advertisement

Guidelines for Reviewers

As a peer reviewer of PHIM, you have an important role. Through your reviews of submitted manuscripts, you help inform the editors about the suitability of the manuscript for inclusion in this publication. The manuscript will only be published in PHIM if reviewers deem it to be of a sufficiently high quality of scholarship. By ensuring high standards, we intend that PHIM will become the foremost journal for research about health information management and will be accepted by academics and research assessment boards as a rigorously edited forum.

Use the Manuscript Peer Review Form to evaluate the manuscript. Return the form to jewelle.hicks@ahima.org within three weeks of receipt of the manuscript. For maximum efficiency, we recommend that you review a manuscript within five days of receipt. Reviewers should be familiar with the Guidelines for Authors for PHIM.

The unpublished manuscript is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Please do not cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published; do not use the information it contains for the advancement of your own research. To maintain the impartiality of our review process, determine whether there is any conflict of interest for you and whether you can judge a given manuscript impartially. If you believe that you cannot judge a given manuscript impartially, please return the manuscript immediately to the editor with an explanation.

Criteria

Complete each item on the form's list of criteria. The list includes questions such as: Is the underlying concept of the paper sound? Is the design of the research or investigation sound? Does the method support the investigation's purpose? Do the data and information appear accurate? Are essential points adequately covered? Does the content build or advance the body of knowledge of health information management practice?

Making Recommendations

Consider these guidelines when making a recommendation to accept or reject. Remember that revision may move a manuscript up the scale and greatly improve its likelihood for acceptance. Only rarely are manuscripts accepted without some revisions.

• Accept without revisions: The manuscript contains new, timely information; data is clearly presented; discussions and conclusions flow logically from data; title and length are appropriate; good language and readability; citations complete.
• Accept with minor revisions: The manuscript requires only minor revisions and re-review may not be necessary. The manuscript has no major flaws in concept or logic; it adds some new information; the analysis is appropriate; language is good; citations are reasonable.
• Major revisions required: The material is already well described in literature; re-review necessary; study organization, data collection, or methods are flawed; analysis inadequate or inappropriate; disconnect between data and conclusions; incomplete or excessive citations.
• Rework and submit elsewhere/reject: Revision is unlikely to lead to acceptance; flawed beyond repair or not appropriate for PHIM.

Be Alert to Pitfalls

In addition to the quality of research, we ask reviewers to note possible breaches of publication policy or ethical conduct such as:

• Plagiarism: Material is copied from another source without attestation, reference, or permission
• Missing or incomplete references: The author has not given proper credit to previously published ideas or data. References are missing, incomplete, or incorrect.
• Dual submission: Be wary of attempts to submit or publish similar material more than once. This act is often difficult to detect, but checking literature citations, as well as having a critical eye, is helpful.
• Conflicts of interest: Be aware of possible conflicts of interest on the part of the authors.

Your criticism, arguments, and suggestions concerning that paper will be most useful to the editor if they are carefully documented. If there are errors, try to indicate all of them unless they are too numerous and the manuscript is recommended for rejection.

Suggested revisions should be described as such and not expressed as conditions of acceptance. Remarks should reflect positive elements as well as negatives. We are interested in learning about the positive contributions that this manuscript can make to PHIM readers and to the HIM body of knowledge, as well as any intellectual or stylistic problems that must be resolved. Who must read this manuscript and why? How does this manuscript advance our understanding of its key topics? How well does it build upon previous research and thinking about its topic?

AHIMA staff will copy edit the manuscript. They will correct problems with spelling and grammar and ensure that the manuscripts conform to AHIMA and Chicago Manual of Style format. However, be on the lookout for errors that the copy editors might miss. Examples include use of scientific jargon, use of outmoded terminology, and use of misspelled, incorrect, or outdated scientific terms. The editor gratefully receives a reviewer's recommendations, but because the editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources, a reviewer should not expect the editor to honor his or her every recommendation.

It is recommended that you make a copy of the review for your files. The manuscript may be returned to you for a second review, particularly if the requested modification was extensive.

For the benefit of the author, please frame your comments in as constructive and professional a manner as possible.

Do not state in "remarks to authors" whether the manuscript should be accepted or rejected. Manuscripts should be evaluated on current content and not on what the reviewers think that the author should have done.

Please distinguish between revisions considered essential and those judged merely desirable.

Conflict of Interest

All members of the Editorial Review Board are required to complete a conflict of interest form outlining the requirements of AHIMA’s policy. To view a copy of the form, click here.

[ About AHIMA | Schools/Jobs | Professional Development | HIM Resources | Foundation | Help | Site Map ]

Copyright © 2008 by the American Health Information Management Association. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced, reprinted, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the association. All contents, including images and graphics, on this Web site are copyrighted by AHIMA unless otherwise noted. You must obtain permission to reproduce any information, graphics, or images from this site. Permission must also be obtained to link to any of AHIMA's Web sites. To request permission, fill out the AHIMA Permissions Request or contact permissions@ahima.org.