Shh! Editor Confidential: An Interview with Heather Carter-Templeton, PhD, RN, NI-BC, FAAN

Cynthia Saver, MS, RN

Writer’s Camp Counselor

---

Practical insights from the editor’s chair.

---

In this second edition of Shh! Editor Confidential, I sat down (virtually) with Heather Carter-Templeton, PhD, RN, NI-BC, FAAN, who has been editor-in-chief for CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing since 2025. Her transition into the role was a natural one — she previously served as deputy editor, starting in 2023.

CIN has been serving readers for almost 35 years and was one of the first nursing journals to receive an impact factor. Members of the Alliance for Nursing Informatics (ANI) are eligible to receive CIN at a discounted subscription rate.

In addition to her journal work, Carter-Templeton is chair of the Adult Health Department, Director of Evaluation, and Professor at the West Virginia University School of Nursing. She has more than 20 years’ experience in academia.

Cynthia Saver: How would you describe CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing in a nutshell?

Heather Carter-Templeton: CIN  informs nurses at all levels about new and emerging technologies and applications of those technologies. It’s the only nursing specific informatics journal that is indexed in major databases, including Clarivate Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing Administration and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), ProQuest, and PubMed. Most of our readers are involved in informatics in some way, but all nurses would be interested in many of the articles, particularly those about innovations that would be useful to them in their practice.

CS: Tell me about how you navigated the transition from deputy editor to editor-in-chief.

HC-T: I had a really good mentor in Leslie Nicoll, PhD, MBA, RN, FAAN, the previous editor-in-chief because I had worked with her for quite some time. I served on the editorial board starting in 2015, then became the section editor for ANI Connection, which features news, updates, and research projects, in 2016. I was later asked to become deputy editor.

I’m grateful that I received a lot of coaching and guidance, and because Leslie is Editor Emerita, I still contact her if I have questions.

CS: What prompted you to embark on your editorial career?

HC-T:  l like to write and seek out opportunities to learn more about writing. One of my early experiences after my doctoral work was to attend a National League for Nursing writing retreat. I’ve learned from many prolific authors like Leslie and Marilyn Oermann, PhD, RN, ANEF, FAAN. When I saw the CIN advertisement for a section editor, I felt ready to share my own expertise and to help others become published authors.

CS: What initiatives have you worked on since becoming editor-in-chief, and what are your future goals?

HC-T: Over the past year I’ve worked with the managing editor to streamline the manuscript submission process for authors and peer reviewers. We worked on making systems more user friendly, so the hope is authors and reviewers will find it easier to submit.

As far as the future: Leslie built an impressive journal, and I hope to extend that work. We want CIN to be at the forefront of informing nurses about technological developments. There is so much going on in that space, particularly with the introduction and widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI). Change is happening rapidly, and the journal provides a way to look at that change with a nursing lens.

I’m also hoping to have a special issue, maybe every two years, based on a current topic. I think that can help bring more visibility to the journal. 

CS: What types of backgrounds do your authors have?

HC-T: We have a nice mix of authors from academic and practice settings. Many are informatics nurses, and we also have nurses who are part of a team working on informatics related projects. We have many submissions, and I think that might be partly driven by the interest in AI: People are exploring how AI is being integrated into different technologies.

CS: Speaking of AI, what do you think is its role in writing and publishing?

HC-T: It’s natural that those working in informatics would want to explore the use of AI in writing; they are already using it in their healthcare systems. I think AI can be very supportive in some areas like outlining, but I would discourage anyone from using it to write a manuscript. I would also discourage peer reviewers from using it to write their review, although it might be helpful to answer a question the reviewer might have about a specific statement made in a manuscript. AI also can be helpful for project work in areas such as data mining and analysis.

At CIN, we require authors to be transparent about their use AI tools in writing, production of images or graphical elements, and collection and analysis of data. Authors need to disclose the tools and how they were used and understand that they are responsible for the content of the manuscript so are liable for any breach in publication ethics.

CS: Do you accept queries, and if so, what makes a good query?

HC-T: I’m always open to queries. I think the more information an author can share about the specifics related to the work the better, but they also need to be succinct. The goal is to provide insight. Sometimes people only share a title or a line or two, so it’s not easy to figure out exactly what the article would be about.

I also encourage potential authors to look at what’s recently been published, because we don’t want too much redundancy in topics. Recently, authors have been sending CIN manuscripts with topics or conceptual approaches similar to what we have published. It’s important to have a fresh approach that contributes to the literature.

CS: What is your best advice for authors?

HC-T: Creating good habits related to writing is really important, for example, setting up a routine. You might establish regular times to write or dedicate a space to your writing work. Having a routine will help you become a prolific author. 

Authors should be very familiar with the literature related to their topic so they can identify gaps they can fill. When targeting a specific journal, authors should look at what has been published recently and the types of articles the journal is looking for. They also need to consider the types of readers the journal is targeting. Are those the readers you want to reach? Some of this information can be found in the author guidelines on the journal’s website.

Think of your writing in terms of: Begin with the end in mind.

When it comes to submitting the manuscript, pay attention to the formatting instructions. If the article isn’t formatted correctly, we return it to the author even if we think it might be a fit for the journal.

When it comes to revising, it’s important for authors not to give up when they see the peer review comments. If you receive a “revise and resubmit” message, it’s usually a signal that the editor of the journal and those who reviewed your work see something in it that would be beneficial. Revise based on the comments.

CS: You are very involved in the informatics field. There are a limited number of journals in the specialty, so you often are part of a writing team for a manuscript that is a good fit for CIN. How do you navigate the publication process in that situation?

HC-T: I feel very strongly that I should not be involved in processing that manuscript. I let our managing editor know that a manuscript where I’m a coauthor is going to be submitted, so she can assign it a nurse who edits a section of our journal. I’m also “blinded” in our editorial management system so I can’t see the manuscript and actions related to it. The section editor decides if the manuscript will be sent for peer review and manages that process.

CS: You have done research in the editorial field, such as the articles A bibliometric analysis of review types published in the nursing scientific literature and Citations of articles in predatory nursing journals. Why is this type of work important to the editorial field?

HC-T: I’m going to paraphrase what Marilyn Oermann has written. Conferences and journals are where we communicate what’s going on in our fields, so it’s important to periodically step back and look at the landscape of the literature to see what has been done — what the focus areas have been as well as how and where things have been disseminated.

CS: What do you like best about your job?

HC-T: I love informatics, so it’s such a blessing to be able to read and review the articles that come in. I like watching the evolution of a submission as it moves through the peer review, revision, and editing processes that shape the work. I also like the community of our peer reviewers, who are the key to making the work the best it can be to help it come to fruition in terms of an informative publication.

CS: On the reverse side: What do you like least about your job or what are some of the challenges?

HC-T: It’s never fun to reject a manuscript because I know someone probably worked really hard on it.

As far as challenges, it would be authors who opt not to take the advice of peer reviewers, when the suggestions would make the manuscript better. It’s helpful to have others look at your work; they sometimes see things that you don’t see because you’re too close to the content. I realize that comments can be a tough pill to swallow, but the goal is to make the article more helpful to readers. Sometimes it’s hard to convey the value of what a reviewer is suggesting. If I could have a conversation with each author, it might be helpful, but it’s not practical.

CS: Speaking of peer reviewers, are you looking for them?

HC-T: We’re always looking for peer reviewers. I’m so grateful for our reviewers; we simply could not publish a quality journal without them.

We have recruited peer reviewers from authors who have submitted manuscripts to us because we can see their writing and the spaces they are working in and we know that they understand the writing process. But we are also open to people who are working in the specialty who have not written before, but have a deep understanding of the content. Their perspectives and feedback are valuable too. We have multiple peer reviewers for each manuscript, so I would pair this person with someone who has writing experience.

Annually we recognize our peer reviewers on the journal’s website and on our social media platforms. There is no monetary compensation for reviewers, but we offer them contact hours for their reviews.

CS: Could you share a little about CIN’s publishing process?

HC-T: I, along with our managing editor, Lisa Marshall, review submitted manuscripts to see if they are appropriate for peer review. The managing editor checks items like formatting and making sure they are prepared per author guidelines. When the reviews come back, I read the feedback and decide whether to reject the manuscript or return to the author for revisions based on the peer review comments.

When the revised manuscript is resubmitted, I check to be sure the authors addressed everything. If there is more detailed editing required, I’ll do that and send to the author to be sure they are okay with what I’ve done.

Our production team handles several areas, such as copyediting, checking figures and tables for formatting and copyright permission, author information, and laying out the manuscript.

CS: Any final comments for Writer’s Camp readers?

HC-T: I think the biggest thing to for those that haven’t been involved in writing is to continue to learn about the process and develop strong habits. It’s also helpful to work  with someone who’s a seasoned writer. Team writing might also be something to consider.

CS: That’s a good note to end on. Thank you, Dr. Carter-Templeton. I appreciate your time and expertise.

Author: Cynthia Saver

Reviewed and edited by: Leslie H. Nicoll

Copyright © 2026 Writer’s Camp and Cynthia Saver. CC-BY-ND 4.0

Citation: Saver C. Shh! Editor Confidential: An interview with Heather Carter-Templeton, PhD, RN, NI-BC, FAAN. The Writer’s Camp Journal, 2(3),11. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.21514510