Find policies for the American Journal of Hospital Medicine (AJHM) online publication.

Peer Review Process

  • All submissions to the American Journal of Hospital Medicine (AJHM) are initially reviewed by the Editor(s)-in-Chief. The Editor(s)-in-Chief can select and invite the most suitable sub-editors for individual submissions.
  • The Editor examines the manuscript to determine whether it is appropriate for inclusion in the journal.
  • After the initial assessment is done, some manuscripts will be rejected outright at editorial review without peer review if the assigned editor deems the submission unsuitable for the journal (the manuscript might be outside the scope of the journal, poorly written, or do not conform to the guidelines of the journal). This fast rejection process means that authors are given a quick decision and do not need to wait for the review process.
  • For submissions that are not instantly rejected, the designated editor will identify two to three independent experts in the subject matter.
  • The potential peer reviewers are contacted by email and invited to assess the manuscript. If they agree, the reviewers are granted access to the manuscript and asked to complete a Peer Reviewer form within four weeks.
  • The reviewer will comment on the importance of the work, originality, the fitness of the methods, the validity of the results, the discussion, whether the conclusions are consistent with the data, and the work adequately referenced.
  • Manuscripts may also be sent out for statistical review.
  • Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality of manuscripts during the peer-review process. Sharing a manuscript in whole or in part, outside the scope of what is necessary for assessment, is impermissible.
  • AJHM uses single blind review model for peer review. The author(s) do not know the identity of the reviewers. The anonymity gives the reviewer(s) the freedom to judge the research objectively and to give an honest critique, even when it is not favorable. In addition, knowing who the author is (and their affiliation) allows the reviewer to use their knowledge of the author’s previous research to aid in their assessment.
  • Based on the feedback from all reviewers and the objective evaluation of the editorial team, the designated editor will decide whether to reject the manuscript, invite the authors to revise and resubmit, seek additional reviews, or accept the work as is.
  • The designated editor will communicate decision to the Editor-in-Chief who then will inform the corresponding author with blinded comments of the peer reviewers along with guidelines and deadline for receipt of the revised manuscript.
  • The designated editor will evaluate the revised manuscript and decide to accept or send it again to reviewers.
  • It is not unusual to engage in multiple rounds of revisions before the submission is finally accepted.
  • After acceptance for publication, the manuscript will go through copy-editing and production.
  • Authors may appeal an Editor’s decision if they think it is unwarranted. Appeals must be submitted by email to the editorial office explaining why the manuscript should be reconsidered.
  • Authors are usually notified within 4 - 8 weeks about the decision for acceptance or denial of their manuscript for publication.

Post-acceptance Production and Handling Errors After Publication

  • All accepted manuscripts will go through copyediting.
  • Page proofs will be sent to the corresponding author. It is the corresponding author's responsibility to share the page proofs with co-authors and to coordinate all authors' corrections into one proof.
  • Only corrections related to errors in typesetting and/or layout will be allowed.
  • Any requested changes related to content, or that alter the outcome of a study, will require the approval of the Editor, and may require further peer review.
  • For errors in published papers: in the event an error is discovered after publication of an article, the corresponding author should submit the correction in writing to the editorial office for consideration. 
  • The erratum will appear as a new article in the journal, and will cite the original published article.
  • In the case of severe errors in an article that invalidate the conclusions, publication malpractice, or unethical research, retractions are made and published. A retraction article signed by the editor is published in a subsequent issue of the journal with a link to the original article. The online original article is retained and preceded by a screen containing the retraction note.
  • When substantial and valid concerns arise about the integrity of a published article, however the investigation is inconclusive or underway, the editors may consider issuing an expression of concern. The expression of concern will be linked back to the published article it relates to.

Ethical Policies

Publication Ethics

  • Scientific articles should conform with the Commission on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals
  • Clinical studies reporting should follow guidelines when available. These include the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Statement (CONSORT), Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic accuracy studies (STARD), Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE), Transparent Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), and Case Report Guidelines (CARE).
  • Authors are recommended to refer to reporting guidelines for specific studies available at
  • All clinical trials published in the AJHM must be registered in a public trials’ registry at or before the onset of participant enrolment.
  • By submitting your manuscript to the AJHM it is understood that this it is an original manuscript and is unpublished work and is not under consideration elsewhere.
  • All manuscripts will be assessed/screened for plagiarism, fraudulence, or any other compromise of standard academic policy. If found, the manuscript will be removed immediately and withdrawn from that issue of AJHM. In addition, all prior publications by the same author(s) in our previous issues will be removed and such author(s) will also be proscribed from submitting future manuscripts of any category to AJHM. We reserve the rights to take further legal action against such authors.
  • Published papers found to be in violation of any of the misconduct noted above, or in the accepted principles of peer review and scientific publishing, will be officially retracted from the literature.


  • All authors listed on the manuscript should have substantial contributions in designing, conducting the study, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
  • In addition, all authors should have been involved in the drafting and writing of the manuscript, should have read, and reviewed the final version, and should agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
  • Author contribution statement for each listed author should be outlined in the cover letter.
  • Any other individuals who contributed to the study but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgement section at the end of the manuscript. Personal acknowledgment should precede those of institutions and agencies.
  • One author should be designated as the corresponding author who will be responsible for communication between the authors and the journal editorial office(s) and publisher. 
  • Any change in authorship after the initial manuscript submission must be approved in writing by all authors.

Disclosure of Conflict of Interest and Relationships Between Investigators and Research Sponsors

  • AJHM requires complete disclosure of all relevant financial relationships and potential financial conflicts of interest, regardless of amount or value.
  • The editors expect all authors to disclose any commercial associations that might potentially lead to a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted manuscript.
  • Each author should reveal any conflicts to disclose (financial interests, connections, sources of funding, pharmaceutical stock ownership, consultancy, or personal relationships).
  • Refer to the ICMJE recommendations around what constitutes a conflict and what information should be declared. If authors are uncertain about what might constitute a potential financial conflict of interest, they should err on the side of full disclosure.
  • If no potential conflict exists, the phrase "None declared".
  • Authors are requested to provide the details of all funding sources for the work in question, even if there is no funding information to declare.
  • The full official funding agency name and the grant number(s) should be complete and accurate.
  • Authors should describe the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; and in the decision to submit the article for publication.

Human and Animal Rights, and Informed Consent

  • For studies on human subjects, authors should indicate that all procedures were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki as revised in 2013.
  • The authors should declare that subjects have given their informed written consent and that the study protocol was approved by an appropriate ethics committee. If not possible, an institutional review board (IRB) must decide if this is ethically acceptable.
  • For animal experimentation, the Authors declare that the study was approved by the appropriate institutional review body. If ethics approval was not required, or if the study has been granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval. Authors must state that a corresponding IRB or local ethical committee that conforms to standards currently applied in the country of origin has approved the work and name the authorizing body in the Methods section.


  • To comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), use of unique patient identifiers within the manuscript will result in exclusion of manuscript from consideration for peer-review.
  • Clinical images/figures must not contain individual identifiers. Every effort must be made to conceal the identity of patient. If identifying features are not avoidable in the images, then AJHM will require the authors to submit an informed written consent from any potentially identifiable person or legal representative and should be included in the initial submission.

Open Access

  • AJHM is a fully open access journal, and all articles are published in the journal under an open access license immediately upon publication, with no embargo period. 
  • Authors grant the publisher non-exclusive publishing rights of first publishing the articles.
  • AJHM applies the Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND): This license allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.

Author Charges

  • There are no submission fees, editorial processing charges, or article processing charges (APCs).

Advertising Policies

  • Advertisements may not be deceptive, misleading, indecent, or offensive, and must be verifiable.
  • All advertisements are independent from editorial decisions. Editorial content is not compromised by commercial or financial interests, or by any specific arrangements with advertising clients or sponsors. Advertisements and editorial content are clearly distinguishable.
  • Advertising for products or services known to be harmful to health will not be accepted.