Authors

Why publish in BMJ Open?

High Impact of your work 2 year Impact Factor: 2.692 5 year Impact Factor: 3.587 CiteScore: 3.9 SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): 0.982 Speed Days to first decision: 59 days (mean) Days from acceptance to publication: 24 days (mean)
Wide dissemination to a global audience 8.12 million article views 29,819 Altmetric mentions (with 1,451 mentions in news outlets & 63 mentions in policies) 5.4K Fans on Facebook and 17K Followers on Twitter More than 5,000 email alerts registrants

Editorial policy

BMJ Open is an open access journal dedicated exclusively to publishing medical research. The journal aims to provide rapid publication of research across a range of medical disciplines and therapeutic areas, through a continuous publication model. As well as publishing definitive articles, including small and specialist studies, BMJ Open will consider protocols and pilot studies. Read about the journal's aims and scope. Submissions will only be published after peer review, and reviewers' comments will be published alongside accepted manuscripts.
BMJ Open will not consider for publication any study partly or wholly funded by the tobacco industry. Read about the journal's policy on research funded by the tobacco industry. BMJ Open adheres to the highest standards concerning its editorial policies on publication ethics, scientific misconduct, consent and peer review criteria. To view all BMJ Journal policies please refer to the BMJ Author Hub policies page.

Copyright and authors’ rights

As an open access journal, BMJ Open adheres to the Budapest Open Access Initiative definition of open access. Articles are published under an exclusive licence or non-exclusive licence for UK Crown employees or where BMJ has agreed CC BY applies. For US Federal Government officers or employees acting as part of their official duties, the terms are as stated in accordance with our licence terms. Authors or their employers retain copyright. Such open access articles can be reused under the terms of the relevant Creative Commons licence to facilitate reuse of the content. please refer to the BMJ Open Author Licence. More information on copyright and authors’ rights.
When publishing in BMJ Open, authors choose between two licence types – CC-BY-NC and CC-BY (Creative Commons open access licences require payment of an article processing charge). As an author you may wish to post your article in an institutional or subject repository, or on a scientific social sharing network. You may also link your published article to your preprint (if applicable). What you can do with your article, without seeking permission, depends on the licence you have chosen and the version of your article. Please refer to the BMJ author self archiving and permissions policies page for more information.

Preprints

Preprints foster openness, accessibility and collaboration by allowing authors to make their findings immediately available to the research community and receive feedback on an article before it is submitted to a journal for formal publication. BMJ fully supports and encourages the archiving of preprints in any recognised, not-for-profit server such as medRxiv. BMJ does not consider the posting of an article in a dedicated preprint repository to be prior publication.
Preprints are reports of work that have not been peer-reviewed; Preprints should therefore not be used to guide clinical practice, health-related behaviour or health policy. For more information, please refer to our Preprint policy page.

Article processing charges

BMJ Open is an open access journal and levies an Article Processing Charge (APC) of 2,163 GBP (exclusive of VAT for UK and EU authors and GST for Australian and Indian authors) for all article types. There are no submission, colour or page charges.

Waivers and discounts

BMJ journals offer waivers for the full Article Processing Charge (100% discount of the APC) where all authors are based in low-income countries. See full waiver list*. Requests for waivers should be made before or during initial submission**. If an article reports funding from a funder with an open access mandate or policy that covers paying APCs, BMJ expects that the APC will be paid. Visit our author hub to learn more about our waivers policy and how to request one. You might be eligible for institutional funding. A number of institutions have open access agreements with BMJ which can either cover the whole cost of open access publishing for authors at participating institutions or can allow authors to receive a discount of the Article Processing Charge (APC).
Visit BMJ’s open access agreements page to find out whether your institution is a member and what discounts you may be entitled to. *These lists are based on the HINARI Core Offer Groups A and B, and the World Bank Country and Lending Groups, downloaded in July 2021. They will be updated annually. **Please note that applications for waivers or discounts should be made during initial submission and not after an article has been accepted. Editors are not involved in this process and the ability to pay has no bearing on editorial decisions. Payment will not be required unless your article is accepted. Accepted articles will not be published until payment has been received. BMJ does not refund APCs once paid.

Peer review process

All articles published in BMJ Open will have been sent for external, open peer review. Reviewers will not be asked to judge importance or breadth of appeal. Readers will be able to make these judgements for themselves. We recommend you use our instructions for reviewers as a checklist to ensure that your article is complete. Upon publication, all previous versions of the manuscript will also be made available, as will the reviewers' comments and authors' replies to those comments. Post-publication peer review will also be possible via rapid responses. BMJ 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. 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. We ask that authors do not provide a revised manuscript during the appeal. All decisions made on appeals are final, and the decision process could take longer than with original submissions. Appeals must be made within 30 days of the reject decision. 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. BMJ is a member of CrossCheck by CrossRef and iThenticate. iThenticate is a plagiarism screening service that verifies the originality of content submitted before publication. BMJ runs manuscripts through iThenticate during the peer review process. Authors, researchers and freelancers can also use iThenticate to screen their work before submission by visiting www.ithenticate.com.

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). Please provide proof that these criteria are met when uploading your protocol. We need to see peer-review reports that clearly show the protocol methodology has been thoroughly evaluated by suitably qualified experts. 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. Reviewers will be instructed to review for clarity and sufficient detail. The intention of peer review is not to alter the study design. 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. Fast-track publication is at the discretion of the editors. As with research articles, protocols will be published under a Creative Commons licence.

ORCID

Reviewers are now able to share their activity by connecting their review to their ORCID account. 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. Records are uploaded once a final decision or revision has been made on the article. Please find more information about ORCID and BMJ’s policy on our Author Hub.

Tobacco industry funded work

BMJ Open will not consider for publication papers reporting work funded wholly or partly by the tobacco industry. This journal also excludes work where the authors have personal financial ties with the tobacco industry. This applies to all content types. Read more on BMJ’s policy on work funded by the tobacco industry on the BMJ Author Hub.

Reporting patient and public involvement in research

BMJ encourages active patient and public involvement in clinical research as part of its patient and public partnership strategy. 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’. We appreciate that patient and public involvement is relatively new and may not be feasible or appropriate for all papers. We therefore continue to consider papers where patients were not involved. Please note that this practice is only applicable for Research Articles, Study Protocols, and Cohort Profiles. The Patient and Public Involvement statement should provide a brief response to the following questions, tailored as appropriate for the study design reported.
  • At what stage in the research process were patients/the public first involved in the research and how?
  • How were the research question(s) and outcome measures developed and informed by their priorities, experience, and preferences?
  • How were patients/the public involved in the design of this study?
  • How were they involved in the recruitment to and conduct of the study?
  • Were they asked to assess the burden of the intervention and time required to participate in the research?
  • How were (or will) they be involved in your plans to disseminate the study results to participants and relevant wider patient communities (e.g. by choosing what information/results to share, when, and in what format)?
If patients were not involved please state this. In addition to considering the points above we advise authors to look at guidance for best reporting of patient and public involvement as set out in the GRIPP2 reporting checklist. If the Patient and Public Involvement statement is missing in the submitted manuscript we will request that authors provide it.

Data Sharing

BMJ Open adheres to BMJ's Tier 2 data policy. We strongly encourage that data generated by your research that supports your article be made available as soon as possible, wherever legally and ethically possible. We also require data from clinical trials to be made available upon reasonable request.
To adhere to ICMJE guidelines, we require that a data sharing plan must be included with trial registration for clinical trials that begin enrolling participants on or after 1st January 2019. Changes to the plan must be noted in the Data Availability Statement and updated in the registry record. All research articles must contain a Data Availability Statement. For more information and FAQs, please see BMJ's full Data Sharing Policy page.

Resources

How can I maximise my chances of being published?

BMJ Open will publish all submissions judged to be technically sound after peer review. Asking yourself these five questions will help maximise your chances of a successful submission.
  1. Does my research fall within BMJ Open's aims and scope?
  2. Is the research question clear?
  3. Is the study design appropriate?
  4. Is the study valid?
  5. Is the research presented correctly?
These are intended to be aids to a successful submission and reflect the type of judgement we ask reviewers to make. If you have any questions please contact the editorial office.

Where can I find more general advice?

The pages above all contain useful information for anyone preparing a research article for BMJ Open. The following links provide more detailed information on how to perform and report research. The links are not exhaustive and if you know of any good resources we have not listed, please let us know. General advice on designing, carrying out and reporting research Authors' Submission Toolkit: A practical guide to getting your research published

Resources for data management and sharing

BMJ Open supports the idea that all appropriate datasets should be placed in open repositories. To assist, we have assembled some useful links and resources that cover best practice for data management plans through to sharing and citing complete datasets. Resources for data management and sharing

ORCID

BMJ has long supported the use of ORCID by integrating ORCID into our submission systems. BMJ Open mandates ORCID iDs for all submitting authors; this is published on the final article to promote discoverability and credit. Co-authors and reviewers are strongly encouraged to also connect their ScholarOne accounts to ORCID. We are also working with ORCID to recognise the importance of the reviewer community. Reviewers are able to share their activity by connecting their review to their ORCID account to gain recognition for their contributions.
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. Records are uploaded once a final decision or revision has been made on the article. Please find more information about ORCID and BMJ’s policy on our Author Hub.

Rapid responses

A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in BMJ Open; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed. Find out more about responses and how to submit a response.

Submission guidelines

Please review the below article type specifications including the required article lengths, illustrations, table limits and reference counts. Manuscripts should be as succinct as possible. For further support when making your submission please refer to the resources available on the BMJ Author Hub. Here you will find information on writing and formatting your research through to the peer review process and promoting your paper. You may also wish to use the language editing and translation services provided by BMJ Author Services.

Original research

Research submissions should have a clear, justified research question. We strongly encourage you to register your study. Prospective registration is mandatory for any clinical trials. Acceptable registries for trials include clinicaltrials.gov. We recommend Prospero for registration of systematic reviews. All articles should include the following:
  • The article title should include the research question and the study design. Titles should not declare the results of the study.
  • A structured abstract including all the following where appropriate (please note that for RCTs there is a specific CONSORT extension for abstracts):
    • objectives: clear statement of main study aim and major hypothesis/research question
    • design: e.g. prospective, randomised, blinded, case control
    • setting: level of care e.g. primary, secondary; number of participating centres. Generalise; don't use the name of a specific centre, but give geographical location if important
    • participants: numbers entering and completing the study; sex and ethnic group if appropriate. Clear definitions of selection, entry and exclusion criteria
    • interventions: what, how, when and how long (this can be deleted if there were no interventions)
    • primary and secondary outcome measures: planned (i.e. in the protocol) and those finally measured (if different, explain why) - for quantitative studies only
    • results: main results with (for quantitative studies) 95% confidence intervals and, where appropriate, the exact level of statistical significance and the number need to treat/harm. Whenever possible, state absolute rather than relative risks
    • conclusions: primary conclusions and their implications, suggest areas for further research if appropriate. Do not go beyond the data in the article
    • where applicable, trial registration: registry and number (for clinical trials and, if available, for observational studies and systematic reviews)
  • Please include a ‘Strengths and limitations of this study’ section after the abstract. This section should be no more than 5 bullet points relating specifically to the methods - not the results of the study. This will be published as a summary box after the abstract in the final published article.
  • The original protocol for the study, as a supplementary file.
  • A funding statement, preferably worded as follows. Either: 'This work was supported by [name of funder] grant number [xxx]' or 'This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors'. You must ensure that the full, correct details of your funder(s) and any relevant grant numbers are included.
  • A competing interests statement. See the BMJ Author Hub for details on what to include as competing interests.
  • Articles should list each author's contribution individually at the end; this section may also include contributors who do not qualify as authors. Please visit the ICMJE website for more information on authorship.
  • Any checklist and flow diagram for the appropriate reporting statement, e.g. STROBE (see below).
  • A patient consent form: any article that contains personal medical information about an identifiable living individual requires the patient's explicit consent before we can publish it. We will need the patient to sign our consent form, which requires the patient to have read the article. This form is available in multiple languages.
  • A data sharing statement, such as: "Technical appendix, statistical code, and dataset available from the Dryad repository, DOI: [include DOI for dataset here].
  • Tables and Figures, we ask that your article does not exceed up to eight figures and tables. Exceeding this will impact upon the paper's 'readability'. Authors are encouraged to submit figures and images in colour - there are no colour charges. Table headers should be provided at the top of each table in the manuscript. We require that you upload your figures as separate files rather than embedding them in the manuscript.
  • Supplementary and raw data can be placed online alongside the article although we prefer raw data to be made publicly available and linked to in a suitable repository (e.g. Dryad, FigShare). We may request that you separate out some material into supplementary data files to make the main manuscript clearer for readers.
We also recommend, but do not insist, that the discussion section is no longer than five paragraphs and follows this overall structure (you do not need to use these as subheadings): a statement of the principal findings; strengths and weaknesses of the study; strengths and weaknesses in relation to other studies, discussing important differences in results; the meaning of the study: possible explanations and implications for clinicians and policymakers; and unanswered questions and future research. At upload you will be asked to choose one general subject area that applies to your article - it will be published under this banner on the main table of contents. You will also be asked to select further subject headings to be used for the 'Browse by topic' section, and specific keywords for help with identifying reviewers. Following the lead of The BMJ and its patient partnership strategy, BMJ Open is encouraging active patient involvement in setting the research agenda. As such, we require authors of Research Articles to add a Patient and Public Involvement statement in the Methods section. Please see more details above.

Pilot studies

Articles reporting pilot studies should explain the work's wider context and explain why the term 'pilot study' applies. The term 'pilot study' should not be applied to justify reporting a small-scale study. Justifications for a pilot study include:
  • trialling a new procedure intended for use in a larger programme of research
  • establishing power calculations required for a full-scale study
  • establishing how many patients and/or healthcare professionals can be recruited
  • evaluating the financial, technical, administrative or logistic feasibility of a full-scale study, including issues of data collection, protocol adherence, and questionnaire design.
The sample/patient size should still be justified. The article should explain the impact that the pilot study had on decisions regarding future research.

Reporting guidelines

The guidelines listed below should be followed where appropriate. Please use these guidelines to structure your article. Completed applicable checklists, structured abstracts and flow diagrams should be uploaded with your submission; these will be published alongside the final version of your paper.
For reporting of randomised controlled trials: please use the appropriate extension to the CONSORT statement, including the extension for writing abstracts
For reporting qualitative research
For reporting qualitative research
For reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies
For reporting of systematic reviews
For reporting of systematic review and meta-analysis protocols
For reporting of scoping reviews
For reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies
For reporting protocols for RCTs
For reporting of gene-disease association studies
For reporting of studies developing, validating, or updating a prediction model, whether for diagnostic or prognostic purposes.
For reporting of consensus studies
For reporting of health economic evaluations The EQUATOR Network (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency Of Health Research) provides a comprehensive list of reporting guidelines.

Protocol

Protocol manuscripts should report planned or ongoing research studies. If data collection is complete, we will not consider the manuscript. We encourage the submission of protocol manuscripts at an early stage of the study. Protocols nearing completion of data collection will be treated on a case by case basis and the final decision on whether to consider a protocol for publication will rest with the Editor. Publishing study protocols enables researchers and funding bodies to stay up to date in their fields by providing exposure to research activity that may not otherwise be widely publicised. This can help prevent unnecessary duplication of work and will hopefully enable collaboration. Publishing protocols in full also makes available more information than is currently required by trial registries and increases transparency, making it easier for others (editors, reviewers and readers) to see and understand any deviations from the protocol that occur during the conduct of the study. The SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items for Randomized Trials) statement has now been published. It is an evidence-based tool developed through systematic review of a wide range of resources and consensus. It closely mirrors the CONSORT statement and also reflects important ethics considerations. We encourage investigators to adhere to the SPIRIT recommendations when drafting their protocols and include a completed SPIRIT checklist with their trial protocol submission. The PRISMA-P (Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols) is a new reporting guideline. An article stating the guideline checklist has now been published. The PRISMA-P checklist contains 17 items considered to be essential and minimum components of a systematic review or meta-analysis protocol. Systematic review authors and assessors are strongly encouraged to make use of PRISMA-P when drafting and appraising review protocols and authors should include a completed PRISMA-P checklist with their protocol submission. Various other resources exist that list the ingredients of an authoritative trial protocol, e.g. the UK Dept of Health/Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Toolkit and the US National Institutes for Health provide advice on how to structure a trial protocol. BMJ Open will consider for publication protocols for any study design, including observational studies and systematic reviews. We strongly encourage you to register your study. Prospective registration is mandatory for any clinical trials. Acceptable registries for trials include clinicaltrials.gov. We recommend Prospero for registration of systematic reviews.
Following the lead of The BMJ and its patient partnership strategy, BMJ Open is encouraging active patient involvement in setting the research agenda. As such, we require authors of Study Protocols to add a Patient and Public Involvement statement in the Methods section. please see more details above. General BMJ policies apply (see above) on manuscript formatting, editorial policies, licence forms and patient consent (where applicable to study designs). Protocols should include, as a minimum, the following items.
  • Protocol papers should report planned or ongoing studies. Manuscripts that report work already carried out will not be considered as protocols. The dates of the study must be included in the manuscript and cover letter.
  • Protocols for studies that will require ethical approval, such as trials, are unlikely to be considered without having received that approval
  • Title: this should include the specific study type, e.g. randomised controlled trial.
  • Abstract: this should be structured with the following sections. Introduction; Methods and analysis; Ethics and dissemination. Registration details should be included as a final section, if appropriate.
  • Please include a ‘Strengths and limitations of this study’ section after the abstract. This section should be no more than 5 bullet points relating specifically to the methods - not the results of the study. This will be published as a summary box after the abstract in the final published article.
  • Introduction: explain the rationale for the study and what evidence gap it may fill. Appropriate previous literature should be referenced, including relevant systematic reviews.
  • Methods and analysis: provide a full description of the study design, including the following. How the sample will be selected; interventions to be measured; the sample size calculation (drawing on previous literature) with an estimate of how many participants will be needed for the primary outcome to be statistically, clinically and/or politically significant; what outcomes will be measured, when and how; a data analysis plan.
  • Ethics and dissemination: ethical and safety considerations and any dissemination plan (publications, data deposition and curation) should be covered here.
  • Full references.
  • Authors' contributions: state how each author was involved in writing the protocol.
  • Funding statement: preferably worded as follows. Either: 'This work was supported by [name of funder] grant number [xxx]' or 'This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors'.
  • Competing interests statement.

Cohort profile

The cohort profile is an article type set up in BMJ Open to fill the space between a study protocol and a results paper. Cohort profiles should describe the rationale for a cohort’s creation, its methods, baseline data and its future plans. Cohorts described should be long-term, prospective projects and not time-limited cohorts established to answer a small number of specific research questions. If a cohort has yet to complete recruitment or baseline data collection, it should be submitted as a study protocol. Papers addressing a specific research question using cohort data should be submitted as a Research paper. Following the lead of The BMJ and its patient partnership strategy, BMJ Open is encouraging active patient involvement in setting the research agenda. As such, we require authors of Cohort Profiles to add a Patient and Public Involvement statement in the Methods section. please see more details above.
Title Should begin ‘Cohort profile: …’. It should include the full name and any commonly used abbreviation of the cohort, plus its location or whether it is international. Include the type of cohort. Abstract Use these headings to provide brief descriptions of the following:
  • Purpose: describe why the cohort was set up
  • Participants: describe who is in the cohort
  • Findings to date: what data has been collected so far and any major results
  • Future plans: how will the cohort be used in future, including any date for completion of data collection
  • Registration: if your Cohort Profile is linked to a clinical trial, we require the registry and trial registration number to be included. In line with the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, we require prospective registration of all clinical trials. For Cohort Profiles not linked to a clinical trial, registration is not required.
Introduction Describe the rationale for the study, including any specific research questions that motivated the project. Cohort description Describe the setting, locations and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, exposure, follow-up and data collection. Give the eligibility criteria and how participants were recruited. Report numbers of individuals at each stage of the study, e.g. how many were approached, included in the study and have been retained. Reasons for non-participation should be reported. A flow diagram is recommended to illustrate this. Describe methods of data collection and follow-up, and any external data sources used. Give characteristics of study participants (e.g. demographic, clinical, social) and information on exposures and potential confounders. Indicate number of participants with missing data for each variable of interest. Detailed statistical plans should not be reported.
Findings to date Include a short explanation of the most notable results from the cohort so far, with references to relevant publications. This section should summarise rather than present results. Strengths and limitations Please include a ‘Strengths and limitations of this study’ section after the abstract. This section should be no more than 5 bullet points relating specifically to the methods - not the results of the study. This will be published as a summary box after the abstract in the final published article. Collaboration Authors should include a section on what data will be available, to whom, how it can be accessed and what restrictions to reuse may apply. (This should be in the text, not the data sharing statement.) Please also state what kind of collaboration you are encouraging. Further details Our standard inclusions – Strengths and limitations of this study, a data sharing statement, funding declaration, contributorship statement, etc., should also be included.

Communication

If you are interested in submitting a communication article to BMJ Open, we ask that you send us a presubmission enquiry via our online submission system. You will be asked to provide a title, an abstract, and a cover letter explaining why you think your work is appropriate as a communication article for BMJ Open. Communication articles will be considered at the discretion of the editorial team at BMJ Open based on the relevance of the topic and the quality of a presubmission enquiry. If your presubmission enquiry is accepted, the editorial team will invite you to submit a full manuscript. The communication article will cover content that does not fit within our existing article types, but is of interest to BMJ Open’s readership. Rather than presenting primary research, it is an opportunity to present ideas, examples, and innovations relating to the conduct of clinical research. As with all content in BMJ Open, communication articles will relate to key research issues in clinical medicine, public health, and epidemiology. Examples of topics of relevance to BMJ Open include:
  • Encouraging patient and public involvement
  • Improving research transparency and reproducibility
  • Reducing research waste through collaboration
  • Improving best practice in publishing and peer review
All communication articles will undergo external open peer review. As with our other content, the peer reviewer reports and previous versions of the manuscript will be posted alongside the final article. We also encourage readers to participate in the discussion by posting comments on the articles.
The communication article should include, as a minimum, the following items:
  • Title: a clear, concise description of the article’s content.
  • Abstract: we recommend a structured abstract that states the objective of the piece along with a summary of the key data or arguments and an overall conclusion.
  • Full References
  • Authors’ Contributions: state how each author was involved in writing the article.
  • Funding statement: preferably worded as follows. Either: ‘This work was supported by [name of funder] grant number [xxx]’ or ‘This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors’.
  • Competing Interests statement. see the BMJ Author Hub for details.
The structure and format of the article is at the discretion of the author. However, it should follow a logical form and be divided into subsections. Communication articles should be kept as brief as possible.

Supplement

BMJ Journals are willing to consider publishing supplements to regular issues. Supplement proposals may be made at the request of:
  • The journal editor, an editorial board member or a learned society may wish to organise a meeting, sponsorship may be sought and the proceedings published as a supplement.
  • The journal editor, editorial board member or learned society may wish to commission a supplement on a particular theme or topic. Again, sponsorship may be sought.
  • BMJ itself may have proposals for supplements where sponsorship may be necessary.
  • A sponsoring organisation, often a pharmaceutical company or a charitable foundation, that wishes to arrange a meeting, the proceedings of which will be published as a supplement.
In all cases, it is vital that the journal's integrity, independence and academic reputation is not compromised in any way.
For further information on criteria that must be fulfilled, download the supplements guidelines. When contacting us regarding a potential supplement, please include as much of the information below as possible.
  • Journal in which you would like the supplement published
  • Title of supplement and/or meeting on which it is based
  • Date of meeting on which it is based
  • Proposed table of contents with provisional article titles and proposed authors
  • An indication of whether authors have agreed to participate
  • Sponsor information including any relevant deadlines
  • An indication of the expected length of each paper Guest Editor proposals if appropriate