External Peer Review Process

Manuscripts submitted to HMPI are subject to review by the senior editors and, if they clear the initial review, by external peer review from at least two reviewers. Authors are encouraged to suggest up to 4 reviewers for their manuscript who have appropriate expertise but no apparent or real conflicts of interest. However, there is no guarantee that suggested individuals will be used. Authors may also request that specific reviewers not be used.

Editors generally make an initial decision to reject or send out for external review within two weeks of submission. Reviewers can recommend that we accept the paper, suggest major or minor revisions, or recommend that we reject the paper.  The Editors use these external reviews in making their final determination on whether to proceed with the manuscript or to reject the manuscript.  The Editors can accept reviewer suggestions for the manuscript, or can formulate guidance for the authors on how to respond to the external reviews.

HMPI editors can make formatting recommendations to authors to ensure accessibility to our target audience.

Manuscripts that undergo a major or minor revision may undergo external re-review at the discretion of the Editors.

See our instruction for authors.

Copyright and Prior Publication

We expect authors to disclose any prior dissemination including via a Web site or at national meetings. Many types of dissemination venues will not preclude our consideration of the manuscript.

If your article has been accepted for publication in HMPI, please see our copyright policy.

Conflict of Interest Policy

HMPI has requires disclosure of information about conflicts of interest, pre-review requirements by funders or employers, and authorship contributions. While not required at the time of initial submission, disclosures must be completed before accepted manuscripts can be published.

The corresponding author is required to provide this information.