Implementation science: A reappraisal of our journal mission and scope

Robbie Foy; Anne Sales; Michel Wensing; Gregory A. Aarons; Signe Flottorp; Bridie Kent; Susan Michie; Denise O'Connor; Anne Rogers; Nick Sevdalis; Sharon Straus; Paul Wilson; Nick Sevdalis

doi:10.1186/s13012-015-0240-2

Implementation science: A reappraisal of our journal mission and scope

Robbie Foy^*, Anne Sales, Michel Wensing, Gregory A. Aarons, Signe Flottorp, Bridie Kent, Susan Michie, Denise O'Connor, Anne Rogers, Nick Sevdalis, Sharon Straus, Paul Wilson, Nick Sevdalis

^*Corresponding author for this work

Health Service & Population Research

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The implementation of research findings into healthcare practice has become increasingly recognised as a major priority for researchers, service providers, research funders and policymakers over the past decade. Nine years after its establishment, Implementation Science, an international online open access journal, currently publishes over 150 articles each year. This is fewer than 30% of those submitted for publication. The majority of manuscript rejections occur at the point of initial editorial screening, frequently because we judge them to fall outside of journal scope. There are a number of common reasons as to why manuscripts are rejected on grounds of scope. Furthermore, as the field of implementation research has evolved and our journal submissions have risen, we have, out of necessity, had to become more selective in what we publish. We have also expanded our scope, particularly around patient-mediated and population health interventions, and will monitor the impact of such changes. We hope this editorial on our evolving priorities and common reasons for rejection without peer review will help authors to better judge the relevance of their papers to Implementation Science.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1-7
Number of pages	7
Journal	Implementation Science
Volume	10
Issue number	51
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0240-2
Publication status	Published - 17 Apr 2015

Keywords

Implementation research
Methodology

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1186/s13012-015-0240-2

Cite this

@article{93f1fd536c234f25a479388180063ed5,

title = "Implementation science: A reappraisal of our journal mission and scope",

abstract = "The implementation of research findings into healthcare practice has become increasingly recognised as a major priority for researchers, service providers, research funders and policymakers over the past decade. Nine years after its establishment, Implementation Science, an international online open access journal, currently publishes over 150 articles each year. This is fewer than 30% of those submitted for publication. The majority of manuscript rejections occur at the point of initial editorial screening, frequently because we judge them to fall outside of journal scope. There are a number of common reasons as to why manuscripts are rejected on grounds of scope. Furthermore, as the field of implementation research has evolved and our journal submissions have risen, we have, out of necessity, had to become more selective in what we publish. We have also expanded our scope, particularly around patient-mediated and population health interventions, and will monitor the impact of such changes. We hope this editorial on our evolving priorities and common reasons for rejection without peer review will help authors to better judge the relevance of their papers to Implementation Science.",

keywords = "Implementation research, Methodology",

author = "Robbie Foy and Anne Sales and Michel Wensing and Aarons, {Gregory A.} and Signe Flottorp and Bridie Kent and Susan Michie and Denise O'Connor and Anne Rogers and Nick Sevdalis and Sharon Straus and Paul Wilson and Nick Sevdalis",

year = "2015",

month = apr,

day = "17",

doi = "10.1186/s13012-015-0240-2",

language = "English",

volume = "10",

pages = "1--7",

journal = "Implementation Science",

issn = "1748-5908",

publisher = "BIOMED CENTRAL LTD",

number = "51",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implementation science

T2 - A reappraisal of our journal mission and scope

AU - Foy, Robbie

AU - Sales, Anne

AU - Wensing, Michel

AU - Aarons, Gregory A.

AU - Flottorp, Signe

AU - Kent, Bridie

AU - Michie, Susan

AU - O'Connor, Denise

AU - Rogers, Anne

AU - Sevdalis, Nick

AU - Straus, Sharon

AU - Wilson, Paul

AU - Sevdalis, Nick

PY - 2015/4/17

Y1 - 2015/4/17

N2 - The implementation of research findings into healthcare practice has become increasingly recognised as a major priority for researchers, service providers, research funders and policymakers over the past decade. Nine years after its establishment, Implementation Science, an international online open access journal, currently publishes over 150 articles each year. This is fewer than 30% of those submitted for publication. The majority of manuscript rejections occur at the point of initial editorial screening, frequently because we judge them to fall outside of journal scope. There are a number of common reasons as to why manuscripts are rejected on grounds of scope. Furthermore, as the field of implementation research has evolved and our journal submissions have risen, we have, out of necessity, had to become more selective in what we publish. We have also expanded our scope, particularly around patient-mediated and population health interventions, and will monitor the impact of such changes. We hope this editorial on our evolving priorities and common reasons for rejection without peer review will help authors to better judge the relevance of their papers to Implementation Science.

AB - The implementation of research findings into healthcare practice has become increasingly recognised as a major priority for researchers, service providers, research funders and policymakers over the past decade. Nine years after its establishment, Implementation Science, an international online open access journal, currently publishes over 150 articles each year. This is fewer than 30% of those submitted for publication. The majority of manuscript rejections occur at the point of initial editorial screening, frequently because we judge them to fall outside of journal scope. There are a number of common reasons as to why manuscripts are rejected on grounds of scope. Furthermore, as the field of implementation research has evolved and our journal submissions have risen, we have, out of necessity, had to become more selective in what we publish. We have also expanded our scope, particularly around patient-mediated and population health interventions, and will monitor the impact of such changes. We hope this editorial on our evolving priorities and common reasons for rejection without peer review will help authors to better judge the relevance of their papers to Implementation Science.

KW - Implementation research

KW - Methodology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84928580371&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s13012-015-0240-2

DO - 10.1186/s13012-015-0240-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 25928695

AN - SCOPUS:84928580371

SN - 1748-5908

VL - 10

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - Implementation Science

JF - Implementation Science

IS - 51

ER -

Implementation science: A reappraisal of our journal mission and scope

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this