Authors of articles published in AMA journals are required to footnote the availability of their research instruments and other stimuli as appropriate and provide information on how the materials may be obtained. Authors of manuscripts based on proprietary data sets or other restricted material must so notify the editor at the time a manuscript is submitted. The editor will then decide whether to accept the manuscript for review. Published articles in this genre will contain a footnote stating that the data or other elements of the research process as identified are proprietary.
2. Concurrent Reviews
AMA policy prohibits an article under review at an AMA journal from being concurrently reviewed at another journal without prior discussion with and written permission from the involved AMA journal editor.
3. Multiple and Related Submissions
The value of a publication depends on its incremental contribution. Therefore, it is inappropriate to submit articles with substantial overlap. This overlap can result from the use of the same data or analysis or when providing parallel substantive or theoretical results. When there is a question about defining overlap, particularly that which arises from their own work, it is the authors’ responsibility to inform the editor.
The editor will make a binding decision as to whether a manuscript submitted to an AMA journal is too similar to an article already published there or elsewhere.
When writing a paper, it is important for authors to define its incremental contribution by referencing relevant work on which the paper builds. Authors are expected to search for and reference the related work of others. Authors are especially responsible for informing the editor about their own work, whether it is published, in working paper form, or under review. When questions arise about related work, the editor will provide guidance to the authors. Submitting a paper that is substantially the same as a previously published paper is considered a serious breach of professional ethics and may warrant the editor contacting officials at the authors’ institutions of this breach.
4. Resubmissions
Manuscripts that have been rejected are not eligible for further consideration by the same journal and thus should not be resubmitted. If a revision is allowed, it will be explicitly stated in the Editor’s decision. Other revisions of previously rejected manuscripts will be promptly returned to the authors without review.
5. Conflicts of Interest
Conflicts of interest may arise in a variety of situations, and therefore the author is required to inform the editor of such conflict. A conflict of interest may exist when a manuscript under review puts forth a position contrary to the reviewer's published work or when a manuscript author or reviewer has a substantial direct or indirect financial interest in the subject matter of the manuscript. Because it is AMA policy to engage in a double-blind review process, a conflict of interest may also exist when a reviewer knows the author of a manuscript. The reviewer should consult the journal editor in such situations to decide whether to review the manuscript. A conflict of interest does not exist when an author disagrees with a reviewer's assessment that a problem is unimportant or disagrees with an editorial outcome.
6. Protecting Intellectual Property
Protecting intellectual property is a primary responsibility of the reviewer and the editor. Reviewers, therefore, will not use ideas from or show another person the manuscript they have been asked to review without the explicit permission of the manuscript's author, obtained through the journal editor. Advice regarding specific, limited aspects of the manuscript may be sought from colleagues with specific expertise, provided the author’s identity and intellectual property remain secure.
7. Sharing of Reviewing Responsibilities
Sharing of reviewing responsibilities is inappropriate. The review is the sole responsibility of the person to whom it was assigned by the journal editor. Students and colleagues should not be asked to prepare reviews unless the journal editor has given explicit prior approval. Each person contributing to a review should receive formal recognition.
8. Review Process
All reviews will use a double-blind review process. Reviewers and journal editors are expected to provide comments and critiques in a confidential, constructive, prompt, and unbiased manner appropriate for their position of responsibility. Collegiality, respect for the author’s dignity, and the search for ways to improve the quality of the manuscript should characterize the review process. The editor has the final authority for the acceptance or rejection of any article.