- The Editor-in-Chief oversees the editorial content, process, and policies, and makes all final decisions, including the acceptance and rejection of submitted, reviewed, and revised manuscripts.
- Senior Associate Editors (SAEs) provide initial reviews of all submissions and, if the manuscripts clear their assessment, the papers undergo an external peer review. The SAEs provide recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief.
- The Managing Editor works closely with all HMPI editors and authors in executing the editorial process, copy-editing papers, as well as producing and marketing HMPI.
- The Editorial Board provides subject matter expertise and regular input for articles and the overall direction of the journal. Each member of the editorial board commits to serve as an external reviewer for at least one paper per year.
HMPI is committed to a thorough, streamlined, and expedient review process.
Research Papers:
- The Managing Editor sends a submitted manuscript to an SAE for initial review, which is conducted within two weeks of the paper’s receipt. If the paper is accepted for a detailed review, the SAE may recruit one or more external reviewers.
- Authors are invited to suggest up to four reviewers with the requisite expertise and no apparent or real conflicts of interest. SAEs decide whether to agree to the suggested reviewers. Authors may also request that specific reviewers not be used.
- Reviewers may recommend that the paper be accepted, suggest major or minor revisions, or recommend that the paper be rejected.
- Reviewers are requested to provide their recommendations and / or comments within three weeks. The Managing Editor will pass their input on to the SAE, who can accept the reviewer suggestions and / or can formulate guidance for the authors on how to respond to the external reviews.
- The Managing Editor will coordinate with the SAE and the authors about the timeframe to complete requested revisions.
- Upon review of the revised paper, the SAE will make a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief about whether to accept or reject the manuscript.
- The Editor-in-Chief makes a final decision to accept or reject the manuscript.
Commentaries and Perspective Pieces:
- The Managing Editor sends the submitted paper to the SAE for an initial review within two weeks of receipt. The SAE may review the paper themselves or recommend an external reviewer with the requisite expertise.
- Reviewers may recommend that the paper be accepted, suggest major or minor revisions, or recommend that the paper be rejected.
- Reviewers are requested to provide their recommendations and / or comments within three weeks. The Managing Editor will pass that input on to the SAE.
- Authors have up to two weeks to complete any recommended revisions.
- Upon review of the revised paper, the SAE makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief to accept or reject the paper.
- The Editor-in-Chief makes a final decision to accept or reject the paper.
HMPI Editors may make formatting and stylistic recommendations to ensure the articles are accessible to the journal’s target audiences and align with editorial style and standards.
Manuscripts that undergo major or minor revisions may undergo external re-review at the discretion of the Editors.
For more information about content, style and formatting, see our instruction for authors.
HMPI recognizes that generative AI tools are increasingly used in scholarly writing and that HMPI authors may choose to use AI in preparing their manuscripts. However, authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the submitted work.
- Submission of a manuscript constitutes a declaration that the author(s) have reviewed and edited any AI-generated content and verified that all statements, data, and citations are accurate and appropriate. AI use must also comply with data protection, confidentiality, and intellectual property laws.
- If a reviewer identifies strong evidence that the use of an AI tool has introduced factual errors, misinterpretations, fabricated citations, or other inaccuracies, the reviewer should notify the Senior Associate Editor, the Editor-in-Chief and / or the Managing Editor. The Editorial Team may request clarification regarding AI use and determine appropriate corrective action, which may include revision, rejection, or other editorial measures.
Scope of Research
- This journal publishes research, perspectives and other articles related to the business of healthcare.
- Clinical and biomedical studies without a clear contribution to management, policy, or innovation are not within the scope of the journal. For example, the journal does not publish trials evaluating investigational drugs, biologics, medical devices, or other regulated biomedical products.
- The journal does consider rigorous evaluations of healthcare delivery, clinical practice models, and comparative approaches to care, including randomized and cluster-randomized studies involving patients, clinicians, clinics, or health systems.
Protected Health Information
- Research with human participants (such as surveys, interviews, case studies, or observational research) must comply with applicable ethical standards and institutional requirements.
- For research that uses Protected Health Information (PHI), authors must provide a statement that their study has been reviewed and approved (or exempted) by an Institutional Review Board (IRB). If the research was exempt from review, authors must indicate the basis for exemption and the approving institution.
Informed Consent
- In studies involving human participants, authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained in accordance with institutional and ethical standards.
Use of Confidential or Personal Data
- Authors must ensure that all personal, proprietary, or confidential information is handled responsibly and that individuals cannot be identified unless explicit permission has been obtained. Any protected health information must be de-identified in accordance with applicable regulations.
Ethical Standards
- Authors are expected to adhere to widely recognized publication ethics standards, including those outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
Misconduct
- The journal does not tolerate research misconduct, including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or unethical research practices. Suspected violations may result in rejection, retraction, or notification of the authors’ institutions.
HMPI is committed to maintaining the accuracy of the scholarly record. Errors that do not affect an article’s conclusions may be corrected through a published correction. Articles may be retracted if findings are unreliable due to error, misconduct, or ethical violations. When concerns arise during investigation, the editors may issue an editorial expression of concern, consistent with guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics.
HMPI requires the corresponding author to provide 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.
We expect authors to disclose any prior dissemination, including via a website or at national meetings. Many types of dissemination venues will not preclude our consideration of the manuscript.
If an article has been accepted for publication in HMPI, please see our copyright policy.
HMPI does not feature advertising or sponsored content. Editorial decisions are made independently of any commercial interests.