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 ... click here for full Aims & Scope
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