The Australian Health Review provides information for decision makers in the healthcare industry. It is read by healthcare professionals, managers, planners and policy makers throughout Australia and the region. Topics covered by the Australian Health Review include all aspects of health policy and management, healthcare delivery systems, clinical programs, health financing and other matters of interest to those working in health care.
- Licence to publish
- Journal editorial policy
- Preparation of manuscripts
- Types of Articles
- Abstract
- Key Question Summary
- General Organisation
- Manuscript Text
- Illustrations
- Tables
- Acknowledgements
- Competing Interests
- References and Citations
- Abbreviations
- Peer Review
- Page Proofs
- Reprints
- Embargo
- Conflicts of interest
- How to Write a Case Study
Licence to publish
For details regarding copyright, please see Copyright/Licence to Publish.
Journal editorial policy
Authors should obtain the appropriate clearances from their directors or supervisors before submission.
Manuscripts submitted to Australian Health Review must be offered exclusively to the Journal and must conform with the Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Submission of an article implies that it has not been previously published, is not being considered for publication elsewhere, and that the contents are original. If a submitted article overlaps considerably with previously published articles or articles submitted elsewhere, copies of these should be included with the submitted manuscript.
Note: Do not include author-identifying information in your manuscript. The manuscript you submit online will (if appropriate) be forwarded to peer reviewers. Australian Health Review uses double-blind peer review, in which reviewers are not told the identity of the authors. To preserve blinding, your manuscript should not contain author-identifying information, such as a list of authors on the title page or a contact address; these should be listed on a separate title page.
Australian Health Review subscribes to the criteria for authorship as outlined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those that qualify should be listed. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. At least one author, ‘corresponding author’, should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. Authorship credit should be based only on (a) substantial contributions to conception and design or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data, (b) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content, and (c) final approval of the version to be published. Distinction must be made between those who contributed as authors and those who should be named in Acknowledgements.
Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to use figures and tables previously published in other books or journals. It is also the reponsibility of the authors to check reproduced materials against the original for accuracy.
Preparation of manuscripts
All submissions should be accompanied by a covering letter telling us the names, institutional affiliations, addresses and contact numbers of the authors, in addition to a completed Licence to Publish form.
Submissions should be double-spaced with ample margins. Number all pages consecutively. Authors should retain one copy for their own reference.
Types of Articles
Please identify your paper as one of the following. The word length specified is of the abstract plus body text.
Thorough analysis of a topic, including review and results of new work by you, plus discussion and interpretation. 2500 to 3000 words.
Results of new work by you. 1500 to 3000 words.
The story of a project, innovation or evaluation with relevance for Australian Health Review readers, in a structured format (see How to write a case study). 1000 to 2000 words.
An expert view on a topical matter. 1000 to 2000 words.
Book reviews need include a summary of contents, interesting aspects, and who might benefit from reading the book. Up to 1000 words.
Gives commentary or opinion, usually a response to an item in a previous issue of Australian Health Review or related to current events. 500 words.
Abstract
All longer papers (Feature Article, Research Note, Case Study) require a 100–200 word abstract outlining the key message of the article, its implications and supporting evidence. Abstracts should be clear and succinct, covering the purpose, research method, main findings (including statistical significance if relevant), and principal conclusions.
Structured abstracts are recommended where appropriate. Not all structured abstract headings are appropriate to all articles, but the use of headings can abbreviate the abstract and highlight the key features of the article. Headings in a structured abstract include:
Key Question Summary
For Feature Articles and Research Notes authors are asked to provide, in addition to an abstract, three short paragraphs answering these questions:
1. What is known about the topic?
2. What does this paper add?
3. What are the implications for practitioners?
General Organisation
Article content should be structured according to the type of submission. For scientific papers the following headings should be used: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, and References. References should include seminal articles related to the topic.
Manuscript Text
The Methods section should clearly state how the study was carried out. The reader should have a clear idea about the research design and how it was applied to answer the research question or hypothesis. The setting, subjects, and tools should also be elucidated.
Results describe the findings. These should not be repeated or introduced elsewhere, and discussion of results should be reserved for the Discussion section. The presentation of results (text, tables, or illustrations) is important. The purpose of graphs and tables is to supplement the text and provide a concise overview of the results. Graphs or tables should serve a purpose, and be clear and easy to understand.
The Discussion describes the significance of the results, including new and important findings. Discussion should be pertinent and concise, including the implications of the findings, limitations, and implications. The author may interpret the results, express opinions, speculate about the significance of the results and may compare them with those of other studies. No new information should be introduced and it is important to avoid repetition.
Statements made in the Conclusion should be derived from and supported by the findings in the study. They should relate to the goals of the study, clearly communicating the answer to the research question and how the work has contributed to new knowledge (or validated previous findings). Recommendations can be included if appropriate.
Illustrations
Illustrations (charts, graphs, figures, drawings) are encouraged. These should be clear and accurate, not contain excessive data, and be designed to reproduce well without colour. Be sure that each illustration is cited in the text. In general the number of figures and tables should not exceed 4 in total per article and any one table or figure should be no longer than 1 page.
Every line in a graph should have a purpose and should be part of the message. Avoid three-dimensional boxes or unnecessary shading. If you need to distinguish columns in a histogram, use a pattern rather than a colour or shading. All illustrations need a legend (which should include all explanatory text; that is, avoid displaying stray text on the graph itself).
Illustrations are generally reproduced at a width of 65 mm (single column) or 140 mm (page width). At this size, text within illustrations should usually be 8 point type in a sans-serif font (eg, Arial, Helvetica). The most common error in preparing electronic images is to make them too small.
Tables
Set out tables using your word processor’s table tool – do not use a string of spaces or tabs as a formatting device. Tables should not duplicate information in the text. Be sure that each table is cited in the text. The table should have a title which should clearly describe what the table is about. Each column and row should have a heading. Abbreviations should be explained in a footnote. If material is presented in a table or graph, there is no need to repeat it in the text.
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements should be brief, and should be included in the title page (to prevent revealing your identity to the reviewers who see your manuscript). Where appropriate give credit to grantors, sponsors, technical assistants, and professional colleagues. All sources of funding need to be acknowledged. If the work has been part of postgraduate studies, the university in which you were enrolled should be mentioned.
Competing Interests
In a separate document to be submitted online with the manuscript, we require a statement of competing interests. Each author should declare the source of any financial or other support, and any financial or professional relationships which may pose a competing interest. They should describe the role, if any, of the supporting source(s) in study design, data collection, analysis and interpretation, and in writing of the article. They should also state whether the supporting source(s) controlled or influenced the decision to submit the final manuscript for publication. If the supporting source(s) had no such involvement, this should be stated.
References and Citations
Australian Health Review uses the Vancouver style of referencing. References are numbered in order of their first appearance in the text, and citations appear as superscript numerals. In the reference list, abbreviate journal names as in Index Medicus. Give surnames and initials of all authors.
Do not use headers and footers, automatic referencing or footnotes.
Examples of references:
1. Wright O, Capra S, Aliakbari J. A comparison of two measures of hospital foodservice satisfaction. Aust Health Rev 2003; 26: 70-6.
2. Ringsven MK, Bond D. Gerontology and leadership skills for nurses. 2nd edn. Albany, New York: Delmar Publishers, 1996.
Abbreviations
Avoid using abbreviations unless there are many repetitions (more than five). Abbreviations are appropriate in tables and graphs, but these should be explained in a footnote.
Peer review
The Australian Health Review uses double-blind peer review to maintain standards and ensure relevance. Not all material submitted is accepted. Each reviewer is provided with standard guidelines to focus his or her evaluation.
The time between submission of a manuscript and a decision by the editor regarding publication depends on the nature of the manuscript, and the availability and other commitments of the reviewer. The journal follows a standard protocol for administering the peer review process.
Page Proofs
We will send page proofs to the corresponding author as PDF files. They must be returned to the production editor within three days of receipt to ensure timely publication of the journal and your research. Major alterations to the text and illustrations are accepted only when absolutely necessary.
Reprints
The publisher will provide a final version of the paper free of charge as a high-resolution PDF. Authors may purchase hard copies and order them from the publisher when the proofs are returned.
Embargo
All accepted manuscripts are subject to embargo until the day of publication. Manuscripts should not be made available to others, nor should any news reports about articles appear until the date of publication
Conflicts of Interest
Under a subheading ´Conflicts of Interest´ at the end of the text all authors must disclose any financial and personal relationships with organisations or people that could inappropriately influence their work. If there are no conflicts of interest, authors should state that none exist.
How to Write a Case Study
A case study is a form of qualitative, descriptive research about a single or small number of events or cases. Conclusions are drawn in relation to the specific participants in the specific content and there is no expectation that the results of the case study can be generalised to other subjects or contexts. Case studies describe real-life situations and are most successful when they present the ´story´ and the outcomes, and analyse the failures as well as the successes, and the old and new strategies and tactics. It is valuable to set the case in a theoretical context, if relevant. The readers should be given a balanced presentation of ´what happened´, so that they are in a position to assess the accuracy of the authors´ analysis of the ´so what?´ question.
In the context of Australian Health Review a case study describes a typical policy or management issue or situation, or the development of a new service or model. It is a written account of the situation and the steps taken, and is best presented from the decision maker´s point of view.
The case study should be no more than 2000 words and will be accepted for publication if it presents a balanced view, is evidence-based (but does not need to provide a comprehensive review of the literature); is applicable to and will educate others; and documents actual outcomes (both successful and unsuccessful). A case study often works best when it follows the sequence and timeframe of the real-life event.
Although the best structure will be partly determined by the material, a suggested framework is as follows:
- Objectives
- Setting
- Participants
- Methodology /Sequence of events
- Outcomes
- Problems/conflicts/constraints
- Discussion/lessons learned
A good case is relevant to the reader, and the editors of the journal will choose case studies that address the interests of our readers. Our readers are healthcare managers and board members, members of the Australian Healthcare & Hospitals Association, Australian Institute of Health Policy Studies, and Case Management Society of Australia, policy-makers, clinician managers and students of health management and policy. Case studies should involve situations that the readers know or are likely to face, as this improves the empathy factor and makes the case worth reading and reflecting upon.
Early Alert
