JAMIA Bigger figures
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Institution: Vanderbilt University Sign In as Member
 

 Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association Instructions for Authors

Originality of Manuscripts

Transfer of Copyright

Types of JAMIA Articles
Preparation of Manuscripts
Electronic Submission of Manuscripts
Review and Action
Publication of Online PrePrints
Guidelines for Every Article Type 
Sample References
Contact Information

JAMIA Instructions for Authors are also available as a PDF . Click here for a PDF of the Special Guidelines .

These guidelines are in accordance with the "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication" by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Updated October 2007. URL: http://www.icmje.org/.

Important topics covered in the ICMJE document include:

I.     A statement of purpose regarding the Uniform Requirements

II.    A discussion of ethical considerations in the conduct and reporting of research that supplements that JAMIA guidelines cited below.  The discussion covers, among other topics: criteria for authorship and contributorship; conflicts of interest; privacy and confidentiality; and , protection of patients and study participants involved in research.

III.   Caveats regarding publishing and related editorial concerns for Biomedical Journals, covering topics such as: corrections, retractions, and "expressions of concern": Copyright issues; avoidance of overlapping publications and duplicated submissions; and OBLIGATION TO REGISTER CLINICAL TRIALS.

IV.   General procedures for manuscript preparation and submission that supplement the specific JAMIA guidelines detailed herein.

V.     Use and formatting of References

Documentation of Originality for Submitted JAMIA Manuscript (download prior to manuscript submission)


ORIGINALITY OF MANUSCRIPTS
Manuscripts will be reviewed for possible publication with the understanding that they have not been published, in part or in whole, simultaneously submitted, or already accepted for publication elsewhere. Published guidelines deatailing JAMIA policy on this matter appear in "On Exemplary Scientific Conduct Regarding Submission of Manuscripts to Biomedical Journals," which is available at http://www.jamia.org/cgi/content/full/13/1/113 . Authors should not submit material that substantively duplicates content (paragraphs, figures, and/or tables) previously published or in press. For the purpose of this policy, any form of mass distribution, including general availability through a web server, is considered to be publication.  In addition, publication of an abstract or poster exceeding 400 words in length constitutes prior publication if the message is the same.  Unless the Editorial Office is notified prior to review of any duplicative/overlapping previous publications, subsequent discovery of such overlap may lead to return of the manuscript without review, and possible notification of any serious violations to administrators at the involved authors' institution(s).


This policy does not preclude consideration of a much more complete report that follows publication of preliminary findings elsewhere, usually in the proceedings of a conference (unless prior publication exceeded 400 words and had the same message); however, substantially new methods, results, and insights must differentiate a new submission from any previously published work, and there must be NO substantial repetition of textual content. Electronic copies of any possibly duplicative material must be included with the manuscript at the time of its initial submission to JAMIA. Authors submitting a manuscript previously reviewed by another journal should include a copy of the previous critique and an explanation of how the manuscript was changed in response to that critique. Questions about specific special cases may be directed to the Editor.

To ensure that this policy is adhered to, the coresponding author will be required to submit a "Documentation of Originality for Submitted JAMIA Manuscript" form before a manuscript will be processed. Forms may be obtained on the JAMIA website, www.jamia.org (see link above), or by e-mailing the editorial office. Authors may fax signed originality forms to the JAMIA editorial office at (615) 936-5900. The corresponding author will be responsible for obtaining signed originality forms from all other authors of the manuscript if the manuscript is accepted for publication.

Authors should disclose to the editors any financial or commercial interest that they have in products discussed in their manuscript at the time that it is submitted. Information about such interests will not influence the editorial decision, but a mechanism will be found to disclose the interest to the reader if the paper is published.
Back to top

TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT
If the manuscript is accepted for publication, authors will grant copyright of their articles to the American Medical Informatics Association, unless they are federal employees performing the work as governmental activity at the time the work is done, in which case there is no copyright. The American Medical Informatics Association will license back to the authors the right to use their articles for limited purposes as specified in the copyright release form, which will be sent to you upon accceptance.
Back to top

TYPES OF JAMIA ARTICLES
The Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA) will consider the publication of any original manuscript that deals with the broad field of medical informatics.
 A list of the sections and categories of JAMIA submissions follows below.   Each reference in this section is an example of one of the types (categories) of papers that JAMIA considers for publication. The reference articles have been published in prior issues of JAMIA. For manuscript category-specific guidelines, click here .

SECTION I:  Perspectives on Informatics
The Perspectives on Informatics section carries opinions of individuals and organizations regarding important topics in the field.  Papers of other types that provide general insights regarding Biomedical Informatics may also appear in this section.  Topics may range from ethical dilemmas to formulation of policy or consensus.

Position Papers (1) recommend a specific course of action. They should promote discussion of policy questions or potential initiatives. White Papers (2) present a consensus regarding techniques or approaches that will improve the productivity of the field. They should provide a road map for learners, practitioners, and researchers alike. Forum Papers (3) point out differences in approach or opinion. They should make the choices clear in situations where there may be more than one right answer. Viewpoint Papers (4) present an author's perspective about a topic to provoke thought. The opinions must be tenable, but scientific proof of their validity is not required.
Back to top

SECTION II:  The Practice of Informatics
The Practice of Informatics section targets the needs of people in the biomedical and health professions who use informatics in their work. Papers that further the development of medical informatics as a field are given priority. Examples include application of information technology, reviews, and development of novel methods or technologies.

The Practice of Informatics section includes papers on the use of information technology in real-world settings. A Technical Milestone (5) provides a detailed description of the development of an innovative technology or information resource. It provides an archival foundation for reports of the application or evaluation of the technology. A Technology Evaluation Paper (6) reviews the basis of a new technology together with qualitative or quantitative assessment of its effectiveness, shortcomings, and cost. Full-length papers on the Application of Information Technology (7) show how to solve practical problems relevant to health care research, health education, or health care delivery. Although these papers are not research papers, some aspect of the application must be original and the report must emphasize generalizable concepts gleaned from specific experiences. An Implementation Brief (8) is a case report of an innovative implementation strategy or application. Such a report should document the methods employed and the application's usefulness as measured by the number of users, time saved, cost, or other relevant parameters. A short Technical Brief (9) provides a description of a method or a helpful hint. These papers should give tips and tricks of the trade that others can incorporate into their tool kits. A Historical Perspectives (10) paper describes important past events in the history of biomedical informatics. Review Papers (11) present and interpret the state of the art. Over time, these works should serve as a multi-authored text on the practice of medical informatics. Synthesis of Research Papers (12) review and interpret the work of an investigator or laboratory. They place work that has been reported over time into a broader context. Brief Reviews (13) present a short overview or update on a hot topic. Careers in Medical Informatics (14) provide insight into curriculum requirements, training requirements, and career alternatives. Book Reviews (15) and Software Reviews (16) alert readers to new releases and comment on their utility.
Back to top

SECTION III:  Original Investigations
The Original Investigations section presents original hypotheses and findings.

Research Papers contribute to the scholarly archive detailing the development of new knowledge in the field of biomedical informatics. A wide range of original investigation report categories exist. The papers convey the formal evaluation of a technique. (17) The work may be a report of an approach together with preliminary findings (18) or a summarization of decades of work with evaluation of the most recent step. (19) Qualitative studies are suitable for full-length research papers if an appropriate methodology such as analysis of a case is used. (20)

As stated earlier, manuscripts will not be published if they have been paritally or wholly published, or are to be published, elsewhere. This does not preclude publication of material that has been published in preliminary form in the proceedings of a conference, provided the manuscript includes significant new material and the prior publication is submitted as documentation to JAMIA. The expansion can involve the addition of background material (21) or additional results. (22)

Preliminary work may be reported in a variety of ways. A Model Formulation (23) paper proposes a model or technique. A Methods Paper (24) proposes methods for a research project. A Case Report (25) explores a method or problem through an example.

Special Sections (Focus papers) ( see guidelines )
A Special Section of an issue of the Journal can be devoted to a coordinated set of manuscripts that focus attention on an important topic. (26) Depending on the length of the manuscripts, such sections would be restricted to three to seven papers to permit inclusion of some of the Journal's normal content. Special Section vs. Supplement

Editorial Comments ( see guidelines ) place a paper in context (27) or present a balancing view. (28) Editorials are also used as a vehicle for bringing attention to an issue that is important in the field. (29) Letters to the Editor provide another forum for this type of information.
Back to top


 

PREPARATION OF MANUSCRIPTS
All submissions to JAMIA are in electronic format (see details below).  All communication is done via email.
Back to top

General Layout
Set the format for the word processor as follows:

The header should include:

Insert a page break between each of the following sections: title page, abstract, text, acknowledgments, references, individual tables, and figures.

Title Page
The title page should include the title of the paper; the first name, middle initial, last name, and the academic degree(s) attained by each author (do not include bachelor degrees, fellowships, or professional associations); the name of the department(s) and institution(s) where the work was done (including city and state).  
The author list should be limited to seven (7) individuals.  Other contributors can be acknowledged in the Acknowledgment section of the manuscript.  Contact information for the one author who is responsible for all communication concerning the manuscript should also be included on the Title Page.  This information should include the person's name, mailing address, telephone number, fax number, and email address.

Abstract
Abstracts for Research papers and Model Formulation papers are limited to 250 words and should be structured as follows: Objective, Design, Measurements, Results, and Conclusion.   A Limitation(s) section should be added when relevant.

Abstracts for all other types of papers should be unstructured and limited to 150 words.

An abstract should be factual, not descriptive. Below the abstract, provide and identify as such three to ten key words or short phrases that will assist indexers. Terms from the Medical Subject Headings list of Index Medicus are preferred.

Text
The text of observational and experimental articles should be divided into sections with headings such as Introduction, Background, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion.   The Discussion section should include a subsection on limitations of the current work.  Long articles may need subheadings within some sections to clarify their content. Other types of articles, such as case reports, reviews, and editorials, may use other headings. Detailed guidelines by type of paper can be found here.

Major sections, and up to two levels of subsections, should be numbered for easy reference by reviewers, as follows:

I. SECTION
A. First level Subsection
1) Second level Subsection

All references in the text to a section should be to the section title because the section numbers will not be included in the published version.

Acknowledgments
Following the text, one or more statements should specify 1) contributions that need acknowledging but do not justify authorship; 2) acknowledgments of grant or other financial and material support, specifying the nature of the support; 3) acknowledgments of meetings at which the paper has been presented; and 4) financial or commercial relationships that may pose a conflict of interest.

References
References should be double-spaced in the order in which they are cited in the manuscript. All references must be cited in the text, tables, or figure legends. The style of references is the Vancouver style as used by Index Medicus . List all authors when there are six or fewer; otherwise list the first six followed by et al.

The following examples show how to reference an article that is first published online as a JAMIA PrePrint .

For the time the article is online as a PrePrint only :

[Authors]. [Article title]. J Am Med Inform Assoc (e-pub ahead of print). Mar 1, 2002. DOI 10.1197/jamia.M####.
Available at: http://www.jamia.org .

The DOI (digital object identifier) is assigned to the PrePrint by the editorial office on acceptance of the manuscript.

Once the article appears in its final version in print and online:

[Authors]. [Article title]. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002;9(4):415-22. DOI 10.1197/jamia.M####.


Tables
Tables should be placed at the end of the manuscript, after the references, with markers (e.g., [Table 1 about here]), placed in the body of the manuscript to specify approximate placement in the text. Tables should be double-spaced and include a title/caption. There should be one table and its corresponding title/caption per page.  A page break should be inserted after each table.

Illustrations
Photographs, drawings, graphs, and charts may be computer-generated or scanned. Symbols, lettering, and numbering should be of such proportional size that when the figure is reduced each item will still be distinctly recognizable. If a figure consists of two or more parts, the individual parts should have similar dimensions. Art work submitted at a size suitable for publication +/-40% reproduces best.

Illustrations should be placed at the end of the manuscript, after tables and/or references, with markers (e.g., [Figure 1 about here]), placed in the body of the manuscript to specify approximate placement in the text. An illustration and its corresponding legend should be on the same page. There should be one figure and its corresponding legend per page.  A page break should be inserted after each illustration. If an illustration has more than one part (i.e., Figure 1a and Figure 1b), then all parts and legends may be placed on the same page. Legends for illustrations should be double-spaced.

If the manuscript is accepted: 

 A high resolution (at least 300 dpi) electronic copy of each figure saved in .tif format (preferred) will be requested.  The capture of a direct screen image (often at only 72 dpi) is problematic, particularly when gray tones are employed.

****NOTE: JAMIA prints all figures in black and white/grayscale.  For this reason, all figures should be shaded accordingly.  The background of shaded text boxes should be as light as possible (or removed completely) to prevent the text from being obscured.  Graphs using shading to differentiate between items should be different enough so that readers can tell the difference.  Another option for graphs is to use patterned shading versus different shades of gray.  If the figure(s) submitted is deemed inappropriate for reproduction, a new file(s) will be requested.****

Authors may be required to have low-resolution images recreated professionally at their expense after final acceptance of a manuscript. Authors may request printing of color figures at their expense.

Online-only Appendices and Data Supplements 

JAMIA publishes data supplements for accepted articles electronically via www.jamia.org (HighWire Press).  All such materials are free-for-view, even when the articles citing them are not free-for-view.

All online-only appendices and data supplements should be submitted as a file separate from that of the manuscript, not placed at the end of the manuscript file.  Authors should designate in their cover letter which Tables, Figures, Appendices, and other materials are inteded as online-only components of their submission.

Online-only data supplements allow authors to include a variety of content with their manuscripts. A supplement may be a text file, a PDF file, a spreadsheet, an HTML document, a table, a video, or an audio file. The supplement may consist of one file or multiple files. For usability, the files should be small enough to be downloaded fairly quickly. They should be of common file types that most readers will be able to open and use, such as PDF, HTML, GIF, JPEG files, QuickTime movies, or WAV sound files.  If more than one data supplement is being submitted for consideration, each data supplement should be a separate file.  Data supplements should be submitted to the JAMIA FTP server along with the manuscript at the time of submission, so that they can be considered during the normal review process.

Data supplements do not count against manuscript word/page limits and can be used to include less important, but pertinent, materials while allowing authors to adhere to manuscript guidelines.  Data supplements are online only and do not appear in print, but are referenced in the print article.  The proper way to reference a data supplement follows:

"see Appendix/Table/Figure X, available as an online data supplement at www.jamia.org" 

where X is the number of the Appendix, Figure, or Table.  References to data supplements should be included in the manuscript at the first mention of the data supplement or the first mention of each data supplement if there is more than one.
 

Use of Abbreviations
Consult Scientific Style and Format: The CBE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers , by the Council of Biology Editors Style Committee (6th edition, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994). The first time an uncommon abbreviation appears, it should be preceded by the full name or phrase for which it stands.

Permissions
Authors should indicate whether the work has been submitted to an Institutional Review Board and whether approval was obtained.

If text, illustrations, or data supplements include information about individual patients, either the patients should not be identifiable or the material must be accompanied by written permission to use the identifiable material in print and online publication.

Materials taken from other sources must be accompanied by a written statement from both the author and publisher giving permission to the publishers of JAMIA to reprint the material in print and online. If clearances are required by the author's institution, statements concerning such clearance should be provided with the manuscript at the time of submission.

Obtain and submit written permission from authors to cite unpublished data or papers still in press.

If the manuscript is accepted, the corresponding author will be responsible for obtaining a signed statement from each author indicating that the author takes responsibility for the content of the manuscript and that the material has not been published, simultaneously submitted, or already accepted for publication elsewhere.
Back to top

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION OF MANUSCRIPTS

General Instructions
Electronic submission is required.  The host name of the ftp server is "jamia.mc.vanderbilt.edu" this is NOT a website. The login name is jamia and the password is submit. The editorial office must receive manuscripts (original and resubmissions) in both Microsoft Word AND PDF formats. Advanced word processing features, such as graphics and end notes, may cause problems and slow processing.  If using the "Track Changes" function in MS Word, please be sure to accept all changes and TURN OFF the "Track Changes" function before submitting.  Uploading to the server is the preferred method of delivery for initial submissions and the submission of revised manuscripts.

Specific Instructions

1. Save your manuscript as a Word document AND as a PDF file.

2. If using a non-Windows based system, skip to step 3.  If using a Windows based system:

open a command prompt window (start menu > run > cmd.exe)

from within the command prompt window, connect to the drive and directory containing the manuscript-related files you wish to upload. Do this using the "CD" command.  For example, if  the files are on your "D" drive in a folder named "uploads," you would type "CD D:\uploads" (not including the quotation marks)

type: ftp

you should now see: ftp>

3. FTP the manuscript to Vanderbilt University by entering:
open jamia.mc.vanderbilt.edu

4. Log on to the Vanderbilt computer:

User name: jamia
Password: submit

**NOTE: the password will NOT appear on screen when typed, but it will be entered**

5. Indicate binary transmission:

ftp> binary

6. Transfer the files containing the manuscript and if one exists, the cover letter. (The filenames should include the last name of the first author.)

ftp> put filename
      (optional)      ftp> put cover_letter_file
ftp> quit

7. Send an e-mail message to:
JAMIA@vanderbilt.edu     describing the submission, listing filenames, and whether a cover letter was included

If no cover letter is included, the e-mail message will act as the cover letter and will serve as a double check that we were able to read the manuscript. Also, remember to fax the signed Documentation of Originality for Submitted JAMIA Manuscript form to the JAMIA office at (615) 936-5900. As soon as we have received the manuscript, the corresponding author will receive an e-mail message confirming receipt and whether or not we have received the originality form (required to initiate review).

8. Contact JAMIA office (by email: JAMIA@vanderbilt.edu) if the corresponding author does not receive confirmation of manuscript receipt via email in 3-5 business days.   All correspondence will be sent to the individual listed as the corresponding author.  If the files are submitted by someone other than the corresponding author, please check with the corresponding author before contacting the JAMIA office regarding confirmation of receipt.
Back to top

REVIEW AND ACTION
Manuscripts will be reviewed by the Editor and Associate Editors and sent to outside reviewers. Authors will be notified within four to six weeks if a manuscript is judged not ready or not appropriate for publication in the Journal prior to outside review. The corresponding author will usually be notified within an average of twelve to sixteen weeks post-submission whether full review indicated acceptance, rejection, or a need for revision. Manuscripts and letters will be edited before publication. The corresponding author will receive copies of page proofs before publication. Authors are responsible for proofreading their articles.
Back to top

PUBLICATION OF ONLINE PrePrints
PrePrints will be posted on www.jamia.org during the month following manuscript acceptance and receipt of copyright release. The PrePrint will be a PDF of the article as it was accepted (i.e., not edited), and pagination in the PDF will be in "page x of y" format, to clearly distinguish the PrePrint from the final form.
Back to top


MANUSCRIPT GUIDELINES


POSITION PAPER

Full-length papers presenting the position of an officially recognized body or organization on an important

issue in informatics. Justification for position taken should be presented with discussion of why conclusion

was reached, and possibly what alternatives were considered.



Style:


1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words.

2. Length: 15-20 pages double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables, references.



Review Criteria:
1. The opinion is a valid one for the body or organization to hold.
2. Verification is made that the paper actually represents the opinion of the organization, and not the private opinion of the author.
3. The facts are correct (as contrasted to the opinion which just has to be reasonable).
4. The background and references acknowledge how the statement builds on and relates to prior publications.






WHITE PAPER

Full-length papers presenting the position of ACMI or AMIA on an important issue in informatics. Justification

for position taken should be presented with discussion of why conclusion was reached, and possibly what alternatives

were considered.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 15-20 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables, references.


Review Criteria:
1. The opinion is a valid one for AMIA or ACMI to hold.
2. Verification is made that the paper actually represents the opinion of the organization, and not the private opinion of the author.
3. The facts are correct (as contrasted to the opinion which just has to be reasonable).
4. The background and references acknowledge how the statement builds on and relates to prior publications.







VIEWPOINT

Full length papers presenting the author's perspective about a topic to provoke thought. The opinions must be tenable,

but scientific proof of their validity is not required.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 15-20 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables, references.


Review Criteria:
1. The opinion is a valid one for someone to hold.
2. Presentation of the opinion to the readership will lead to discussion or inquiry that will further the field of medical informatics.
3. The facts are correct (as contrasted to the opinion which just has to be reasonable).
4. The background and references acknowledge how the statement builds on and relates to prior publications.






TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION


Full length papers reviewing the basis of a new technology together with qualitative or quantitative assessment of its effectiveness,

shortcomings and cost.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 20-30 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose of the paper.
2. Background - Subsections might address the need for the technology evaluation, the environment in which the technology has been developed and tested, and/or previous evaluations of the technology.  An analysis of the benefits and weaknesses of applying the technology is crucial.
3. Design Objectives - Key metrics against which the technology evaluation would occur. Examples include purpose, intended users, observed performance and benefits.
4. System Description - Subsections might address the overall technology, data structures and control mechanisms that implement the technology, user function or services that the technology supports, and observed benefits and drawbacks of the technology.
5. Evaluation Results - Measures of the degree to which the technology meets its goals and provides the desired benefits and the extent to which it is used in target communities. Examples include utilization and performance statistics.
6. Discussion - Subsections might address summary of evaluation, lessons learned, and future plans.

Review Criteria:
1. Some aspect of the evaluation must be original. The evaluation itself might be novel originality might come from applying the evaluation to an important new application of the technology.
2. The background and references must acknowledge how the evaluation relates to prior work, both in terms of building and applying the technology and evaluating the technology.
3. The level of detail of the technology description should permit the reader to understand how the technology works. The
description of the evaluation should be adequate to convince the reader of its strengths and weaknesses.
4. The summary and lessons learned sections should provide readers with key insights and general principles for applying the technology successfully.







APPLICATION OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

Full length papers describing the application of information technology to solve practical problems relevant to health care,

biomedical research, or health education.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 20-30 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose of the paper.
2. Background - Subsections might address the need for the application, the environment in which it is being developed or tested, or pilot studies that demonstrate need or feasibility. An analysis and integration of lessons from related work by others is crucial.
3. Design Objectives - Key objectives against which the performance of the application should be judged. Examples include purpose, intended users, or desired performance.
4. System Description - Subsections might address the overall architecture, data structures and control mechanisms that implement the architecture, and user function or services that are supported.
5. Status Report -Measures of the degree to which the application meets the design objectives. Examples include utilization and performance statistics.
6. Discussion - Subsections might address lessons learned and future plans. 7. References


Review Criteria:
1. Some aspect of the application must be original. The application itself might be novel; originality might come from applying a proven technology to an important new user domain; or a new technology can be used to enhance a proven application.
2. The background and references must acknowledge how the effort builds on and relates to prior work.
3. The level of detail of the application description should permit the reader to understand how the application works.
4. The lessons must glean from specific experiences key insights and general principles that will be of use to others.







IMPLEMENTATION BRIEF


An Implementation Brief reports the innovative application of informatics to meet a practical need or a strategy to overcome

barriers to effective use of an application in an environment. The report should document the methods employed and their impact.

Measure of impact might include number of users (actual as well as the number of possible); whether the users continue to use the

system over time; implementation effort; data quality; application utility or acceptability; cost/benefit; etc. to effective use of an

application in an environment. The report should document the methods employed and their impact. Measure of impact might include

number of users (actual as well as the number of possible); whether the users continue to use the system over time;

implementation effort; data quality; application utility or acceptability; cost/benefit; etc.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 5-10 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.
3. Outline: Introduction, Methods, Observations, Discussion, References


Review Criteria:
1. The implementation problem must be important and recognized as challenging. The informatics methods need not be original.
2. Impact must be documented within the reporting site, but evaluation methods do not need to permit generalization beyond that site.
3. The level of detail of the application description should permit the reader to understand how the impact was achieved.
4. The references and discussion must place the work in context with other efforts to handle the problem.







TECHNICAL BRIEF

A Technical Brief presents a method or technique for developing an informatics tool or resource. It should show the reader how

to get around a problem or to do something in an easier way. It should read as a helpful hint and give tips or tricks of the

trade that readers can incorporate into their tool kits.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words
2. Length: 3-5 pages,
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of 0-1 figures or tables and 0-6 references.


Review Criteria:
1. The problem being solved must be important, i.e. the tool or resource must be needed.
2. The technique or its application must be novel or unrecognized. Originality is not required if the majority of the people responsible for solving the problem are unaware of the usefulness of the technique.
3. The method must be described at a level of detail that enables the reader to apply it in their environments.
4. The references and discussion must place the work in context with other efforts to handle the problem.







REVIEW PAPER



Full length papers presenting a comprehensive review and interpretation of the literature on a well defined topic that has significance

to medical informatics.



Style:
1. Abstract: Unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 20-30 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose and scope of the review.
2. Background - Motivate the review and place topic in context. Subsections might address the significance of the topic to medical informatics, relationship of the topic to other topics, and prior efforts to synthesize information about the topic.
3. Process for selecting material for inclusion in the review.
4. Body of the review.
5. Discussion - Subsections might address implications of the review, limitations, directions for future work.
6. Conclusion - Short statement of findings and implications.
7. References


Review Criteria:
1. The review presents material that is current and is not already covered in textbooks, monographs or another review.
2. The material reviewed has adequate depth and diversity.
3. The review is well organized, facts are presented clearly, and discussion of differing findings is balanced.
4. The authors demonstrate expertise in the material, and relay new insight and perspective through the review.
5. The timeliness and significance of the topic to medical informatics is clear.





SYNTHESIS OF RESEARCH PAPER

Full-length papers presenting a comprehensive review and interpretation of the literature on a body of work by an individual

investigator or a single laboratory over an extended time period that has significance to medical informatics.



Style:
1. Abstract: Unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 20-30 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose and scope of the synthesis of research.
2. Background - Motivate the review and place the topic in context. Subsections might address the significance of the body of work to medical informatics, relationship of the body of work to other topics, other important contemporary influences on the topic/field, and prior efforts to synthesize information about the topic.
3. Process for selecting material for inclusion in the synthesis of research.
4. Body of the synthesis of research (usually, but not always organized chronologically).
5. Discussion � Subsections might address implications of the body of work, limitations, directions for future work.
6. Conclusion � Short statement of findings and implications.
7. References


Review Criteria:
1. The synthesis of research presents material that is current and is not already covered in textbooks, monographs or another review.
2. The material reviewed is selected systematically with adequate depth and diversity.
3. The review is well organized, presents facts clearly, and contains a balanced discussion of differing findings.
4. The authors demonstrate expertise in the material, and relay new insight and perspective through the review. 5. The timeliness and significance of the topic to medical informatics is clear.





BRIEF REVIEW

Short papers that provide a timely update or overview of a hot topic or breaking news item that is important

to medical informatics.



Style:
1. Abstract: Unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 5-10 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose the report.
2. Body of the brief review.
3. Implications for medical informatics.
4. References


Review Criteria:
1. The review presents material that is timely and not generally appreciated by the readers.
2. The review is well organized, facts are presented clearly, and discussion of implications is balance. The significance of the topic to medical informatics is clear.






HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

The purpose of a Historical Perspectives paper is to describe important past events in the history of biomedical informatics,

either as verbatim previously unpublished documents1 or through interviews (such as verbal histories) with early pioneers in

the field.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, 150-250 words
2. Length: 15-20 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of figures, tables, and references.


Review Criteria:
1. Relate to the significance of the events described and the uniqueness of the publication.







BOOK REVIEW



The JAMIA book review series is intended to:


1) alert readers to work that is particularly important to the field of medical informatics; or

2) to place a work in context. The series is selective and is not designed to cover everything that is published.



Style:
1. Abstract: none
2. Length: 500-1000 words, exclusive of zero to three references.


Outline:
1. Title of book (exact), author(s) (full name as listed on cover), publisher's name, publication city, date of publication, number of pages, price.
2. Summary of content. General discussion of what the book covers, and its major topics. A chapter by chapter summary is not desirable.
3. Discussion of author(s): What is background and experience of author(s)? Why are authors qualified to write this book? Do authors present a particular perspective?
4. Strong points of book
5. Weak points of book
6. Who should read this book? Who is the prospective audience? What background is required to understand the material?
7. Why you should or should not buy this book? As a text? As a reference?
8. Comparison of this book to others in field.
9. Quotable Quote.







RESEARCH PAPER

Full length papers presenting original hypotheses and findings.



Style:
1. Abstract: Less than 250 words, structured according to Objective, Design, Measurements, Results, and Conclusion.
2. Length: 20-30 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose of the paper.
2. Background - Motivate and place the work in context. Subsections might address the significance of the problem being addressed, other approaches to the problem, prior work on the approach being reported.
3. Research question or hypothesis.
4. Methods - Subsections might include selection of sites and subjects, intervention, measurements, analysis.
5. Results
6. Discussion - Subsections might address significance, limitations, future work.
7. Conclusion - Short statement of findings and implications.
8. References


Review Criteria:
1. The reported work is original and data have not been reported previously.
2. The background and references acknowledge how the findings build on, extend, agree with, or refute prior work.
3. The level of detail of the methods permits the reader to understand how to reproduce the results.
4. The results are presented non-ambiguously.
5. The discussion clarifies the generalizability and limits of the findings.
6. The findings represent a significant addition to the knowledge-base of the field of medical informatics.






MODEL FORMULATION

Full length papers proposing a model, frame work, or technique. The paper should clarify and validate the proposal through an example.



Style:
1. Abstract: Less than 250 words, structured according to Objective, Design, Measurements, Results, and Conclusion.
2. Length: 20-30 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose of the paper.
2. Background - Motivate and place the work in context. Subsections might address the significance of the problem being addressed, other approaches to the problem, prior work on the approach being reported.
3. Formulation process
4. Model description
5. Validation through example
6. Discussion - Subsections might address significance, limitations, future work.
7. Conclusion - Short summary of the model and implications.
8. References


Review Criteria:
1. The model is original and the validation has not been reported previously.
2. The background and references acknowledge how the proposal builds on, extends, agrees with, or refutes prior work.
3. The formulation process is specified in sufficient detail to permit the reader to reproduce the results.
4. The model definition is clear enough that the reader can apply it to their work.
5. The validation example and discussion clarify the generalizability and limits of the model.
6. The model addresses a problem that is significant to the field of medical informatics.





METHODS PAPER

Full length papers presenting significant new methods for research or applications in the field.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words.
2. Length: 20-30 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables and references.


Outline:
1. Introduction - A short statement that presents the purpose of the paper.
2. Background � Motivate and place the work in context. Subsections might address the significance of the problem being addressed, other approaches to the problem, prior work on the approach being reported.
3. Method development process
4. Method description
5. Validation through example
6. Discussion - Subsections might address significance, limitations, future work.
7. Conclusion � Short summary of the method and implications.
8. References


Review Criteria:
1. The method is original and the validation has not been reported previously.
2. The background and references acknowledge how the proposal builds on, extends, agrees with, or refutes prior work.
3. The method formulation process is specified in sufficient detail to permit the reader to reproduce the results.
4. The method definition is clear enough that the reader can apply it to their work.
5. The validation example and discussion clarify the generalizability and limits of the method.
6. The method addresses a problem that is significant to the field of medical informatics.








CASE REPORT

A Case Report explores a method or a problem through an example.



Style:
1. Abstract: unstructured, less than 150 words
2. Length: 5-10 pages
double spaced or one and one half type, inclusive of abstract, figures, tables, references.
3. Outline: Introduction, Case Description, Method, Example, Discussion.


Review Criteria:
1. Significance of the problem; and originality of the method or discovery of the problem.
2. The description of the case must allow the reader to understand if the situation applies to their work; and the description of the method must allow the reader to reproduce it.
3. The references and discussion must place the work in context with other approaches to the problem.







EDITORIAL COMMENTS

An editorial provides authoritative insight or evidence in any area that is of particular interest to our readers. It may

stand alone or may support, supplement, or criticize an article published in JAMIA or elsewhere, or set forth a contradictory position.



Style:
1. Abstract: none
2. Length: 500-1000 words, exclusive of 0-6 references. It may have one or two small tables or figures.






LETTER TO THE EDITOR


A Letter to the Editor may support, supplement, or criticize an article published in JAMIA, or set forth a contradictory

position related to a JAMIA publication.



Style:
1. Abstract: none
2. Length: 250-500 words, exclusive of 0-3 references. It may have up to 1 small table or figure (not both).







SPECIAL FEATURES (ACMI Fellows)

Paragraph 1:
Name
current titles
current institutional affiliations
degrees & degree granting institutions


Paragraph 2:
Significant prior positions
Contributions to medical informatics


Paragraph 3:
Honors
National committees
Prestigious lectureships
Election to academies, etc.







SPECIAL SECTIONS



Special sections allow recruitment and coordinated publication of papers to provide an organized focus upon an important topic.

The section is published in the regular issues of the Journal, not as a supplement. 5-7 manuscripts in an issue can be part of

a section, leaving room for some of the Journal's unsolicited content. Alternatively, a section may be spread across multiple

issues, with 2-4 papers in each issue.


Process:
1. Individuals who are interested in coordinating these special sections within JAMIA submit a proposal to the editors. If the proposal is accepted, the individuals preparing it are designated as guest editors for the section. Their role is prominently highlighted in the issue and they are expected to contribute an editorial to introduce the section.
2. The proposal includes: the objective of the section; the anticipated number of manuscripts and the date at which they will be available for review; proposed topics and authors. Allow at least 6 months between receipt by the editorial office for review and the desired publication date.
3. The selection of topics and authors should be made with an eye toward achieving balance between disciplines and opinions. Any relevant commercial interests of potential authors should be disclosed in the proposal. The plan should reflect our experience that only about ½ of the people who agree to write a paper will produce an acceptable manuscript within a reasonable period of time. If the editors judge the balance to be inadequate, they reserve the right to solicit papers or editorials to correct the deficiency.
4. The editors will accept, reject, or ask for revision of the proposal. Once a proposal has been accepted, the editorial office and the guest editors work out a schedule of deadlines and a possible publication schedule.
5. The guest editor then issues a call for papers or specific invitations to individual authors. The invitations must be clear that acceptance is subject to the journal's peer review process. The guest editor should suggest the appropriate JAMIA "Tag" to the author and provide them with the detailed guidelines for that type of manuscript. We suggest that papers be submitted to the guest editors for an initial review and revision prior to submission to the editorial office for the journal's review process.
6. The guest editors assume the duties of the Associate Editor in the journal's review process. These duties include: recruiting, in consultation with the editors, one or two outside referees to review each manuscript; drafting of letters to authors regarding the results of the review; and commenting upon the adequacy of requested revisions. The guest editor must follow the review process and schedule established for the rest of the Journal.
7. Final acceptance decisions will rest with the Editor-in Chief. The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject individual manuscripts which are submitted as part of the section.
Back to top


REFERENCES (sample)

1. Board of Directors of the American Medical Informatics Association. Standards for medical identifiers, codes, and messages needed to create an efficient computer-stored medical record. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:1-7.

2. Stead WW, Haynes RB, Fuller S, et al. Designing medical informatics research and library-resource projects to increase what is learned. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:28-33.

3. Friedman CP, Frisse ME, Musen MA, Slack WV, Stead WW. How should we organize to do informatics? Report of the ACMI debate at the 1997 AMIA Fall Symposium. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1998;5:293-304.

4. Matheson NW. Things to come: postmodern digital knowledge management and medical informatics. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1995;2:73-8.

5. Spitzer V, Ackerman MJ, Scherzinger AL, Whitlock D. The visible human male: a technical report. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1996;3:118-30.

6. Zafar A, Overhage M, McDonald CJ. Continuous speech recognition for clinicians. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1999;6:195-204.

7. Friede A, Rosen D, Reid J. CDC wonder: a cooperative processing architecture for public health. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:303-12.

8. Carter KJ, Rinehart S, Kessler E, et al. Quality assurance in anatomic pathology: automated snomed coding. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1996;3:270-2.

9. Lehv M. Medicare charges and operational-year coding concept. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;2:124-6.

10. G. Octo Barnett. Report to the National Institutes of health Division of Research Study Section on Computer Applications in Medical Communication and information Retrieval Systems as Related to the improvement of Patient Care and the Medical Record -- September 26, 1966. J Am Med Assoc. 2006; (13)2; 127-135.

11. Miller RA. Medical diagnostic decision support systems--past, present, and future: a threaded bibliography and commentary. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:8-27.

12. Musen MA, Tu SW, Das AK, Shahar Y. EON: a component-based approach to automation of protocol-directed therapy. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1996;3:367-88.

13. Lindberg DAB, Humphreys BL. The high-performance computing and communications program, the National Information Infrastructure, and health care. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1995;2:156-9.

14. Patton GA, Gardner RM. Medical informatics education: the University of Utah experience. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1999;6:457-65.

15. Hammond WE. Health Information and Health Reform: Understanding the Need for a National Health Information System, by Karen A. Duncan [book review]. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1995;2:292-3.

16. Huber JT, Giuse NB. Interactive Brain Atlas, by Sundsten, Brinkley, Eno, and Prothero [software review]. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1995;2:294.

17. Hersh WR, Hickam DH, Haynes RB, McKibbon KA. A performance and failure analysis of saphire with a medline test collection. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:51-60.

18. Ozbolt JG, Fruchtnicht JN, Hayden JR. Toward data standards for clinical nursing information. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:175-85.

19. Sager N, Lyman M, Bucknall C, Ngo N, Tick LJ. Natural language processing and the representation of clinical data. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:142-60.

20. Southon FCG, Sauer C, Dampney CNG. Information technology in complex health services: organizational impediments to successful technology transfer and diffusion. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1997;4:112-24.

21. Henry SB, Holzemer WL, Reilly CA, Campbell KE. Terms used by nurses to describe patient problems. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:61-74.

22. Nelson, BD, Gardner RM, Hedrick G, Gould P. Computerized decision support for concurrent utilization review using the HELP System. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:339-52.

23. Dolin RH. Modeling the temporal complexities of symptoms. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1995;2:323-31.

24. Humphreys BL, Hole WT, McCray, AT, Fitzmaurice JM. Planned NLM/AHCPR large-scale vocabulary test: using UMLS technology to determine the extent to which controlled vocabularies cover terminology needed for health care and public health. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1996;3:281-7.

25. Miller PL, Frawley SJ. Trade-offs in producing patient-specific recommendations from a computer-based clinical guideline: a case study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1995;2:238-42.

26. Cimino J. Controlled medical vocabulary construction: methods from the Canon Group. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:296-7.

27. Gardner RM. Development of medical informatics standards. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:79-80.

28. Tuttle MS. Canon Group's objectives: are they achievable? J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:98-9.

29. Shortliffe EH. Dehumanization of patient care: are computers the problem or the solution? J Am Med Inform Assoc. 1994;1:76-8.

Back to top

CONTACT INFORMATION

Please send all correspondence related to an inital JAMIA submission to the JAMIA office at: jamia@vanderbilt.edu

Please send all other manuscript related correspondence to the JAMIA Editorial Assistant, Alexis Broussard, at: 
alexis.n.broussard @ vanderbilt.edu

Please direct all faxed correspondence to the JAMIA office at (615) 936-5900.
Back to top


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2005 by the American Medical Informatics Association.