![]() Were they asked to assess the burden of the intervention and time required to participate in the research?.How were they involved in the recruitment to and conduct of the study?.How were patients/the public involved in the design of this study?.How were the research question(s) and outcome measures developed and informed by their priorities, experience, and preferences?.At what stage in the research process were patients/the public first involved in the research and how?.The Patient and Public Involvement statement should provide a brief response to the following questions, tailored as appropriate for the study design reported. Please note that this practice is only applicable for Research Articles, Study Protocols, and Cohort Profiles. We therefore continue to consider papers where patients were not involved. We appreciate that patient and public involvement is relatively new and may not be feasible or appropriate for all papers. To support co-production of research we request that authors provide a Patient and Public Involvement statement in the methods section of their papers, under the subheading ‘Patient and public involvement’. Please find more information about ORCID and BMJ’s policy on our Author Hub.īMJ encourages active patient and public involvement in clinical research as part of its patient and public partnership strategy. Records are uploaded once a final decision or revision has been made on the article. As BMJ Open is an open peer-reviewed Journal, information about the Journal, review, and article will be uploaded (title, DOI, URL, etc) into the reviewer’s ORCID record. Reviewers are now able to share their activity by connecting their review to their ORCID account. ![]() Fast-track publication is at the discretion of the editors.Īs with research articles, protocols will be published under a Creative Commons licence. Reviewers will be instructed to check that the study is scientifically credible and ethically sound in its scope and methods, and that there is sufficient detail to instil confidence that the study will be conducted and analysed properly. The intention of peer review is not to alter the study design. Reviewers will be instructed to review for clarity and sufficient detail. Any protocols that do not meet both these criteria will be sent for open external peer review, with reviewer comments published online upon acceptance, as with research articles. We need to see peer-review reports that clearly show the protocol methodology has been thoroughly evaluated by suitably qualified experts. Please provide proof that these criteria are met when uploading your protocol. Authors, researchers and freelancers can also use iThenticate to screen their work before submission by visiting Peer review of study protocols BMJ Open will consider publishing without further peer review protocols that have formal ethical approval and have undergone independent peer review to gain funding from a recognised, open access advocating research-funding body (such as those listed by the JULIET project). BMJ runs manuscripts through iThenticate during the peer review process. iThenticate is a plagiarism screening service that verifies the originality of content submitted before publication. BMJ is a member of CrossCheck by CrossRef and iThenticate. Plagiarism is the appropriation of the language, ideas or thoughts of another without crediting their true source and representation of them as one’s own original work. Appeals must be made within 30 days of the reject decision. All decisions made on appeals are final, and the decision process could take longer than with original submissions. We ask that authors do not provide a revised manuscript during the appeal. For an appeal to be considered, authors must provide a detailed point-by-point response to all the concerns raised by the reviewers or editors involved with the manuscript. Post-publication peer review will also be possible via rapid responses.īMJ Open will consider appeals on rejected manuscripts provided the authors can demonstrate that the decision on their manuscript was flawed or not in line with the journal's policies. Upon publication, all previous versions of the manuscript will also be made available, as will the reviewers' comments and authors' replies to those comments. We recommend you use our instructions for reviewers as a checklist to ensure that your article is complete. Readers will be able to make these judgements for themselves. ![]() Reviewers will not be asked to judge importance or breadth of appeal. All articles published in BMJ Open will have been sent for external, open peer review.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |