Medical Hypotheses takes a deliberately different approach to review: the editor sees his role as a 'chooser', not a 'changer',
choosing to publish what are judged to be the best papers from those submitted. The Editor sometimes uses external referees to inform
his opinion on ... click here for full Aims & Scope
Medical Hypotheses takes a deliberately different approach to review: the editor sees his role as a 'chooser', not a 'changer',
choosing to publish what are judged to be the best papers from those submitted. The Editor sometimes uses external referees to inform
his opinion on a paper, but their role is as an information source and the Editor's choice is final. The papers chosen may contain radical
ideas, but may be judged acceptable so long as they are coherent and clearly expressed. The authors' responsibility for the integrity,
precision and accuracy of their work is paramount.
From Charlton BG. Peer usage versus peer review BMJ 2007; 335: 451 :- "Traditionally,
editorial review is the main alternative to peer review. A scientist editor or editorial team applies a sieve, with varying degrees of
selectivity, to research submissions. Strictly, this process should not attempt to predict whether ideas and facts are "true," because
truth can be established only in retrospect. Instead, editorial selection works within constraints of subject matter on the basis of
factors such as potential importance and interest, clarity and appropriateness of expression, and broad criteria of scientific plausibility.
Even probably untrue papers may be judged worth publishing if they contain aspects (ideas, perspectives, data) that are potentially stimulating
to the development of future science."
Papers in Medical Hypotheses take a standard scientific form in terms of style,
structure and referencing. The journal therefore constitutes a bridge between cutting-edge theory and the mainstream of medical and scientific
communication, which ideas must eventually enter if they are to be critiqued and tested against observations.
Abstracting/indexing
Medical Hypotheses is indexed and abstracted in: Science Citation Index, Index Medicus/Medline, Adonis, BIOSIS, Chemical Abstracts,
Elsevier BIOBASE/Current Awareness in Biological Sciences, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, Current Contents/Life Sciences, EMBASE/Excerpta
Medica, Medical Documentation Service, Reference Update, Research Alert, SciSearch, UMI (Microfilm), Russian Academy of Science
Hide Aims & Scope
Home | Elsevier Sites | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Feedback | Site Map | A Reed Elsevier Company