible, consistent, and based on established journal policies and recognized scholarly standards.

15. Continuous Improvement

Editors are encouraged to remain informed about developments in critical care medicine, research methodology, publishing standards, peer review, and publication ethics.

The editorial team should periodically review journal policies and processes to improve the quality, efficiency, transparency, and integrity of the publication process.

The Netherlands Journal of Critical Care expects all editors to uphold the highest standards of professionalism, confidentiality, fairness, academic integrity, and ethical conduct throughout the editorial process.